Analyzing lateral seabed variability with Bayesian inference of seabed reflection data

2009 ◽  
Vol 126 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Dettmer ◽  
Charles W. Holland ◽  
Stan E. Dosso
Author(s):  
Subhashis Ghosal ◽  
Aad van der Vaart

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-55
Author(s):  
Indrianto Arif Ramadhana ◽  
Jeff Agung Perdana

Forearm pass is one of the materials that must be mastered by students of class X Senior High School. In fact, many students do not yet master and know forearm pass techniques. This research is a classroom action research (CAR) with two cycles. Each cycle consists of 4 stages, namely: planning, action, observation and reflection. Data collection was carried out using observations and questionnaires. Data were analyzed using Hake's Normalized Gain formula. From the results of the study it is known that the psychomotor domain of students increased by 0.42 with average criteria from cycle 1 to cycle 2. The affective domain increased by 0.37 with average criteria. The cognitive domain increased by 0.39 with average criteria. Based on the results of the data analysis, it can be concluded that learning forearm pass techniques with games method can improve student learning outcomes.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Nismarni Nismarni

In the background backs Indonesian learning results obtained by the students is very low because the method of learning that are not relevant. Classroom action research aims to determine the implementation of cooperative learning model Numbered Heads Together (NHT) to improve learning outcomes Indonesian grade IV A SD Negeri 78 Pekanbaru on instructional materials do. The experiment was conducted in two cycles each cycle two meetings and one daily tests. Each cycle stages are: planning, implementation, observation and reflection. Data from the activity of teachers and students in the can from the observation sheet, while, learning outcomes in getting the daily test results. The results showed the activities of teachers and students has increased, in the first cycle of meetings I obtained a score of 33 (68.75%), in the first cycle of meetings II obtained a score of 38 (79.17%), the second cycle of meetings I obtained a score of 40 (83 , 33%), and the second cycle II meeting obtained a score of 44 (91.67%). And in the first cycle of the first meeting of student activity data obtained a score of 27 (56.25%), in the first cycle II meeting increased with the acquisition of a score of 36 (75.00%), and the second cycle first meeting increased to 41 (85.42 %), the second cycle II meeting increased to 45 (93.75%). Learning outcomes of students has increased, this is evidenced by: the preliminary data the number of students who reach KKM amounted to 10 students (28.57%) with an average of learning outcomes at 65.37. Increased in the first cycle by the number of students who completed totaling 26 students (74.28%) with an average of learning outcomes at 76.00. And the second cycle increases with the number of students 32 students (91.42%) with an average of learning outcomes at 86.86. Based on these results it can be concluded that the implementation of cooperative learning model NHT can improve learning outcomes Indonesian grade IV A SD Negeri 78 Pekanbaru. 


2006 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Avihu Ginzburg ◽  
Moshe Reshef ◽  
Zvi Ben-Avraham ◽  
Uri Schattner

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qing Dou ◽  
Ashish Vaswani ◽  
Kevin Knight ◽  
Chris Dyer

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olmo Van den Akker ◽  
Linda Dominguez Alvarez ◽  
Marjan Bakker ◽  
Jelte M. Wicherts ◽  
Marcel A. L. M. van Assen

We studied how academics assess the results of a set of four experiments that all test a given theory. We found that participants’ belief in the theory increases with the number of significant results, and that direct replications were considered to be more important than conceptual replications. We found no difference between authors and reviewers in their propensity to submit or recommend to publish sets of results, but we did find that authors are generally more likely to desire an additional experiment. In a preregistered secondary analysis of individual participant data, we examined the heuristics academics use to assess the results of four experiments. Only 6 out of 312 (1.9%) participants we analyzed used the normative method of Bayesian inference, whereas the majority of participants used vote counting approaches that tend to undervalue the evidence for the underlying theory if two or more results are statistically significant.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document