MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388557549 · doi:10.1590/0102-469839619

CONQUISTANDO CORAÇÕES E MENTES: AS COMPETÊNCIAS SOCIOEMOCIONAIS COMO REFLEXO DA RACIONALIDADE NEOLIBERAL EM COLEÇÕES DIDÁTICAS DE PROJETO DE VIDA

2023· article· pt· W4388557549 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Francisco Vieira da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueEducação em Revista · 2023
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Education Studies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RESUMO: O objetivo deste texto consiste em analisar coleções didáticas de Projeto de Vida, com vistas a estudar como as competências socioemocionais são abordadas em tais materiais didáticos e de que forma refletem os anseios da racionalidade neoliberal. Para ancorar teoricamente o estudo, busca-se respaldo, principlamente nas reflexões inicialmente desenvolvidas por Foucault (2008), posteriormente ampliadas por Dardot e Laval (2016) acerca do neoliberalismo. Acerca da metodologia, convém frisar que se trata de um estudo descritivo-interpretativo de cunho documental, seguindo uma abordagem eminentemente qualitativa. O corpus é formado por fragmentos extraídos de três coleções didáticas de Projeto de Vida, aprovadas pelo Programa Nacional do Livro e do Material Didático (PNLD), edição de 2021. Por meio da análise, pode-se ponderar que há uma relação direta entre as competências socioemocionais e a racionalidade neoliberal, porque os jovens são orientados a regular suas emoções, com vistas a aperfeiçoar o capital humano e, como corolário, construir o projeto de vida com base naquilo que é desejável no cerne de uma racionalidade matizada pela concorrência, individualidade, resiliência e autonomia.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0080.019
Scholarly communication0.0130.009
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducação em RevistaSame topicDiverse Education Studies and ReformsFrench-language works237,207