MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Formação inicial de professores

2024· article· pt· W4400806541 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista e-Curriculum · 2024
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Pedagogy and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As disputas por protagonismo na elaboração dos referenciais curriculares para a formação de professores têm se intensificado. Nesse cenário, a Resolução CNE/CP n.º 2/2015, foi substituída pela n.º 2/2019. Esta pesquisa objetivou analisar os reflexos dessa substituição por meio da análise comparativa dos projetos de formação. A metodologia utilizada foi a pesquisa com base documental e a pesquisa bibliográfica. Contamos com o aporte teórico de Gimeno Sacristán (1999, 2000, 2011), Freire (2017), Arroyo (2013), Marcelo García (1999), Schön (2000), Imbernón (2011) e Laval (2004). Identificamos que a n.º 2/2019 define um projeto direcionado a formação de uma “personalidade global” (Laval, 2004) requerida pelo mercado, resultando na fragilidade da formação de professores. Conclui-se que a integração da competência como nuclear do currículo requer que a educação cumpra as funções que desconsideram os elementos essenciais para a sólida formação do professor.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.382 · 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