An official website of the United States government
If we are to support students to become epistemic agents in the ways envisioned in reforms, we must acknowledge that classrooms can be spaces of injustice, where instructional efforts can propagate inequitable systems of oppression. In this case study, we describe the epistemic efforts of one Black girl, Jessie, and the rights and privileges afforded or denied to her as she worked with a group of her peers to develop and negotiate a scientific claim. Through examination of video data, transcripts, and student work products, we characterized students’ efforts as about epistemic, rhetorical, and pseudo-argumentation, and how we explored how such efforts invited or constrained Jessie’s epistemic agency. Jessie’s pattern of persistence, which we understand to be her fight to have her rights as a scientific sensemaker acknowledged, surfaced issues of inequity in which Jessie’s ongoing efforts to engage in epistemic argumentation were rejected by her peers.
more »
« less
The tragedy of lost ideas: examining epistemic injustice in pair programming
This paper explores an episode of epistemic injustice that develops between two students with help from two teachers. Our analysis seeks to demonstrate not only that epistemic injustice has occurred, but also, how, and why it matters. In particular, we explore the idea of credibility deficit as helping to account for how and why one student’s contributions were routinely sidelined or ignored, and how that repeated positioning led to the ultimate act of testimonial injustice and its outcome, a wrong in the form of a loss of opportunity to learn.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1742257
- PAR ID:
- 10311208
- Editor(s):
- de Vries, E.; Hod, Y.; null
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Computersupported collaborative learning
- Volume:
- 1
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 1573-4552
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
In this position paper, we introduce a new epistemic lens for analyzing algorithmic harm. We argue that the epistemic lens we propose herein has two key contributions to help reframe and address some of the assumptions underlying inquiries into algorithmic fairness. First, we argue that using the framework of epistemic injustice helps to identify the root causes of harms currently framed as instances of representational harm. We suggest that the epistemic lens offers a theoretical foundation for expanding approaches to algorithmic fairness in order to address a wider range of harms not recognized by existing technical or legal definitions. Second, we argue that the epistemic lens helps to identify the epistemic goals of inquiries into algorithmic fairness. There are two distinct contexts within which we examine algorithmic harm: at times, we seek to understand and describe the world as it is, and, at other times, we seek to build a more just future. The epistemic lens can serve to direct our attention to the epistemic frameworks that shape our interpretations of the world as it is and the ways we envision possible futures. Clarity with respect to which epistemic context is relevant in a given inquiry can further help inform choices among the different ways of measuring and addressing algorithmic harms. We introduce this framework with the goal of initiating new research directions bridging philosophical, legal, and technical approaches to understanding and mitigating algorithmic harms.more » « less
-
The social impacts of computer technology are often glorified in public discourse, but there is growing concern about its actual effects on society. In this article, we ask: how does “consent” as an analytical framework make visible the social dynamics and power relations in the capture, extraction, and labor of data science knowledge production? We hypothesize that a form of boundary violation in data science workplaces—gender harassment—may correlate with the ways humans’ lived experiences are extracted to produce Big Data. The concept of consent offers a useful way to draw comparisons between gender relations in data science and the means by which machines are trained to learn and reason. Inspired by how Big Tech leaders describe unsupervised machine learning, and the co-optation of “revolutionary” rhetoric they use to do so, we introduce a concept we call “techniques of invisibility.” Techniques of invisibility are the ways in which an extreme imbalance between exposure and opacity, demarcated along fault lines of power, are fabricated and maintained, closing down the possibility for bidirectional transparency in the production and applications of algorithms. Further, techniques of invisibility, which we group into two categories—epistemic injustice and the Brotherhood—include acts of subjection by powerful actors in data science designed to quell resistance to exploitative relations. These techniques may be useful in making further connections between epistemic violence, sexism, and surveillance, sussing out persistent boundary violations in data science to render the social in data science visible, and open to scrutiny and debate.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)In this paper, three Black women in HCI and CSCW share their experiences of being Black women academics enduring a global pandemic that is disportionately impacting the Black community while simultaneously experiencing the civil unrest due to racial injustice and police brutality. Using Black feminist epistemologies as a theoretical framework and auto-ethnography and testimonial authority as both methodology and epistemic resistance, the authors exercise epistemic agency to testify to their lived intersectional experiences and the various fronts on which they fight to be seen, to be heard, and to live. Additionally, they advocate for more inclusionary policies of Black women and other marginalized populations within the CSCW and HCI communities. We conclude with a call to action for both communities to: 1) stand in solidarity with Blacks in computing; and 2) acknowledge, disavow, and dismantle Whiteness and oppressive power structures in the field of computing, specifically HCI and CSCW.more » « less
-
We use qualitative methods to investigate students’ engagement in an upper-division laboratory. Laboratory activities are recognized as key curricular elements in engineering education. These activities have traditionally been delivered in person, but new laboratory modalities (such as virtual laboratories) have been gaining popularity, boosted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding how laboratory modality influences student learning is important to be able to design and implement effective laboratories. While some educators have investigated if virtual laboratories can replace their analogous physical laboratory counterparts, others have looked at using virtual laboratories in combination with physical laboratories. Taking this latter approach, they argue the two modes have different affordances and therefore could be complementary - meaning that each mode may lend itself to more effectively engaging students in certain productive practices. We have previously reported on the development of two environmental engineering laboratories, one physical and one virtual. Both laboratories address the topic of jar testing, an important process in drinking water treatment, with the design of each mode being based on that mode's affordances. These laboratories were implemented in an upper-level chemical engineering course. Twelve students split into four groups consented to be audio and video recorded during their time in the laboratory and have the work they turn in collected, with most also volunteering to be interviewed about their experiences. A first pass of this data has been completed in which we viewed learning from the lens of participation in disciplinary practice. We applied the theory of engineering epistemic practices, which are the socially organized and interactionally accomplished ways engineers develop, justify, and communicate ideas when completing engineering work. Transcripts of the laboratory observations were coded to identify students’ engagement with specific epistemic practices, which were categorized as either conceptual, material, or social. These codes were then counted and cross-validated with interview responses to draw conclusions about how student's engagement differed in each mode. This prior research has indicated that students engage with each design using different epistemic practices. While the first pass analysis showed differences in counts of epistemic practices between modes, it provided limited insight into how and why the epistemic practices are elicited and coordinated among students. In this paper, we extend the discourse analysis by illustrating our developing methodology for a second pass analysis of the video recordings. We seek to develop a thick description by identifying how particular epistemic practices fit together temporally and serve to promote or hinder students’ progress. Engagement in epistemic practices does not happen in a vacuum and instead happens contextually, influenced by students' previous engagement and the laboratory environment and their social and academic history. This analysis allows a deeper understanding of how students engage in engineering practice while completing laboratories, knowledge that can be applied to enhance engineering physical and virtual laboratory instruction and design. Additionally, this work contributes to the methodological conversation of ways to use interaction analyses to extract understanding from a rich set of qualitative data.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
