MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409108006 · doi:10.7213/1981-416x.25.084.ds01

A governamentalidade neoliberal em discursos sobre o Projeto de Vida do novo Ensino Médio

2025· article· pt· W4409108006 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrícia Diógenes de Melo Brunet, Francisco Vieira da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Diálogo Educacional · 2025
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Pedagogy and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O Ensino Médio brasileiro tem sido debatido há muitos anos, especialmente após a aprovação da Lei n.º 13.415/2017, que instituiu o Novo Ensino Médio (NEM). A reforma se propõe a preparar os jovens tanto para o mercado de trabalho quanto para a vida, permitindo-lhes a escolha de áreas de interesse para aprofundamento de seus conhecimentos. Nesse contexto, o Projeto de Vida (PV) , como componente curricular, destaca-se como uma ferramenta para que os estudantes possam refletir e agir sobre vários aspectos de suas vidas por meio de diferentes atividades e experiências. Este artigo objetiva analisar o funcionamento da governamentalidade neoliberal nos discursos relacionados ao PV. A metodologia adotada é a qualitativa e documental, baseada no método arqueogenealógico de Michel Foucault. O referencial teórico embasa-se em Foucault (de 1995 a 2010) e autores como Dardot e Laval (2016), Damon (2009), dentre outros. A pesquisa abrange documentos legais e pedagógicos, além de discursos em mídias digitais relacionados ao PV. As análises dos enunciados revelaram a influência da racionalidade neoliberal que molda o campo educacional para atender às demandas do mercado.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Diálogo EducacionalSame topicEducation Pedagogy and PracticesFrench-language works237,207