MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087683630 · doi:10.18224/educ.v22i1.6655

Utilização de Materiais Didáticos Para Ensinar Ciências Humanas na Escola Primária

2019· article· pt· W3087683630 on OpenAlexaff
Anderson Araújo‐Oliveira

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Educativa - Revista de Educação · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicScience and Education Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Em um estudo recente que investigou as características das técnicas de ensino aplicadas ao ensino de ciências humanas em alunos do ensino fundamental, foram levantadas questões sobre o lugar e o papel dos materiais de ensino na prática de ensino utilizada pelos futuros professores durante o estágio. Quais são os materiais de ensino preferidos usados? Como esses materiais são usados? Por que esses materiais são escolhidos? Os dados de entrevistas semiestruturadas e observações diretas em sala de aula indicam que os futuros professores recorrem principalmente a livros didáticos, que são usados tanto para apoiar o planejamento do estágio de ensino, como para fornecer aos futuros professores uma fonte de informação e uma fonte de apoio visual durante as aulas. Os futuros professores também recorrem aos livros de atividades dos alunos e aos registros dos trabalhos que eles desenvolvem para orientar os exercícios para o aprendizado dos alunos. Além disso, esses materiais são escolhidos principalmente por causa de seu potencial de motivar e despertar o interesse dos alunos e, para esse fim, foram considerados satisfatórios.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Educativa - Revista de EducaçãoSame topicScience and Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207