MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197882690 · doi:10.38024/arpe.139

Developing Heterodox Economics Curriculum The case of John Jay College

2017· article· en· W3197882690 on OpenAlexaff
Geert Dhondt

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Review of Political Economy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovations in Educational Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumContext (archaeology)MainstreamMainstream economicsSociologySchools of economic thoughtPolitical sciencePedagogyPositive economicsApplied economicsEconomicsNeoclassical economicsLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article seeks to be a contribution to heterodox teaching initiatives by focusing on curriculum building and institutional opportunities and constraints at John Jay College, the City University of New York. The article first focuses on the need for alternative curriculums in the context of the global crisis and the crisis of economics as a discipline. Then, after some historical context to John Jay College in which opportunities arose to develop a heterodox program, the focus is on the core of the current economics curriculum and its contrasts with the mainstream. Finally, there is a discussion of institutional constraints.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.387 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Review of Political EconomySame topicInnovations in Educational MethodsFrench-language works237,207