Interrogating Algorithmic Bias: From Speculative Fiction to Liberatory Design.

IF 2.2 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH TechTrends Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-09-19 DOI:10.1007/s11528-022-00783-0
Nettrice Gaskins
{"title":"Interrogating Algorithmic Bias: From Speculative Fiction to Liberatory Design.","authors":"Nettrice Gaskins","doi":"10.1007/s11528-022-00783-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper reviews algorithmic or artificial intelligence (AI) bias in education technology, especially through the lenses of speculative fiction, speculative and liberatory design. It discusses the causes of the bias and reviews literature on various ways that algorithmic/AI bias manifests in education and in communities that are underrepresented in EdTech software development. While other recent work has responded to mainstream or private sector technology development, this review looks elsewhere where practitioners, artists, and activists engage underrepresented communities in brainstorming processes to identify and solve tough challenges. Their creative work includes films, toolkits, applications, prototypes and other physical artifacts, and other future-facing ideas that can provide guideposts for private sector development. Acknowledging the gaps in what has been studied, this paper proposes a different approach that includes speculative and liberatory design thinking, which can help developers better understand the educational and personal contexts of underrepresented groups. Early efforts to advocate for fairness and equity in AI and EdTech by groups such as the Algorithmic Justice League, the EdTech Equity Project, and EdSAFE AI Alliance is also explored.</p>","PeriodicalId":47534,"journal":{"name":"TechTrends","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9483409/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TechTrends","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00783-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper reviews algorithmic or artificial intelligence (AI) bias in education technology, especially through the lenses of speculative fiction, speculative and liberatory design. It discusses the causes of the bias and reviews literature on various ways that algorithmic/AI bias manifests in education and in communities that are underrepresented in EdTech software development. While other recent work has responded to mainstream or private sector technology development, this review looks elsewhere where practitioners, artists, and activists engage underrepresented communities in brainstorming processes to identify and solve tough challenges. Their creative work includes films, toolkits, applications, prototypes and other physical artifacts, and other future-facing ideas that can provide guideposts for private sector development. Acknowledging the gaps in what has been studied, this paper proposes a different approach that includes speculative and liberatory design thinking, which can help developers better understand the educational and personal contexts of underrepresented groups. Early efforts to advocate for fairness and equity in AI and EdTech by groups such as the Algorithmic Justice League, the EdTech Equity Project, and EdSAFE AI Alliance is also explored.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
质疑算法偏见:从推理小说到解放设计。
本文回顾了教育技术中的算法或人工智能(AI)偏见,特别是通过推理小说、推理和解放设计的视角。它讨论了偏见的原因,并回顾了有关算法/人工智能偏见在教育领域和在教育技术软件开发中代表性不足的群体中的各种表现形式的文献。近期的其他作品对主流或私营部门的技术开发做出了回应,而本评论则着眼于其他领域,在这些领域中,实践者、艺术家和活动家让代表性不足的社区参与到集思广益的过程中,以确定并解决严峻的挑战。他们的创意作品包括电影、工具包、应用程序、原型和其他实物工艺品,以及其他面向未来的想法,可为私营部门的发展提供指导。本文认识到研究中存在的差距,提出了一种不同的方法,其中包括推测性和解放性的设计思维,它可以帮助开发者更好地理解代表性不足群体的教育和个人背景。本文还探讨了算法正义联盟(Algorithmic Justice League)、教育技术公平项目(EdTech Equity Project)和教育安全人工智能联盟(EdSAFE AI Alliance)等团体为倡导人工智能和教育技术的公平与公正所做的早期努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
TechTrends
TechTrends EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
125
期刊介绍: TechTrendsis a leading publication for professionals in the educational communication and technology field. As such its major purposes are: to provide a vehicle for the exchange of information among professional practitioners concerning the management of media and programs, the application of educational technology principles and techniques to instructional programs, corporate and military training, and any other kinds of information that can contribute to the advancement of knowledge of practice in the field, to provide a means by which practictioners can be kept current on the latest developments in the design, manufacture, and use of communications materials and devices; and to provide a vehicle for communication among the members of AECT to share information. TechTrends considers manuscripts of the following types:Reports of innovative and/or exemplary practice. General articles discussing matters of concern to practitioners. Critical reviews of important literature, materials, and devices related to the field. Summaries of research translated into practical application. Reports of developmental programs and trends of national and international significance. News of the latest products, both materials and devices, for use in the field. Articles of use to managers and various specializations within the general educational communications and technology field.TechTrends is a peer-reviewed publication, and submitted manuscripts are reviewed without bias by a panel of consulting editors and other professionals with expertise in the topics TechTrendsis a leading publication for professionals in the educational communication and technology field. As such its major purposes are: to provide a vehicle for the exchange of information among professional practitioners concerning the management of media and programs, the application of e ducational technology principles and techniques to instructional programs, corporate and military training, and any other kinds of information that can contribute to the advancement of knowledge of practice in the field, to provide a means by which practictioners can be kept current on the latest developments in the design, manufacture, and use of communications materials and devices; and to provide a vehicle for communication among the members of AECT to share information. TechTrends considers manuscripts of the following types:Reports of innovative and/or exemplary practice. General articles discussing matters of concern to practitioners. Critical reviews of important literature, materials, and devices related to the field. Summaries of research translated into practical application. Reports of developmental programs and trends of national and international significance. News of the latest products, both materials and devices, for use in the field. Articles of use to managers and various specializations within the general educational communications and technology field.TechTrends is a peer-reviewed publication, and submitted manuscripts are reviewed without bias by a panel of consulting editors and other professionals with expertise in the topics
期刊最新文献
Why is There a Picture of Me on Snapchat?: Educational Approaches to Overposting Harnessing the Power of Generative AI to Support ALL Learners Improving Writing Feedback for Struggling Writers: Generative AI to the Rescue? Exploring Inventions in Self-Directed Language Learning with Generative AI: Implementations and Perspectives of YouTube Content Creators Utilizing Generative AI for Instructional Design: Exploring Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1