Are algorithms biased in education? Exploring racial bias in predicting community college student success

IF 2.3 3区 管理学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Kelli A. Bird, Benjamin L. Castleman, Yifeng Song
{"title":"Are algorithms biased in education? Exploring racial bias in predicting community college student success","authors":"Kelli A. Bird, Benjamin L. Castleman, Yifeng Song","doi":"10.1002/pam.22569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Predictive analytics are increasingly pervasive in higher education. However, algorithmic bias has the potential to reinforce racial inequities in postsecondary success. We provide a comprehensive and translational investigation of algorithmic bias in two separate prediction models—one predicting course completion, the second predicting degree completion. We show that if either model were used to target additional supports for “at-risk” students, then the algorithmic bias would lead to fewer marginal Black students receiving these resources. We also find the magnitude of algorithmic bias varies within the distribution of predicted success. With the degree completion model, the amount of bias is over 5 times higher when we define at-risk using the bottom <i>decile</i> than when we focus on students in the bottom <i>half</i> of predicted scores; in the course completion model, the reverse is true. These divergent patterns emphasize the contextual nature of algorithmic bias and attempts to mitigate it. Our results moreover suggest that algorithmic bias is due in part to currently-available administrative data being relatively less useful at predicting Black student success, particularly for new students; this suggests that additional data collection efforts have the potential to mitigate bias.","PeriodicalId":48105,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Policy Analysis and Management","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Policy Analysis and Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22569","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Predictive analytics are increasingly pervasive in higher education. However, algorithmic bias has the potential to reinforce racial inequities in postsecondary success. We provide a comprehensive and translational investigation of algorithmic bias in two separate prediction models—one predicting course completion, the second predicting degree completion. We show that if either model were used to target additional supports for “at-risk” students, then the algorithmic bias would lead to fewer marginal Black students receiving these resources. We also find the magnitude of algorithmic bias varies within the distribution of predicted success. With the degree completion model, the amount of bias is over 5 times higher when we define at-risk using the bottom decile than when we focus on students in the bottom half of predicted scores; in the course completion model, the reverse is true. These divergent patterns emphasize the contextual nature of algorithmic bias and attempts to mitigate it. Our results moreover suggest that algorithmic bias is due in part to currently-available administrative data being relatively less useful at predicting Black student success, particularly for new students; this suggests that additional data collection efforts have the potential to mitigate bias.
教育中的算法是否存在偏见?探索社区大学学生成功预测中的种族偏见
预测分析在高等教育中越来越普遍。然而,算法偏差有可能加剧中学后教育成功中的种族不平等。我们在两个独立的预测模型中对算法偏差进行了全面的转化研究,一个预测课程完成情况,另一个预测学位完成情况。我们发现,如果将这两个模型用于为 "高危 "学生提供额外支持,那么算法偏差将导致更少的边缘黑人学生获得这些资源。我们还发现,算法偏差的程度在预测成功率的分布中有所不同。在学位完成模型中,当我们用最低十分位数来定义高风险学生时,算法偏差的程度是预测分数最低一半学生的 5 倍多;而在课程完成模型中,情况正好相反。这些不同的模式强调了算法偏差的背景性质以及减轻算法偏差的尝试。此外,我们的研究结果还表明,算法偏差的部分原因是目前可用的行政数据在预测黑人学生(尤其是新生)的成功方面作用相对较小;这表明,额外的数据收集工作有可能减轻偏差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: This journal encompasses issues and practices in policy analysis and public management. Listed among the contributors are economists, public managers, and operations researchers. Featured regularly are book reviews and a department devoted to discussing ideas and issues of importance to practitioners, researchers, and academics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信