Centralização versus Descentralização na Governação do Sistema Educativo de Cabo Verde: Lógicas em Análise

Nesta dissertação procura-se analisar a problemática da “Centralização versus Descentralização na Governação do Sistema Educativo de Cabo Verde: lógicas em análise” no período compreendido entre (1975 a 2006). Constata-se que Cabo Verde, depois de se tornar um país soberano e independente, assistiu a momentos de grande concentração e de grande centralização na administração do Sistema Educativo. Ao longo deste período assistiuse também a momentos de desconcentração e de ideias de descentralização que culminaram com a abertura do sistema político pluripartidário. Essa abertura abriu a possibilidade de uma nova dinâmica de transformação nos deferentes sectores da administração do sistema educacional. As mudanças políticas verificadas no país, permite-nos conhecer e desocultar as razões, as lógicas e as racionalidades que presidem a manutenção de um sistema centralizado de governação do Sistema Educativo, apesar da presença de forças políticas com diversidades ideológicas. Uma vez conhecido o historial da organização, administração e gestão do Sistema Educativo Cabo-verdiano, a partir de uma retrospectiva histórica, debruçámo-nos sobre as principais teorias que estão na base das perspectivas da centralização e descentralização, e seus conceitos associados enquanto modelo de análise teórica, para tentar perceber este aparente paradoxo. Na parte empírica, a metodologia utilizada apoia-se na abordagem qualitativa de investigação, na qual utilizámos a entrevista, a análise documental e conversas informais, que nos permitiram confirmar ou infirmar a problemática inicialmente formulada. Os dados obtidos dez entrevistados, nomeadamente os responsáveis da política educativa, os administradores do sistema, e os directores dos estabelecimentos de ensino público, levam-nos a tirar várias conclusões sobre um Sistema Educativo centralizado, com uma relativa margem de autonomia. Apesar de encontrarem algumas vantagens no modelo centralizado, a maioria dos entrevistados sublinha a relevância da opção por um modelo descentralizado de governação do Sistema Educativo.

Rational reasoning or adaptive behavior? Evidence from two-person beauty contest games

Many experiments have shown that human subjects do not necessarily behave in line with game theoretic assumptions and solution concepts. The reasons for this non-conformity are multiple. In this paper we study the argument whether a deviation from game theory is because subjects are rational, but doubt that others are rational as well, compared to the argument that subjects, in general, are boundedly rational themselves. To distinguish these two hypotheses, we study behavior in repeated 2-person and many-person Beauty-Contest-Games which are strategically different from one another. We analyze four different treatments and observe that convergence toward equilibrium is driven by learning through the information about the other player s choice and adaptation rather than self-initiated rational reasoning.

Nutrition parentérale compé- mentaire de la nutrition entérale aux soins intensifs: une association logique [Supplemental parenteral nutrition for intensive care patients: a logical combination with enteral nutrition]

Undernutrition is a widespread problem in the intensive care and is associated with a worse clinical outcome. Enteral nutrition is the recommended nutritional support in ICU patients. However, enteral nutrition is frequently insufficient to cover protein-energy needs. The initiation of supplemental parenteral nutrition, when enteral nutrition is insufficient, could optimize the nutritional therapy. Such a combination could allow reducing morbidity, length of stay and recovery, as well as improving quality of life and health care costs. Prospective studies are currently underway to test this hypothesis.

Kitcher's Revolutionary Reasoning Inversion in Ethics

This paper examines three specific issues raised by The Ethical Project. First, I discuss the varieties of altruism and spell out the differences between the definitions proposed by Kitcher and the ways altruism is usually conceived in biology, philosophy, psychology, and economics literature. Second, with the example of Kitcher's account, I take a critical look at evolutionary stories of the emergence of human ethical practices. Third, I point to the revolutionary implications of the Darwinian methodology when it is thoughtfully applied to ethics.

How to assign a likelihood ratio in a footwear mark case: an analysis and discussion in the light of R v T

This article analyses and discusses issues that pertain to the choice of relevant databases for assigning values to the components of evaluative likelihood ratio procedures at source level. Although several formal likelihood ratio developments currently exist, both case practitioners and recipients of expert information (such as judiciary) may be reluctant to consider them as a framework for evaluating scientific evidence in context. The recent ruling R v T and ensuing discussions in many forums provide illustrative examples for this. In particular, it is often felt that likelihood ratio-based reasoning amounts to an application that requires extensive quantitative information along with means for dealing with technicalities related to the algebraic formulation of these approaches. With regard to this objection, this article proposes two distinct discussions. In a first part, it is argued that, from a methodological point of view, there are additional levels of qualitative evaluation that are worth considering prior to focusing on particular numerical probability assignments. Analyses will be proposed that intend to show that, under certain assumptions, relative numerical values, as opposed to absolute values, may be sufficient to characterize a likelihood ratio for practical and pragmatic purposes. The feasibility of such qualitative considerations points out that the availability of hard numerical data is not a necessary requirement for implementing a likelihood ratio approach in practice. It is further argued that, even if numerical evaluations can be made, qualitative considerations may be valuable because they can further the understanding of the logical underpinnings of an assessment. In a second part, the article will draw a parallel to R v T by concentrating on a practical footwear mark case received at the authors' institute. This case will serve the purpose of exemplifying the possible usage of data from various sources in casework and help to discuss the difficulty associated with reconciling the depth of theoretical likelihood ratio developments and limitations in the degree to which these developments can actually be applied in practice.

Estimating the time since discharge of spent cartridges: a logical approach fro interpreting the evidence

Estimating the time since discharge of a spent cartridge or a firearm can be useful in criminal situa-tions involving firearms. The analysis of volatile gunshot residue remaining after shooting using solid-phase microextraction (SPME) followed by gas chromatography (GC) was proposed to meet this objective. However, current interpretative models suffer from several conceptual drawbacks which render them inadequate to assess the evidential value of a given measurement. This paper aims to fill this gap by proposing a logical approach based on the assessment of likelihood ratios. A probabilistic model was thus developed and applied to a hypothetical scenario where alternative hy-potheses about the discharge time of a spent cartridge found on a crime scene were forwarded. In order to estimate the parameters required to implement this solution, a non-linear regression model was proposed and applied to real published data. The proposed approach proved to be a valuable method for interpreting aging-related data.

Endogenous depth of reasoning

We introduce a model of strategic thinking in games of initial response. Unlike standard level-k models, in this framework the player's `depth of reasoning' is endogenously determined, andit can be disentangled from his beliefs over his opponent's cognitive bound. In our approach,individuals act as if they follow a cost-benefit analysis. The depth of reasoning is a function ofthe player's cognitive abilities and his payoffs. The costs are exogenous and represent the gametheoretical sophistication of the player; the benefit instead is related to the game payoffs. Behavioris in turn determined by the individual's depth of reasoning and his beliefs about the reasoningprocess of the opponent. Thus, in our framework, payoffs not only affect individual choices inthe traditional sense, but they also shape the cognitive process itself. Our model delivers testableimplications on players' chosen actions as incentives and opponents change. We then test themodel's predictions with an experiment. We administer different treatments that vary beliefs overpayoffs and opponents, as well as beliefs over opponents' beliefs. The results of this experiment,which are not accounted for by current models of reasoning in games, strongly support our theory.Our approach therefore serves as a novel, unifying framework of strategic thinking that allows forpredictions across games.

Liberties and constraints of the normative approach to evaluation and decision in forensic science: a discussion towards overcoming some common misconceptions

At a time when disciplined inference and decision making under uncertainty represent common aims to participants in legal proceedings, the scientific community is remarkably heterogenous in its attitudes as to how these goals ought to be achieved. Probability and decision theory exert a considerable influence, and we think by all reason rightly do so, but they go against a mainstream of thinking that does not embrace-or is not aware of-the 'normative' character of this body of theory. It is normative, in the sense understood in this article, in that it prescribes particular properties, typically (logical) coherence, to which reasoning and decision making ought to conform. Disregarding these properties can result in diverging views which are occasionally used as an argument against the theory, or as a pretext for not following it. Typical examples are objections according to which people, both in everyday life but also individuals involved at various levels in the judicial process, find the theory difficult to understand and to apply. A further objection is that the theory does not reflect how people actually behave. This article aims to point out in what sense these examples misinterpret the analytical framework in its normative perspective. Through examples borrowed mostly from forensic science contexts, it is argued that so-called intuitive scientific attitudes are particularly liable to such misconceptions. These attitudes are contrasted with a statement of the actual liberties and constraints of probability and decision theory and the view according to which this theory is normative.

Diagnosing Patients Combining Principal Components Analysis and Case Based Reasoning

This paper addresses the application of a PCA analysis on categorical data prior to diagnose a patients data set using a Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) system. The particularity is that the standard PCA techniques are designed to deal with numerical attributes, but our medical data set contains many categorical data and alternative methods as RS-PCA are required. Thus, we propose to hybridize RS-PCA (Regular Simplex PCA) and a simple CBR. Results show how the hybrid system produces similar results when diagnosing a medical data set, that the ones obtained when using the original attributes. These results are quite promising since they allow to diagnose with less computation effort and memory storage