Inclusão Escolar: um saber necessário à prática docente?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O presente artigo tem como objetivo analisar se as politicas publicas especificas para a inclusao escolar sao de conhecimento dos professores, efetivando um direito, fruto de uma conquista resultante de um processo complexo ao longo da historia da educacao no Brasil. O caminho percorrido para analise partiu dos documentos que constituem as politicas publicas especificas para inclusao, para fundamentar o tema escolhido dispos da abordagem teorica dos autores como: Paulo Freire, Maria Teresa Egler Mantoan, Rosita Edler Carvalho, dentre outros que falam da pratica docente e do processo de inclusao. Metodologicamente, trata-se de uma pesquisa empirica mista (qualiquantitativa), com professores do ensino fundamental em duas escolas publicas municipais de Sao Jose dos Campos/SP. A analise das entrevistas evidenciou a importância do conhecimento das leis e politicas que regem a inclusao escolar, com a pratica e reflexao da praxis docente. Pode-se considerar que o professor deve se instrumentalizar de forma plena dos saberes necessarios para sua pratica, incluindo as politicas publicas e leis que norteiam o processo de inclusao, buscando o olhar para o estudante com o compromisso com a cidadania.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".