Importância dos cursos extracurriculares na formação profissional dos acadêmicos do Curso Técnico em Agropecuária - The importance of extracurricular courses in professional training of students of the Agriculture Technical Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumo Cursos extracurriculares são uma oportunidade de praticar e aprender assuntos muitas vezes não abordados no decorrer de um curso. Este trabalho objetivou verificar a percepção dos discentes do início e final do Curso Técnico em Agropecuária do Colégio Politécnico da UFSM em relação aos cursos extracurriculares. Por meio de questionário foi observado que os estudantes consideram os cursos extracurriculares importantes para a formação profissional. Também foi observado que grande parte dos estudantes já participou de atividades semelhantes. Os resultados obtidos demonstram a preocupação dos alunos com o futuro profissional e também o papel fundamental de agências financiadoras de atividades na formação qualificada dos estudantes. Palavras-chave: aprendizagem, práticas, currículo, Pronatec. THE IMPORTANCE OF EXTRACURRICULAR COURSES IN PROFESSIONAL TRAINING OF STUDENTS OF THE AGRICULTURE TECHNICAL COURSE Abstract Extracurricular courses are an opportunity to practice and learn subjects not often addressed in the curriculum. This study aimed to determine the perceptions of students from the beginning and end of the Agriculture Technical Course of Colégio Politécnico of UFSM regarding extracurricular courses. Through questionnaire was observed that students from both semesters consider extracurricular courses an important methodology for the training. In addition was observed that most students have already participated in similar activities. These results indicated interest and the preoccupation of the students with the professional future and the fundamental role of financial agencies in the training of qualified students. Key-words: learning, practices, curriculum, Pronatec.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".