MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008211111 · doi:10.1080/00220485.2020.1731383

Teaching modules for estimating climate change impacts in economics courses using computational guided inquiry

2020· article· en· W3008211111 on OpenAlexaff
Lea Fortmann, Justin Beaudoin, Isha Rajbhandari, Aedin Wright, Steven Neshyba, Penny M. Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Economic Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovations in Educational Methods
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeMathematics educationComputer scienceManagement scienceEnvironmental scienceEconomicsPsychologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors of this article introduce two teaching modules that aim to increase climate literacy and active learning in undergraduate economics courses through the incorporation of real-world data and modeling. These modules are based on the concept of computational guided inquiry (CGI), which combines a guided inquiry approach within a computational framework, such as Excel. In one module, students estimate and graph expected marginal damages due to regional sea level rise for various polar ice melt scenarios. In the second module, students partially replicate a journal article estimating the total economic value of ecosystem services in the Arctic. These modules have been used in urban, environmental, and climate change economics courses, and are ready to be implemented with minimal upfront cost to instructors.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0570.023

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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Economic EducationSame topicInnovations in Educational MethodsFrench-language works237,207