MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016330165 · doi:10.5016/geografia.v44i1.14961

PRINCÍPIOS DO ENSINAR-APRENDER GEOGRAFIA: APONTAMENTOS PARA A RACIONALIDADE DO COMUM

2020· article· pt· W3016330165 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eduardo Donizeti Girotto, Ana Cláudia Carvalho Giordani

Bibliographic record

VenueGEOGRAFIA · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRural and Ethnic Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyRationalityPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O presente artigo discute princípios para ensinar-aprender geografia na escola pública, reconhecendo e problematizando o contexto de ampliação das desigualdades e violação de direitos que têm marcado o projeto societário neoliberal no Brasil. Parte importante deste contexto acentua-se com a emergência de políticas educacionais que pouco problematizam as desigualdades da educação pública no Brasil, reproduzindo-as, com o intuito de consolidar lógicas privatistas em torno das escolas, dos campos disciplinares, da docência e da educação. Os princípios apresentados neste texto se fundam na busca de uma outra racionalidade para além da lógica neoliberal. Para tanto, dialogamos com o conceito de comum, sistematizado por Dardot & Laval (2018), discutindo os sentidos do ensinar-aprender geografia como momento de construção desta outra racionalidade. Em nossa perspectiva, diante da hegemonia da racionalidade neoliberal, é fundamental construir o comum desde as escolas, reinventando nossas práticas, reconhecendo as geografias que fazemos, em diferentes contextos e que, reunidas, tecem novas grafias a muitas mãos e abrem as possibilidades das ações em defesa de um outro projeto societário.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.033
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGEOGRAFIASame topicRural and Ethnic EducationFrench-language works237,207