Bibliographic record
Abstract
El sistema escolar argentino presentaba un profundo vacío al no contemplar dentro de su estructura a la Expresión Corporal como una «disciplina a enseñar». Este déficit se subsanó, parcialmente, a partir de la sanción de la Ley Federal de Educación 24 195 (1993) que la incluyó dentro del área artística, conjuntamente con Música, Plástica y Teatro. Pero es sabido que el sólo hecho de legitimar algo a través de una normativa, no asegura que lo que marca la norma se lleve a cabo en la práctica de la mejor manera. Actualmente, en las instituciones escolares de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, la implementación de la enseñanza de Expresión Corporal presenta serias dificultades. Entre ellas se encuentra la relacionada con que la mayoría de los docentes en ejercicio no contó en su formación inicial con una «formación específica» de esta disciplina. Por lo tanto este artículo pretende realizar un aporte en este sentido brindando los conceptos centrales que hacen a la temática y rescatando el valor pedagógico de la misma.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".