MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

UMA ANÁLISE DE MATERIAIS DIDÁTICOS (RE)ELABORADOS NO PROJETO DE EXTENSÃO “UNISALE PARCERIA UNIVERSIDADE-ESCOLA” À LUZ DOS MULTILETRAMENTOS

2020· article· pt· W3034204996 on OpenAlexaff
Isabela de Oliveira Campos, Sarah Linhares Oliveira

Bibliographic record

VenuePROLÍNGUA · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Digital Technologies
Canadian institutionsCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux Cavendish
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artigo tem como propósito analisar os materiais didáticos (re)elaborados a partir de uma parceria estabelecida dentro do projeto de extensão UNISALE – Parceria Universidade-Escola à luz da teoria dos multiletramentos. O projeto é parte integrante do Programa Interfaces, da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (FALE-UFMG), e tem atuado para que seja possível unir duas instituições de ensino, a escola básica e a universidade, em prol da melhoria de suas relações. Para a análise, foram selecionados dois planos de aula com seus respectivos materiais elaborados durante uma parceria no ano de 2018. As análises apontam que ambos os materiais contemplaram os principais aspectos da teoria dos multiletramentos, ainda que em diferentes graus e de diferentes maneiras. Salientamos também aspectos que podem ser mais bem explorados dentro das (re)elaborações didáticas. Ademais, há indícios de que os materiais (re)elaborados nessa parceria contribuíram para uma junção bem-sucedida da teoria e da prática, entendidas sócio-historicamente como dois polos distantes.

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)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePROLÍNGUASame topicEducation and Digital TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207