MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409107604 · doi:10.7213/1981-416x.25.084.ds13

As identidades do professor de inglês no ensino médio integral: entre a língua estrangeira e o projeto de vida

2025· article· pt· W4409107604 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gildete Cecília Neri Santos Teles, Thadeu Vinícius Souza Teles

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Diálogo Educacional · 2025
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyPhilosophyHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artigo analisa as identidades dos professores de inglês no Ensino Médio Integral do estado de Sergipe, destacando os impactos da disciplina Projeto de Vida quando esta é parte da carga horária docente. O problema investigado é a tensão gerada pela sobrecarga do professor, que precisa ensinar uma língua estrangeira e, ao mesmo tempo, guiar os alunos na construção de seus projetos de vida, ainda que esta disciplina não tenha sido parte da sua formação inicial. A pesquisa foi conduzida a partir de uma metodologia qualitativa, com análise de documentos (Sergipe, 2016) e entrevistas com professores de inglês a fim de compreender como essas exigências moldam as subjetividades docentes dentro de um contexto de racionalidade neoliberal (Laval, 2020). Os principais resultados indicam que o Projeto de Vida reforça práticas de controle e subjetivação neoliberal, mas também pode ser ressignificado como um espaço de resistência pedagógica (Gallo, 2008). Conclui-se que os professores enfrentam um dilema entre seu papel tradicional e as novas demandas emocionais e formativas, com oportunidades para práticas pedagógicas críticas.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0160.010
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Diálogo EducacionalSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207