Emergência e circulação da fórmula discursiva “Itinerário Formativo” e o projeto neoliberal na reforma do Ensino Médio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to problematize the relationship between neoliberalism and education, taking as its object of investigation the emergence and circulation of the discursive formula “training itinerary” within the scope of the normative text of the Secondary Education Reform (Law n⁰ 13.415/2017). Bearing in mind that neoliberal guidelines are advancing throughout all sectors of Brazilian society, it is important to highlight their performance in the educational field, above all, based on the dissemination of a discourse ideologically committed to limiting and determining the role of education to mere professional training, in order to universalize the culture of entrepreneurship as a decisive pedagogical factor for the educational training of impoverished youth, forced into precarious work and without guaranteed rights. According to the interpretative hypothesis presented in this article, such distortion of relations in the world of work results precisely from the amplification of the neoliberal discourse of freedom of choice and entrepreneurial autonomy, which, in the High School Reform, is crystallized in the formula “training itinerary”. In this sense, we will first address the elements that characterize neoliberal subjectivity, which is responsible for the adaptation of new subjects to the reality of competition in contemporary societies. Next, we will quickly argue about the configuration of neoliberalism as a totalitarian Project, and; finally, we will analyze how the circulation of the formula “training itinerary” corroborates the fixation of the elements of neoliberal subjectivity in education, especially in the High School stage. This work uses as a methodological procedure the analysis of discursive formulas (Planque, 2010) and the theoretical-conceptual contribution of Laval and Dardot (2016) and Laval (2019) on the elements that make up current neoliberal societies.
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 | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".