Discursos sobre a educação financeira em postagens do Twitter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O artigo analisa discursos sobre a educação financeira em postagens do Twitter, com o intento de responder aos seguintes questionamentos: que discursos sobre a educação financeira circulam em postagens do Twitter? Em que medida tais discursos se conectam com os saberes, as práticas e as crenças da racionalidade neoliberal? Para tanto, toma como aporte teórico principal as reflexões de Foucault (2008; 2010), Dardot e Laval (2016), Laval (2020), Casara (2021) a respeito do discurso e da racionalidade neoliberal, além de autores como Saraiva (2013; 2017), Leite (2017) e Cunha (2020), que discutem a educação financeira na articulação com os modos neoliberais de gestão das condutas. Trata-se de um estudo descritivo-interpretativo com viés predominantemente qualitativo. O material de análise recobre vinte postagens publicadas no Twitter nos primeiros dois meses de 2023. Reunimos as postagens em quatro blocos, conforme a posição de sujeito adotada. As análises indicam a existência de posicionamentos de recusa e de aceitação da educação financeira como uma estratégia de regulação da racionalidade neoliberal.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.029 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".