School Choice Algorithms: Data Infrastructures, Automation, and Inequality

被引:0
作者
Swist T. [1 ]
Gulson K.N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Sydney School of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Automated decision-making systems; Data infrastructures; Education counter-archiving; Inequality; School choice algorithms;
D O I
10.1007/s42438-022-00334-z
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Automated decision-making is a process in which an algorithm collects and analyses data, derives information, applies this information, and recommends an action, at times using forms of Artificial Intelligence (Richardson 2021). This paper proposes that we need to locate automated decision-making as part of the history of educational policy and governance, as well as increasingly networked cultural records or digital archives. As such, we explore the history and present of automated decision systems across a range of cultural records spanning several categories: data, algorithm, and AI-based technologies; innovation and industry; philanthropy and funding; policy and legislation; spatiality and socioeconomics; plus, activism, and communities. To do so, we created an interdisciplinary archival heuristic as a research tool to retrace these interrelated cultural records shaping data infrastructure and inequalities. We then tested this tool in the context of the school admission matching algorithm in New York City. Our central aim is to help counter discourses about the newness and efficiencies of introducing automation and algorithms across education reform initiatives. The education counter-archiving heuristic introduced therefore offers a novel research tool to explore the intersecting history, present, and future of automated decision-making systems, such as school choice algorithms. © 2022, Crown.
引用
收藏
页码:152 / 170
页数:18
相关论文
共 65 条
[1]  
School Choice, NBER Working Paper Series., (2022)
[2]  
Anagnostopoulos A., Rutledge S.A., Jacobsen R., Mapping the information infrastructure of accountability, The Infrastructure of Accountability: Data Use and the Transformation of American Education, (2013)
[3]  
Agostinho D., D'Ignazio C., Ring A., Thylstrup N.B., Veel K., Uncertain Archives: Approaching the Unknowns, Errors, and Vulnerabilities of Big Data through Cultural Theories of the Archive, Surveillance & Society, 17, 3-4, pp. 422-441, (2019)
[4]  
Confronting Black Boxes: A Shadow Report of the NYC ADS Task Force, (2019)
[5]  
Amoore L., Cloud ethics: Algorithms and the attributes of ourselves and others, (2021)
[6]  
Baker R.S., Hawn A., Algorithmic Bias in Education, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, (2021)
[7]  
Barnum M., A ‘portfolio’ of Schools? How a Nationwide Effort to Disrupt Urban School Districts is Gaining Traction., (2017)
[8]  
Belitz C., Ocumpaugh J., Ritter S., Baker R.S., Fancsali S.E., Bosch N., Constructing categories: Moving beyond protected classes in algorithmic fairness, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, (2022)
[9]  
Benjamin R., Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim Code, (2019)
[10]  
Bonkoungou S., Nesterov A., Comparing school choice and college admissions by their strategic accessibility. Theoretical Economics, Journal of the Econometric Society, 16, 3, pp. 881-909, (2021)