MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088449800

Il paradigma relazionale e l'educazione

2016· book-chapter· it· W3088449800 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paolo Terenzi

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageit
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nelle sociologie relazionali che sono emerse nel panorama internazionale nelle ultime tre decadi, i procesi educativi sono un
\ntema che stranamente finora non sembrano avere avuto un approfondimento analitico adeguato. Questo vale per gli studiosi che hanno introdotto la sociologia relazionale negli Stati Uniti (Harrison White, Charles Tilly, Mustapha
\nEmirbayer), in Canada (Simon Laamme), in Francia (Guy Bajoit), in Inghilterra
\n(Nick Crossley). Il presente contributo intende pertanto superare questo gap tra sociologie relazionali e analisi dei processi educativi. Il saggio inizia con una lettura critica di alcune aporie presenti nelle letture funzionaliste applicate alla educazione, letture che hanno anche oggi una ampia diffusione nella letteratura interazionale. Nella seconda parte, viene poi operato un confronto tra approccio funzionalista e approccio relazionale sul tema problema della acquisizione nelle pratiche educative di skills fondamentali nella società della conoscenza. Il saggio individua poi e sviluppa elementi presenti nelle sociologie relazionali che possono portare un contributo innovativo e propositivo nell'affrontare anomie e criticità presenti nella organizzazione del sistema scolastico italiano.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.007

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.226 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)Same topicEducational and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207