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 15: Line 15:
* 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)
* 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
* The fairness of the model, namely demographic parity and equality of opportunity, as well as its accuracy, improved after correcting the threshold values
Yu et al. (2020) [[https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED608066.pdf 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





Revision as of 20:08, 22 March 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


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


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


Ramineni & Williamson (2018) [pdf]

  • Revised automated scoring engine for assessing GSE essay
  • Relative weakness in content and organization by African American test takers resulted in lower scores than Chinese peers who wrote longer.