MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386693038 · doi:10.7202/1105532ar

La pédagogie des sans-terre comme forme d’expérience et d’enracinement démocratique du travail

2023· article· fr· W4386693038 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Pascale Devette, Dan Furukawa Marques

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyWork (physics)PedagogySociologyPolitical scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article interroge les liens entre éducation, démocratie et travail tels qu’ils se déploient dans une école du Mouvement des travailleurs ruraux sans-terre (MST) du Brésil, afin de cerner la manière dont ces trois sphères sociales s’influencent mutuellement. Pour ce faire, nous analysons les pensées de John Dewey (1859-1952) et de Simone Weil (1909-1943), indirectement mobilisées par les sans-terre pour créer ce qu’ils appellent la « pédagogie de la campagne », soit une praxis démocratique qui articule éducation et travail et qu’ils appliquent dans des centaines d’écoles à travers le Brésil. Nous partirons d’abord de considérations théoriques, afin de montrer l’importance sociale et politique de réfléchir à des institutions qui favorisent les capacités d’attention pour comprendre en retour comment ces capacités, loin d’être purement individuelles, ont des effets sur la qualité des liens sociaux et de la vie collective. Cette vision de l’articulation entre démocratie, éducation et travail à travers l’attention se retrouve au coeur de plusieurs institutions d’éducation gérées par le Mouvement des sans-terre au Brésil.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.025
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.187
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et SociétésSame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207