MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Anísio Teixeira’s Legacy to Brazilian Education

2022· article· en· W4311949557 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Clarice Nunes

Bibliographic record

VenueEncounters in Theory and History of Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Pedagogy and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyIdeologyPoliticsWork (physics)Political scienceSociologyPedagogyPublic administrationLibrary scienceLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of the work of Anísio Teixeira (1900-1971), based on research in his archives that permitted a questioning of the current interpretations found in the pedagogical literature between 1970 and 1990. The focus is on his role as administrator at the secretaries of education of Rio de Janeiro (1930-1935) and Salvador (1940-1950), as coordinator of public organs, particularly the Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Educacionais/INEP (1952–1964). His legacy was built amid political-ideological clashes due to his stance in defense of democracy and education for democracy, both in his administrative work and publications. The controversy surrounding the book Educação não é Privilégio (1957) and its nationwide repercussion are examined. Anísio Teixeira and his collaborators built a domain of identification and practice for professional educators, defining the career and producing policy aimed at creating a school system from elementary education to university. Keywords: history of Brazilian education, Brazilian educators, Anísio Teixeira

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncounters in Theory and History of EducationSame topicEducation Pedagogy and PracticesFrench-language works237,207