MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763254526

Letting the Gini Coefficient Out of the Bottle: What Canadian and American High School Teachers Know and Teach About Economic Inequality

2017· article· en· W2763254526 on OpenAlexaffabout
Matt Brillinger

Bibliographic record

Venue2017 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical and Liberation Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInequalityGini coefficientSession (web analytics)Social inequalityEconomic inequalityPoliticsEducational inequalitySociologySocioeconomic statusPolitical scienceMathematics educationPsychologyLawDemographyBusinessMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the significant social and political consequences of economic inequality in the United States and Canada, not enough attention has been paid to what students are learning about the widening gap between rich and poor. Drawing on teacher interviews conducted in 2015-2016, this session reports on research aimed at ascertaining whether, how and why high school teachers in the United States and Canada discuss economic inequality in their classrooms. The papers in the session share an interest in exploring how high school teachers draw on and move beyond curricular treatments of economic inequality. Individually and collectively, the papers reveal a tension between what teachers are expected to and want to teach about economic inequality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0210.023
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2017 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of EducationSame topicCritical and Liberation PedagogyFrench-language works237,207