Purpose of the grant. Distance Delivery of Graduate Education in Agricultural Economics for Middle and Low Income Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the grant was, “To initiate a feasibility study for delivering distance education in agricultural economics at the masters and doctoral levels to developing and transitional economies ” 2. The proposal for this program was initiated by the National Association of Agricultural Economics Administrators (NAAEA), a section of the American Agricultural Economics Association (AAEA). An earlier grant from the Farm Foundation and the AAEA Foundation supported the drafting of a prospectus. The work funded under the current grant has been primarily to assess potential demand, and secondarily to consider delivery issues. This report will also outline proposed next steps and show how grant funds have been spent. Potential demand Demand has been assessed in two ways. The first has been through personal contacts with departments in medium and low income countries, mainly in Africa. The second has been through a formal sample survey of similarly defined countries world-wide, with roughly a quarter of respondents in each of Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe and the Middle East (17 % in Europe and 6 % in the Middle East). An appendix to this report contains a brief description of the survey and summary tables. A full survey report will shortly be available separately. The following are conclusions regarding demand, with qualifications where results from the personal contacts and the survey differ. The survey sometimes found notable differences between respondents inside and outside universities, and the comments note these instances. 1. There is considerable interest in the program. Visits by Chris Barrett of Cornell University
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 | 0.001 | 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".