MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165485664 · doi:10.14393/ufu.di.2020.33

Educação sexual: uma proposta para a Educação de Jovens e Adultos do Ensino Fundamental II

2019· dissertation· pt· W3165485664 on OpenAlexaff
Danielly Ferreira Dias

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Sexuality, and Education
Canadian institutionsBibliographical Society of Canada
FundersMinistério da SaúdeMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadUniversidade Federal de UberlândiaStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsHuman sexualityTheme (computing)Sexuality educationPsychologyPedagogyIntervention (counseling)Sex educationSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theme of this research in Science Education is Sexual Education (SE) aimed at students of Youth and Adult Education (YAE) of Elementary Education (EE) II, within the qualitative approach of pedagogical intervention. Its study objective was to investigate the sexuality conceptions of students from YEA, as well as to propose and develop a pedagogical training intervention with ES in a school provisionally allocated in a settlement, in the municipality of Monte Alegre de Minas / MG. This research is justified due to the absence of discussions on the theme, lack of specific material for the teaching and learning process for this audience in addressing the contents of sexuality, which is restricted to Science teachers. The target audience was composed of a total of 26 students, 8 men and 18 women, with ages ranging from 27 to 82 years. Data collection was carried out in 3 phases: Initial Questionnaire (IQ), Didactic Sequence (DS) and Final Questionnaire (FQ). The DS, the educational product of this study, was composed of texts, dynamics and workshops. The results presented possibilities for discussing the different themes of sexuality, including gender, based on the experiences and knowledge of these students. It is suggested the development of DS that adapts the transversality of the themes of sexuality to the reality of the students. Likewise, it is considered that SD was a two-way street in the education of the teacher and the students regarding the understanding of sexuality themes without prejudice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender, Sexuality, and EducationFrench-language works237,207