Inicio
todoELE
  • Inicio
  • Materiales
    • πŸ“‹ Actividades
    • πŸ“ Conjugación
    • πŸ“Š Corpus
    • πŸ“” Diccionarios
    • βœ… Evaluación
    • βš™οΈ Gramática
    • πŸ“— Manuales
    • ✍️ Ortografía
    • πŸ“… Programación
    • πŸ—£οΈ Pronunciación
    • πŸ“ Recursos
    • πŸ”€ Vocabulario
    • πŸ’» Herramientas digitales
  • Formación
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía
    • πŸ‘₯ Congresos
    • πŸŽ“ Cursos
    • 🏫 Centros
    • 🏒 Organizaciones
    • πŸ“° Revistas
    • 🌍 Atlas de ELE
  • Trabajo
    • πŸ’Ό Ofertas de trabajo
    • ℹ️ Trabajo - Recursos
  • En la red
    • 🌐 Sitios ELE
    • πŸ“° Agregador
    • πŸ“§ Formespa
  • IA
    • ✨ Nuevos contenidos
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía IA
    • 🧰 Herramientas IA
    • πŸ’¬ Prompts
    • πŸ§ͺ Experiencias IA
    • 🌐 Sitios web IA
    • πŸ“° Actualidad IA
  • Comunidad
    • πŸ“° Actualidad ELE
    • 😊 Anécdotas ELE
    • πŸ“ Blog
    • πŸ“ŒTablón de anuncios
  • Buscar

Ruta de navegación

  • Inicio
  • Bibliografia
  • Investigating algorithmic bias in student progress monitoring

Sección IA: Inteligencia artificial Bibliografía

Investigating algorithmic bias in student progress monitoring

Jamiu Adekunle Idowu
Adriano Soares Koshiyama
Philip Treleaven
2024
Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence
7
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a…
artículo
estudio empírico
inteligencia artificial
ética
inclusión y equidad
analítica del aprendizaje
tecnología educativa
ética de la IA
estudio empírico

Texto completo

This research investigates bias in AI algorithms used for monitoring student progress, specifically focusing on bias related to age, disability, and gender. The study is motivated by incidents such as the UK A-level grading controversy, which demonstrated the real-world implications of biased algorithms. Using the Open University Learning Analytics Dataset, the research evaluates fairness with metrics like ABROCA, Average Odds Difference, and Equality of Opportunity Difference. The analysis is structured into three experiments. The first experiment examines fairness as an attribute of the data sources and reveals that institutional data is the primary contributor to model discrimination, followed by Virtual Learning Environment data, while assessment data is the least biased. In the second experiment, the research introduces the Optimal Time Index, which pinpoints Day 60 of an average 255-day course as the optimal time for predicting student outcomes, balancing timely interventions, model accuracy, and efficient resource allocation. The third experiment implements bias mitigation strategies throughout the model's life cycle, achieving fairness without compromising accuracy. Finally, this study introduces the Student Progress Card, designed to provide actionable personalized feedback for each student.

Texto completo en abierto (CC BY 4.0).
  • Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios

Enviar publicación

Contenidos relacionados

  • AI-based prediction of academic success: Support for many, disadvantage for some?
  • Beyond binary outcomes: Evaluating and mitigating bias in national standardized test score prediction
  • How to responsibly deploy a predictive modelling dashboard for study advisors? A use case illustrating various stakeholder perspectives
  • Diverging perceptions of artificial intelligence in higher education: A comparison of student and public assessments on risks and damages of academic performance prediction in Germany
  • Fixing teachers’ problems? Exploring teachers’ repair and maintenance work around generative AI technologies
  • Ethics of AI in education: Towards a community-wide framework
Sobre Todoele Índice Publica Contacto: todoele@gmail.com
Política de privacidad Créditos