MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317039053 · doi:10.35265/2236-6717-228-12363

NEUROCIÊNCIAS NO CONTEXTO DA EDUCAÇÃO ESCOLAR: A ESTIMULAÇÃO DA APRENDIZAGEM

2023· article· en· W4317039053 on OpenAlexaff
NATHANE DO ESPIRITO SANTO BARBOSA

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Científica Semana Acadêmica · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Pedagogy and Practices
Canadian institutionsMonsanto (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemorizationPsychologyFacilitatorVisionContext (archaeology)Theme (computing)PerceptionAction (physics)Cognitive sciencePedagogyMathematics educationSociologyNeuroscienceSocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article intends to provide a reflection that leads educators to knowledge that relates the brain, its maturity and perception, to learning. Thus, it presents itself with the theme: Neurosciences in the context of school education: the stimulation of learning. It is believed that the human mind was constituted and there is no way to understand how it is organized with a traditional view of intelligence. Therefore, the current educator needs to know and reposition himself in the face of new studies and discoveries about the human mind and intelligence. Thus, the objective is to analyze, in the existing literature, neuroscience in training and pedagogical practice, as a tool for learning. The research took place through exploratory and reflective bibliographic research, with the contribution of authors such as: CARVALHO (2010), FONSECA (2015), OLIVEIRA (2011), RELVAS (2012, 2016, 2018), it is possible to understand the issue of neurosciences in education as a facilitator from understanding to the teaching-learning process and its difficulties, also highlighting issues such as motivation, emotion and memorization. Pedagogical action needs to be carried out by new discoveries that help in the classroom process and that search for new visions, as allowed by neuroscience. It becomes necessary to enable the student to enjoy learning, rescuing lost interests due to the difficulties not addressed.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.008

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Científica Semana AcadêmicaSame topicEducation Pedagogy and PracticesFrench-language works237,207