Leteratura do cordel no espaço escolar en Petrolina-PE : uma relaçao marcada por conflitos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research talks about Cordel Literature in the educational space in Petrolina City, Pernambuco Backwoods. This work considered as a starting point the studies carried out so far about this northeastern culture-artistic demonstration, investigates the main cause of Cordel exclusion in the schools. \n \nIn the first chapter, the description of the main studies already developed about Cordel literature is made. Thus, we establish a discussion about the possible death of this kind of text, as well as the current conditions of reading and production of this north-eastern culture demonstration. \n \nThus, Cordel is seen in this work as a text which is made, as a result of long social process. It is asked why this text which convey know ledges isn't accepted by the school. In the second chapter, we focus on the main themes about the text concept, culture, culture identity, classical and popular. \n \nIn the following chapters, the methodology is presented, supported in the action-research and the analysis of datas is made, as a result the north the qualitative interpretation. In the final considerations, this work indicates that Cordel is excluded from educational space for several motives. Among them, the biggest one is the lack of knowledge of the teachers about this kind of text. Thus, the teachers, the main conductors of the education process are disable to use this literature in the activities in the classroom. \n
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".