MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200399109 · doi:10.3102/0013189x211066114

Economic Imperialism in Education Research: A Conceptual Review

2021· review· en· W4200399109 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Researcher · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentUniversity of Texas at Austin
KeywordsPhenomenonRelevance (law)Economics educationSociologyPower (physics)Positive economicsEconomic growthEconomicsPolitical scienceHigher educationEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

, a concept that captures the phenomenon of a single discipline's power over so many facets of social life and policy-including education. Through a systematic search, we examine how economic imperialism has been conceptualized and applied across fields. We uncovered three key, interconnected elements of economic imperialism that hold relevance for education research. First, economics has colonized other disciplines, narrowing the lens through which policymakers have designed education reforms. Second, an overreliance on economic rationales for human behavior neglects other explanations. Third, a focus on economic outcomes of education has subjugated other important aims of education. We share implications for researchers to use economic theory in ways that are interdisciplinary but not imperialist.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.585
GPT teacher head0.628
Teacher spread0.043 · 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