The cyclical ethical effects of using artificial intelligence in education

被引:0
作者
Edward Dieterle
Chris Dede
Michael Walker
机构
[1] Educational Testing Service,
[2] Harvard University,undefined
[3] Educational Testing Service,undefined
来源
AI & SOCIETY | 2024年 / 39卷
关键词
Artificial intelligence; Education; Equity; Ethics;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Our synthetic review of the relevant and related literatures on the ethics and effects of using AI in education reveals five qualitatively distinct and interrelated divides associated with access, representation, algorithms, interpretations, and citizenship. We open our analysis by probing the ethical effects of algorithms and how teams of humans can plan for and mitigate bias when using AI tools and techniques to model and inform instructional decisions and predict learning outcomes. We then analyze the upstream divides that feed into and fuel the algorithmic divide, first investigating access (who does and does not have access to the hardware, software, and connectivity necessary to engage with AI-enhanced digital learning tools and platforms) and then representation (the factors making data either representative of the total population or over-representative of a subpopulation’s preferences, thereby preventing objectivity and biasing understandings and outcomes). After that, we analyze the divides that are downstream of the algorithmic divide associated with interpretation (how learners, educators, and others understand the outputs of algorithms and use them to make decisions) and citizenship (how the other divides accumulate to impact interpretations of data by learners, educators, and others, in turn influencing behaviors and, over time, skills, culture, economic, health, and civic outcomes). At present, lacking ongoing reflection and action by learners, educators, educational leaders, designers, scholars, and policymakers, the five divides collectively create a vicious cycle and perpetuate structural biases in teaching and learning. However, increasing human responsibility and control over these divides can create a virtuous cycle that improves diversity, equity, and inclusion in education. We conclude the article by looking forward and discussing ways to increase educational opportunity and effectiveness for all by mitigating bias through a cycle of progressive improvement.
引用
收藏
页码:633 / 643
页数:10
相关论文
共 95 条
[1]  
Baker RS(2019)Challenges for the future of educational data mining: the Baker learning analytics prizes J Educ Data Mining 11 1-17
[2]  
Caliskan A(2017)Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases Science 356 183-186
[3]  
Bryson JJ(2016)Digital games, design, and learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis Rev Educ Res 86 79-122
[4]  
Narayanan A(2005)A retrospective on twenty years of education technology policy J Educ Comput Res 32 279-307
[5]  
Clark DB(2019)Big data and data science: a critical review of issues for educational research Br J Edu Technol 50 101-113
[6]  
Tanner-Smith EE(2021)Introduction: critical studies of digital education platforms Crit Stud Educ 62 1-16
[7]  
Killingsworth SS(2017)Advanced, analytic, automated (AAA) measurement of engagement during learning Educ Psychol 52 104-123
[8]  
Culp KM(2017)The ethics of big data: balancing economic benefits and ethical questions of big data in the EU policy context European Union 2 209-230
[9]  
Honey M(2016)Negotiating the swamp: the opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice Qual Res 44 130-160
[10]  
Mandinach E(2020)Mining big data in education: affordances and challenges Rev Res Educ 48 108-119