E-module in Trigonometry as Instructional Materials for Grade 9
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p><span>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the E-Module in Trigonometry for Grade 9 Mathematics that has been developed as a teaching resource at San Isidro National High School in Antipolo City during the fourth quarter of the 2020–2021 academic year. Descriptive and quasi-experimental methods of research were used. The developed E-module in Trigonometry were evaluated by fifteen mathematics teachers and fifteen experts from different public schools in Antipolo City. The participants of the study were 60 students of Grade 9 from two sections of San Isidro National High School. The researcher used a matched case-control design. The matching procedure increases the similarity between the controls and the cases for both the exposure and the matching factor. The pretest and posttest, together with survey questionnaires, were the data collection tools employed by the researcher. The significant findings of the study were the following: Mathematics teachers and expert respondents have a very highly acceptable evaluation to the developed E-module in Trigonometry with regards to appropriacy, assessment, authenticity, automaticity, clarity, comprehensibility, meaningfulness and technicality this yielded weighted grand averages of 4.78 and 4.75, correspondingly; the mean score of the experimental group’s pretest and posttest differed significantly. The experimental group's performance with the E-module in Trigonometry for Mathematics 9 improved, as evidenced by the posttest mean score exceeding the pretest mean. The findings prove that the E-module are packed wholly and logically designed to help students acquire to meet their learning needs.</span></p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".