MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

O aluno \"em inclusão\" no discurso docente

2017· dissertation· pt· W2573735473 on OpenAlexaff
Sâmara Gurgel Aguiar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationInclusion (mineral)Subject (documents)MilestonePedagogyObject (grammar)Ideal (ethics)Active listeningSociologyRealization (probability)Field (mathematics)Mathematics educationPsychologyLinguisticsGender studiesEpistemologyPhilosophyLibrary scienceComputer scienceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work has the purpose of thinking about the impacts of the teacher-student relationship in the infantile school inclusion. With that intent, we situate this meeting in the dynamics, created by psychoanalysis, as for the contact with the difference. Considering that something of this functioning is expressed in the language, we aks ourselves: how does the educator discursively formulates his interlocution with the student? Which place addresses to the child in this discourse? Taking those questions as a milestone, we make use of the realization of rounds of conversation in six schools, one of them being private and the other five communal. Twenty educators took part on those encounters: nineteen teachers and a coordinator, all of them from children's education. This listening allowed us to, on the first place, pay attention to the strangeness caused by the child unadapted to the model of schooling. Moreover, it made possible to perceive, about this impact, a predominance of discourses outlined so that the student is destined to the place of object. There is, for that matter, resistance to the inscription of the difference on the weave of registers that composes the school field, due to the conservation of it's ideal character. As a consequence of this, we found that the subject is maintained on the margins of school's significations, his inclusion and therefore his education, compromised. On the other hand, we come across sayings that point towards doubts regarding the regular model of education, that we envision as gaps to it's revision and consequent redefinition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.051

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.403 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychology and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207