MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791846741 · doi:10.30612/eadtde.v5i7.7399

A produção de textos a distância com estudantes da Licenciatura do Campo da UFGD

2017· article· pt· W2791846741 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Antonio Rodrigues Paulo

Bibliographic record

VenueEaD & Tecnologias Digitais na Educação · 2017
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Education Research
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este texto tem a perspectiva de apresentar a experiência adquirida no desenvolvimento do projeto de extensão Leitura e Produção de textos Acadêmicos I. Esse projeto pretendia investir na melhoria das habilidades dos professores das escolas do campo do Mato Grosso do Sul e dos alunos da Licenciatura em Educação do Campo (LEDUC) da Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados - UFGD na leitura e produção de textos acadêmicos. Nesse percurso os professores das escolas do campo do Estado do Mato Grosso do Sul e os alunos da LEDUC foram auxiliados por professores da Universidade e acadêmicos do curso de Letras e da Pós-Graduação em Letras da UFGD. Cabe destacar, que essa ação possibilitou uma maior interação entre os alunos da Pós-Graduação e da Graduação da universidade com os professores do campo do Estado do Mato Grosso do Sul. Esse projeto pretendia possibilitar aos professores das escolas do campo e aos alunos da LEDUC o reconhecimento dos princípios básicos da norma culta, desenvolvendo habilidades de leitura e produção de textos coesos e coerentes, tendo como perspectiva o estudo da Língua Portuguesa para fins acadêmicos. Essa proposta vislumbrou o estabelecimento de uma relação profícua entre diferentes instâncias da universidade e a comunidade.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0120.010
Scholarly communication0.0140.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.108
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.254 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueEaD & Tecnologias Digitais na EducaçãoSame topicLinguistics and Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207