Development of the Critical Reflection and Agency in Computing Index

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.13060v1
• Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:13:05 GMT
• Title: Development of the Critical Reflection and Agency in Computing Index
• Authors: Aadarsh Padiyath, Mark Guzdial, Barbara Ericson,
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces the novel framework of Critically Conscious Computing and reports on the development and content validation of the Critical Reflection and Agency in Computing Index.<n>The index is a theoretically grounded, expert-reviewed tool to support research and practice in computing ethics education.
• Score: 0.8192907805418583
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As computing's societal impact grows, so does the need for computing students to recognize and address the ethical and sociotechnical implications of their work. While there are efforts to integrate ethics into computing curricula, we lack a standardized tool to measure those efforts, specifically, students' attitudes towards ethical reflection and their ability to effect change. This paper introduces the novel framework of Critically Conscious Computing and reports on the development and content validation of the Critical Reflection and Agency in Computing Index, a novel instrument designed to assess undergraduate computing students' attitudes towards practicing critically conscious computing. The resulting index is a theoretically grounded, expert-reviewed tool to support research and practice in computing ethics education. This enables researchers and educators to gain insights into students' perspectives, inform the design of targeted ethics interventions, and measure the effectiveness of computing ethics education initiatives.

Related papers

• Form-Substance Discrimination: Concept, Cognition, and Pedagogy [55.2480439325792]
  This paper examines form-substance discrimination as an essential learning outcome for curriculum development in higher education. We propose practical strategies for fostering this ability through curriculum design, assessment practices, and explicit instruction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-01T04:15:56Z)
• Beyond Detection: Designing AI-Resilient Assessments with Automated Feedback Tool to Foster Critical Thinking [0.0]
  This research proposes a proactive, AI-resilient solution based on assessment design rather than detection. It introduces a web-based Python tool that integrates Bloom's taxonomy with advanced natural language processing techniques. It helps educators determine whether a task targets lower-order thinking such as recall and summarization or higher-order skills such as analysis, evaluation, and creation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-30T23:13:00Z)
• The Generative AI Ethics Playbook [25.61087208802131]
  Generative AI Ethics Playbook provides guidance for identifying and mitigating risks of machine learning systems. Drawing on current best practices in both research and ethical considerations, this playbook aims to serve as a comprehensive resource for AI/ML practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-17T22:47:04Z)
• The Rise of Artificial Intelligence in Educational Measurement: Opportunities and Ethical Challenges [2.569083526579529]
  AI in education raises ethical concerns regarding validity, reliability, transparency, fairness, and equity. Various stakeholders, including educators, policymakers, and organizations, have developed guidelines to ensure ethical AI use in education. In this paper, a diverse group of AIME members examines the ethical implications of AI-powered tools in educational measurement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T05:28:40Z)
• How critically can an AI think? A framework for evaluating the quality of thinking of generative artificial intelligence [0.9671462473115854]
  Generative AI such as those with large language models have created opportunities for innovative assessment design practices. This paper presents a framework that explores the capabilities of the LLM ChatGPT4 application, which is the current industry benchmark. This critique will provide specific and targeted indications of their questions vulnerabilities in terms of the critical thinking skills.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T22:46:56Z)
• Integrating AI and Learning Analytics for Data-Driven Pedagogical Decisions and Personalized Interventions in Education [0.2812395851874055]
  This research study explores the conceptualization, development, and deployment of an innovative learning analytics tool. By analyzing critical data points such as students' stress levels, curiosity, confusion, agitation, topic preferences, and study methods, the tool provides a comprehensive view of the learning environment. This research underscores AI's role in shaping personalized, data-driven education.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T06:00:26Z)
• EALM: Introducing Multidimensional Ethical Alignment in Conversational Information Retrieval [43.72331337131317]
  We introduce a workflow that integrates ethical alignment with an initial ethical judgment stage for efficient data screening. We present the QA-ETHICS dataset adapted from the ETHICS benchmark, which serves as an evaluation tool by unifying scenarios and label meanings. In addition, we suggest a new approach that achieves top performance in both binary and multi-label ethical judgment tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T08:22:34Z)
• Teaching at the Intersection of Social Justice, Ethics, and the ASA Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice [0.0]
  Case studies are typically used to teach 'ethics', but when the content of a course is focused on formulae and proofs, a case analysis and the knowledge, skills, and abilities they require can be distracting. Not all students in quantitative courses plan to become researchers, and ethical practice of mathematics, statistics, data science, and computing is an essential topic regardless of the learner's career plans. Five tools can be utilized to integrate social justice into a course in a way that also meets calls to integrate 'ethics'
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-30T15:46:09Z)
• Probing the Moral Development of Large Language Models through Defining Issues Test [21.108525674360898]
  Our study shows that early LLMs exhibit a moral reasoning ability no better than that of a random baseline. GPT-4, in fact, has the highest post-conventional moral reasoning score, equivalent to that of typical graduate school students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-23T12:17:10Z)
• An Interdisciplinary Perspective on Evaluation and Experimental Design for Visual Text Analytics: Position Paper [24.586485898038312]
  In this paper, we focus on the issues of evaluating visual text analytics approaches. We identify four key groups of challenges for evaluating visual text analytics approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-23T11:47:37Z)
• Seeing Like a Toolkit: How Toolkits Envision the Work of AI Ethics [26.977005985123615]
  We conduct a qualitative analysis of 27 AI ethics toolkits to examine how the work of ethics is imagined and how it is supported by these toolkits. We identify a mismatch between the imagined work of ethics and the support the toolkits provide for doing that work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-17T17:55:26Z)
• An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence. The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)
• Do Abstractions Have Politics? Toward a More Critical Algorithm Analysis [19.08810272234958]
  We argue for affordance analysis, a more critical algorithm analysis based on an affordance account of value embedding. We illustrate 5 case studies of how affordance analysis refutes social determination of technology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-04T05:59:26Z)
• Value Cards: An Educational Toolkit for Teaching Social Impacts of Machine Learning through Deliberation [32.74513588794863]
  Value Card is an educational toolkit to inform students and practitioners of the social impacts of different machine learning models via deliberation. Our results suggest that the use of the Value Cards toolkit can improve students' understanding of both the technical definitions and trade-offs of performance metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-22T03:27:19Z)
• 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.