A racionalidade neoliberal regula as políticas educacionais: o empreendedorismo no referencial curricular gaúcho
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation is linked to the field of Educational Policies and was written during the studies at PPGEDU/UPF; it was led by a study of a basic nature, for the purpose of contributing to research focused on curricular policies. The general goal aimed to understand how neoliberal rationality regulates educational policy manifested in the Gaúcho Curricular Reference for High School. The specific goals focused on (i) analyzing the curricular documents guiding the High School Reform, identifying, through a critical diagnosis, the changes and emerging concepts that began to structure the high school curriculum; (ii) identify and understand how neoliberal rationality materializes in the Gaúcho Curriculum Reference for High School (GCR), pointing out the possible consequences of this educational model for the training of students; (iii) contribute, through this investigative process, with political, theoretical, pedagogical and epistemological arguments, so that the school faces the determinism of neoliberal rationality that demarcates the GCR from the HS. The research problem aimed to answer the following question: Considering the context of Law 13,415/2017, how does neoliberal rationality regulate the educational policy manifested in the Gaúcho Curriculum Reference for High School? The hypothesis was adopted that investigating the entrepreneurial rationality that regulates educational policies, especially in the GCR, is necessary to raise awareness and create resistance strategies in the face of the political, economic and social situation that the school faces. As for the research methodology, it was based in the analytical-hermeneutic method, as its purpose was to interpret, understand and point out how neoliberal rationality spreads through entrepreneurship, disseminating training strategies for economic power in the educational area. Regarding the approach to the problem, it is a qualitative research as it seeks the interpretation and analysis of categories, texts and documents. In relation to its goals, it is characterized as descriptive-analytical and, in terms of procedures, as a bibliographic and documentary research, as it searches the literature for the theoretical foundation to analyze an educational policy document through the content analysis of the Gaúcho Curriculum Reference. To achieve the purpose of the investigation, the bibliographical sources of the research (Dardot; Laval, 2016; Laval, 2004; Campos; Soeiro, 2016; Mazzucato, 2014) were essentials works to think about the concept of entrepreneurship as a neoliberal rationality and as a model educational. The main documentary source was the Gaúcho Curricular Reference (2021), preceded by laws, guidelines, ordinances and references that standardize the curricular policies in force as of 2013. Commentators who dialogue about the topic debated through articles were also included in the study. published in periodicals and book chapters, as well as in recent publications relating to High School Reform. Among the conclusions of the text, it is drawn that neoliberal rationality, having conceived the concept of entrepreneurship as a way of being and conceiving life, employs the values of education and teaching solely for the training of professionals aimed at the job market . For this reason, educating for entrepreneurship, or disseminating entrepreneurial culture, also means motivating students to take individual initiative in search of their own survival. Given the problematization raised, it is concluded that training for entrepreneurship, as stated in the GCR-HS, induces education in high school for the training of 10 emerging labor, in order to crystallize social inequality, the deregulation of public policies and the detriment of the emancipatory formation of citizens. Although the implementation of the New High School is already taking place, this work found that educational projects are designed almost without the participation of teachers and students; this study demonstrates that the true goals of the changes are distant from the context and concrete problems that the educational reality faces
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 | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".