Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neste texto, foco as recentes políticas curriculares no Brasil, inserindo-as em um cenário de hegemonia da racionalidade neoliberal. Assumo que tais políticas produziram um discurso de inclusão e justiça social, em diálogo com movimentos internacionais que, no pós-guerra, defenderam uma retórica contra a barbárie. A partir de análises formuladas por Chantal Mouffe, Wendy Brown, Judith Butler, Pierre Dardot e Christian Laval, tento entender o esgotamento ou a emergência de uma nova forma da racionalidade neoliberal. Por um lado, assumo que tal racionalidade não criou as condições materiais para que as promessas do pós-guerra se materializassem, ao contrário ampliou a desigualdade e a oligarquização. Por outro, argumento que, ao desprezar o político, ela apostou na desdemocratização. Combinados, tais movimentos desembocaram na ascensão de governos de direita em diferentes países, inclusive no Brasil. Após essa análise, defendo que uma educação para justiça social – ou para desbarbarizar o mundo – precisa corroer a equação neoliberal, não apenas na resistência às políticas públicas, mas na própria forma como teorizamos o currículo.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".