Enseñar como lectoras: literaturas polifónicas para narrativas heterográficas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gender studies are an indisputable contribution to pedagogy and epistemology-oriented innovation. In this regard, the meaning conferred to the concept of innovation is gradually defined. To innovate is to retake, with a transforming will, the best of the legacy and to dismiss the outdated, it is to give and legitimize the voices of those silenced by history and give them the possibility to rewrite the forgotten; also to innovate demands to make visible and viralize reality, to validate pedagogical proposals that have as a driving force the struggle for dignities, that do not turn their backs on the climate and ecological crisis. In this regard, it is essential to analyze the link between Pedagogy and Literature, disciplines that converge in their political dimension from an ecocritical and gynocritical approach to the written legacy and new textualizations, capable of generating a polyphonic chorus that can transgress the limits imposed by a predominantly male canon.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".