Master's in Economics Programs: Comparing Canada and the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The authors compare various characteristics of terminal master's of economics programs in Canada and the United States. As far as they know, this is the first article to present results from a survey of Canadian master's programs in economics. Using a Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test, they found significant differences between the Canadian and U.S. programs. All of the Canadian master's of economics programs in their sample are in public institutions, and the majority of their programs are located in colleges of arts and sciences. Canadian programs seem to have higher admission standards and are more likely to offer teaching and research assistantships. A higher percentage of the graduates of Canadian programs are placed in careers in government, whereas a higher percentage of U.S. program graduates are placed in the private sector. In addition to these and other statistically significant differences, the results also illustrate that in a large number of areas the Canadian and U.S. programs are similar. Keywords: Canada U.S. economics master'seconomics master's program surveygraduate curriculum in economics
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".