Active methodologies: reflections on te path between tradition and innovation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Faced with a scenario of changes in various social segments, the educational field also needs to adapt to the new times, since education is organized and formatted to meet the demands of society, but it is a very complex task. One of the points that require attention concerns the relationship between those involved in the teaching and learning process. The purpose of this work is to reflect on the literature and teaching practice on such methodologies. As guides, we propose the following questions: What are active methodologies? Since when and where does the search for student autonomy in education come from? Are we teachers, in fact, prepared for the proposed changes with the use of active methodologies? Active methodologies have potential, but what is the vision regarding their use in a neoliberal education? Therefore, our objective is to understand and propose reflections, from the teaching point of view, about active methodologies, the attempt to implement them in our classroom practices in basic education, in addition bringing the discussion about the neoliberal aspects that use the innovation discourse to promote these methodologies as products to be sold. As a theoretical background, we will bring some authors such as Bacich, Neto and Trevisani (2015), Mello, Neto and Petrillo (2019) with the concept and characteristics of active methodologies; Dewey (2011) and Freire (1993 and 1996) with discussions on building autonomy; Libâneo (2013) and Nunes (2008) about the position and challenge of teachers in the face of innovations; Laval (2019), Mordente (2020), Borges (2020) and Silveira (2009) with the reading of the neoliberal forces active in Brazilian Education. The educational product during the Professional Master's in Teaching in Basic Education of the Stricto Sensu Graduate Program CEPAE / UFG is available on the website entitled: “Active methodologies: reflections” https://www.metodologiasativasreflexoes.com/, of an expository nature, it has a blog part that has posts resulting from the bibliographical survey and curation of materials on the subject, the forum with reflective questions about active methodologies and teaching practice and sharing activities in Spanish and Portuguese Language. The intention is to reach basic education teachers who share the anxieties related to the use of active methodologies, so that there is a space for conceptual clarification and an invitation to reflect on the teaching praxis, those involved and the teaching and learning process.
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 | 0.028 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.080 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.028 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| 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".