Difference between revisions of "Black/African-American Learners in North America"

From Penn Center for Learning Analytics Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 47: Line 47:




Bridgeman et al. (2012) [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233291671_Comparison_of_Human_and_Machine_Scoring_of_Essays_Differences_by_Gender_Ethnicity_and_Country pdf]
Bridgeman et al. (2012) [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08957347.2012.635502 pdf]
* A later version of automated scoring models for evaluating English essays, or e-rater
* A later version of automated scoring models for evaluating English essays, or e-rater
* E-rater gave significantly lower score than human rater when assessing African-American students’ written responses to issue prompt in GRE
* E-rater gave significantly lower score than human rater when assessing African-American students’ written responses to issue prompt in GRE

Revision as of 16:44, 18 May 2022

Kai et al. (2017) pdf

  • Models predicting student retention in an online college program
  • J48 decision trees achieved much lower Kappa and AUC for Black students than White students
  • JRip decision rules achieved almost identical Kappa and AUC for Black students and White students


Hu and Rangwala (2020) pdf

  • Models predicting if a college student will fail in a course
  • Multiple cooperative classifier model (MCCM) model was the best at reducing bias, or discrimination against African-American students, while other models (particularly Logistic Regression and Rawlsian Fairness) performed far worse
  • The level of bias was inconsistent across courses, with MCCM prediction showing the least bias for Psychology and the greatest bias for Computer Science


Christie et al. (2019) pdf

  • Models predicting student's high school dropout
  • The decision trees showed little difference in AUC among White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian and Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander.


Lee and Kizilcec (2020) pdf

  • Models predicting college success (or median grade or above)
  • Random forest algorithms performed significantly worse for underrepresented minority students (URM; American Indian, Black, Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Multicultural) than non-URM students (White and Asian)
  • The fairness of the model, namely demographic parity and equality of opportunity, as well as its accuracy, improved after correcting the threshold values from 0.5 to group-specific values


Yu et al. (2020) pdf

  • Model predicting undergraduate short-term (course grades) and long-term (average GPA) success
  • Black students were inaccurately predicted to perform worse for both short-term and long-term
  • The fairness of models improved when either click or a combination of click and survey data, and not institutional data, was included in the model


Yu et al. (2021) pdf

  • Models predicting college dropout for students in residential and fully online program
  • Whether the socio-demographic information was included or not, the model showed worse true negative rates for students who are underrepresented minority (URM; or not White or Asian), and worse accuracy if they are studying in person
  • The model showed better recall for URM students


Ramineni & Williamson (2018) pdf

  • Revised automated scoring engine for assessing GRE essay
  • E-rater gave African American test-takers significantly lower scores than human raters when assessing their written responses to argument prompts
  • The shorter essays written by African American test-takers were more likely to receive lower scores as showing weakness in content and organization


Bridgeman et al. (2009) pdf

  • Automated scoring models for evaluating English essays, or e-rater
  • E-rater gave significantly higher score for 11th grade essays written by Asian American and Hispanic students, particularly, Hispanic female students
  • The score difference between human rater and e-rater was significantly smaller for 11th grade essays written by White and African American students
  • E-rater gave slightly lower score for GRE essays (argument and issue) written by Black test-takers while e-rated scores were higher for Asian test-takers in the U.S


Bridgeman et al. (2012) pdf

  • A later version of automated scoring models for evaluating English essays, or e-rater
  • E-rater gave significantly lower score than human rater when assessing African-American students’ written responses to issue prompt in GRE