MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Políticas curriculares para o ensino médio brasileiro: sentidos atribuídos nas produções discursivas da ANPEd

2025· article· W7117895999 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Almir Antonio Bezerra, Maria Ludmila Holanda da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueREVISTA FAFIRE · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Pedagogy and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade Federal de Pernambuco
KeywordsContext (archaeology)EmancipationScope (computer science)Action (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esse trabalho, inscrito nos debates sobre as políticas curriculares, tem como objetivo analisar sentidos de políticas curriculares para o Ensino Médio brasileiro inscritos nas produções discursivas da Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Educação (ANPEd). A partir de referenciais do pós-estruturalismo, notadamente da Teoria do Discurso de Laclau e Mouffe (2015), Mouffe (2015) e do pós-marxismo, Dardot e Laval (2016) e Brown (2019), buscamos observar, nas produções acadêmicas de 2011 a 2021, sentidos latentes que operam nessas políticas. Sendo assim, utilizamo-nos da tecnologia de busca políticas curriculares para o Ensino Médio como termo chave para fazer o levantamento bibliográfico no espaço acadêmico da ANPEd. Percebemos nessas produções teóricas que as políticas curriculares é parte integrante da reforma do Estado. Este, por sua vez, articula-se a organismos internacionais e nacionais, a partir de discurso de crises econômico-educacional, para forjar um tipo de sociedade consoante a uma capacidade de competir e se desenvolver economicamente, visto que educação é percebida por ele como produção de recursos humanos nas linhas da competição, da individualização e do empreendedorismo (Giovinazzo-Jr, 2015).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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 FAFIRESame topicEducation Pedagogy and PracticesFrench-language works237,207