Algorithmic Fairness in Education

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2007.05443v3
• Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 15:22:14 GMT
• Title: Algorithmic Fairness in Education
• Authors: Ren\'e F. Kizilcec and Hansol Lee
• Abstract summary: Data-driven predictive models are increasingly used in education to support students, instructors, and administrators. There are concerns about the fairness of the predictions and uses of these algorithmic systems.
• Score: 0.4873362301533825
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Data-driven predictive models are increasingly used in education to support students, instructors, and administrators. However, there are concerns about the fairness of the predictions and uses of these algorithmic systems. In this introduction to algorithmic fairness in education, we draw parallels to prior literature on educational access, bias, and discrimination, and we examine core components of algorithmic systems (measurement, model learning, and action) to identify sources of bias and discrimination in the process of developing and deploying these systems. Statistical, similarity-based, and causal notions of fairness are reviewed and contrasted in the way they apply in educational contexts. Recommendations for policy makers and developers of educational technology offer guidance for how to promote algorithmic fairness in education.

Related papers

• FairAIED: Navigating Fairness, Bias, and Ethics in Educational AI Applications [2.612585751318055]
  The integration of Artificial Intelligence into education has transformative potential, providing tailored learning experiences and creative instructional approaches. However, the inherent biases in AI algorithms hinder this improvement by unintentionally perpetuating prejudice against specific demographics. This survey delves deeply into the developing topic of algorithmic fairness in educational contexts. It identifies the common forms of biases, such as data-related, algorithmic, and user-interaction, that fundamentally undermine the accomplishment of fairness in AI teaching aids.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-26T13:59:20Z)
• A Benchmark for Fairness-Aware Graph Learning [58.515305543487386]
  We present an extensive benchmark on ten representative fairness-aware graph learning methods. Our in-depth analysis reveals key insights into the strengths and limitations of existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T18:43:43Z)
• Learning-Augmented Algorithms with Explicit Predictors [67.02156211760415]
  Recent advances in algorithmic design show how to utilize predictions obtained by machine learning models from past and present data. Prior research in this context was focused on a paradigm where the predictor is pre-trained on past data and then used as a black box. In this work, we unpack the predictor and integrate the learning problem it gives rise for within the algorithmic challenge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-12T08:40:21Z)
• Measuring, Interpreting, and Improving Fairness of Algorithms using Causal Inference and Randomized Experiments [8.62694928567939]
  We present an algorithm-agnostic framework (MIIF) to Measure, Interpret, and Improve the Fairness of an algorithmic decision. We measure the algorithm bias using randomized experiments, which enables the simultaneous measurement of disparate treatment, disparate impact, and economic value. We also develop an explainable machine learning model which accurately interprets and distills the beliefs of a blackbox algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-04T19:45:18Z)
• A Human-Centered Review of Algorithms in Decision-Making in Higher Education [16.578096382702597]
  We reviewed an extensive corpus of papers proposing algorithms for decision-making in higher education. We found that the models are trending towards deep learning, and increased use of student personal data and protected attributes. Despite the associated decrease in interpretability and explainability, current development predominantly fails to incorporate human-centered lenses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-12T02:30:50Z)
• Fair Enough: Standardizing Evaluation and Model Selection for Fairness Research in NLP [64.45845091719002]
  Modern NLP systems exhibit a range of biases, which a growing literature on model debiasing attempts to correct. This paper seeks to clarify the current situation and plot a course for meaningful progress in fair learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-11T14:54:00Z)
• A Field Guide to Federated Optimization [161.3779046812383]
  Federated learning and analytics are a distributed approach for collaboratively learning models (or statistics) from decentralized data. This paper provides recommendations and guidelines on formulating, designing, evaluating and analyzing federated optimization algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-14T18:09:08Z)
• All of the Fairness for Edge Prediction with Optimal Transport [11.51786288978429]
  We study the problem of fairness for the task of edge prediction in graphs. We propose an embedding-agnostic repairing procedure for the adjacency matrix of an arbitrary graph with a trade-off between the group and individual fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-30T15:33:13Z)
• Self-organizing Democratized Learning: Towards Large-scale Distributed Learning Systems [71.14339738190202]
  democratized learning (Dem-AI) lays out a holistic philosophy with underlying principles for building large-scale distributed and democratized machine learning systems. Inspired by Dem-AI philosophy, a novel distributed learning approach is proposed in this paper. The proposed algorithms demonstrate better results in the generalization performance of learning models in agents compared to the conventional FL algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-07T08:34:48Z)
• Reinforcement Learning as Iterative and Amortised Inference [62.997667081978825]
  We use the control as inference framework to outline a novel classification scheme based on amortised and iterative inference. We show that taking this perspective allows us to identify parts of the algorithmic design space which have been relatively unexplored.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-13T16:10:03Z)
• No computation without representation: Avoiding data and algorithm biases through diversity [11.12971845021808]
  We draw connections between the lack of diversity within academic and professional computing fields and the type and breadth of the biases encountered in datasets. We use these lessons to develop recommendations that provide concrete steps for the computing community to increase diversity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-26T23:07:39Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.