Muito além da porta de entrada: as relações de comunicação no mundo do trabalho das pessoas com deficiência motora e suas contribuições no processo de inclusão social
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This thesis proposes a link between communication, work and the social inclusion of people with motor disabilities from the perspective of the ontology of social being (Lukács, 2012).Based on the assumption that the imbrication of communication with work (Fígaro, 2008; 2009) confers self-recognition to every human being, this research aims to understand the meaning of the world of work for people with motor disabilities, which materializes through communication relationships and, in real situations, collaborates in the process of inclusion of these workers.Our hypothesis is that the binomial of communication and work makes it possible to understand the dramas of the use of self (Schwartz, 2004) that are configured in the sphere of work and that are posed in the development of the work activity of the people with motor disabilities.To do this, we began by establishing a conceptualization of disability, adding theoretical contributions from other areas such as user-centered design (Dantas, 2014), collective health (Vale de Almeida, 2004;Dejours, 2004;Birman, 2005; Ortega, 2006) and the critique of neoliberalism (Harvey, 2008), the latter being eclipsed by a discourse in which entrepreneurship (Boltanski;Chiapello, 2009;Ehrenberg, 2010;Standing, 2013;Bröckling, 2015;Dardot;Laval, 2016;Han, 2017) uses the idea of overcoming as a synonym for social inclusion.We also draw a brief historical and legal line on the subject until we reach the Quotas Law and the latest labor reform in Brazil, which show how job vacancies have been filled for this public (Brandão, 2023b).In the empirical section, we problematized the divergence of data on disability and people with disabilities through documentary analysis (Flick, 2008;Poupart et al., 2008) of official surveys.It should be noted that we carried out exploratory (Gil, 2008) and qualitative (Poupart et al., 2008) research based on methodological triangulation (Denzin; Lincoln, 2008; Moliani, 2020) of the following instruments: questionnaire (Thiollent, 1980), interviews (Medina, 1986) and field observation (Fernandes; 1980;Flick, 2008;Poupart et al., 2008) of the daily working life of a person with motor disability.The relations of communication in this specific world of work became evident with ergology (Schwartz, 2004; 2014;Durrive, 2002; Schwartz; Durrive, 2007; Rodrigues da Silva, 2021; 2022), which highlighted the unprecedented nature of work and the connections that the working disabled body mobilizes to carry out its craft.To the ergological approach, we added discourse analysis (Pêcheux, 1997; 2001; 2002;Brandão, 2004;Maingueneau, 2000; 2006; 2008a; 2008b; 2010) of the research subjects: organizations that work on behalf of people with disabilities, professional recruitment agencies, private corporations and workers who are people with motor disabilities.The results of this intersection reinforce that social inclusion, understood in the light of Paulo Freire´s doctrine (Alves, 2021;Freire, 2003; 2013), still has a long way to go in terms of full accessibility and equal opportunities for people with mobility disabilities in the workplace.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,014 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».