A regionalized historical-sociological constitutionalist analysis of the right to basic education in the district of Bailique in Macapá-AP: The education that Brazil does not know and does not need
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first manifestation regarding public education was registered in 1717, the year in which the King of Prussia instituted compulsory primary education in his country for children from 05 to 12 years old. In Brazil, the first Constitution granted by Dom Pedro, in 1824, recognized the right to education. In his text, he presented the free primary education for all citizens among civil and political rights, but selective, not extending this right to the entire population. Currently, the right to education is provided for in article 205 of the 1988 Federal Constitution. It is a right of all and a duty of the State. However, as much as this right is provided for in our legal system, many localities face numerous difficulties, some more and some less, in access to education, as is the case of the district of the Bailique Archipelago, located in the State of Amapá, about 230 km from the capital Macapá. The difficult access to the region corroborates its "oblivion" by the government and consequent violation of rights. People living in situations of social exclusion do not have the guarantee of access to or attendance at school, for example, with special emphasis on children and adolescents. Such violations contribute to perpetuating the intergenerational cycle of social inequality and poverty.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".