Engaging Youth in Constructive Discussions About Artificial Intelligence Technology and Inclusion in Computer Science

• In Event: Navigating the Dilemmas, Tensions, and Contradictions of Teaching Critical Issues in the Pursuit of "Truth"

Abstract

The current US political landscape is filled with a host of seemingly contradictory “truths.” Particularly for young people, repetition of these truths might be more reflective of the adults around them or the dominant narratives advanced through the news or social media, than they are reflective of youth’s own thinking. Educators are faced with a number of challenges around if and how to appropriately engage youth people around these polarized truths.

This paper looks at one teacher’s experience engaging 5th grade students in critical conversations around truths related to inclusion and ethical uses of computer science (Benjamin, 2019; Jones & melo, 2021) as part of the “AthleticSense” program. The AthleticSense curriculum was developed through research-practice partnership and aligns with a growing body of research on culturally responsive-sustaining computer science education (Davis et al., 2021). It is designed to disavow common stereotypes about “jocks” and “nerds” (Eckert, 1989; Flowers, 2018) by helping youth learn and practice computer science alongside physical education and sports (Lee & Drake, 2013; Jones, Thompson & Worsley, 2020). As part of this curriculum, students learn about designing and building different sports wearables and physical movement-based games. Some of the technologies they explore utilize computer vision, accelerometers, and other forms of sensor-based tracking.

The focus of this paper is a collection of sessions that the teacher with her students during a one-year implementation of AthleticSense. Some of the discussions emerged through unprompted student-generated questions. For example, one of the early class sessions was completely postponed because students were eager to talk about why some local after-school computer science programs are exclusively designed for girls. Other conversations were planned as part of the curriculum. For instance, one activity has students think about the advantages and disadvantages of facial recognition technology, how it is often used to criminalize Black and Brown people (Raji et. al., 2020), and strategies for fooling these technologies (Gobir, 2021). Given the proximity that these topics have with students’ identities and lived experiences, we argue that these are conversations that must be handled with considerable care, while also acknowledging that students may bring normative and positivist views of these technologies from other experiences.

The paper’s analysis highlights both pedagogical and curricular considerations of the teacher and the research team and surfaces strategies, challenges, and questions that might be instructive for other researchers and practitioners. As part of this analysis, we consider how the teacher spontaneously decided to take up the question of gendered computer science camps and navigate a conversation about the history of gender bias in STEM while also thinking about the typical pressures of following the curriculum. The paper also considers how the team developed age appropriate prompts, and how students received those prompts. Finally, the paper reflects the RPP team’s embracing of student and adult indecision as an acceptable position on some of these complex truths. Namely, it can be difficult to adhere to highly dichotomized views without addressing questions of context, positionality, and power.

Authors

• Marcelo A.B. Worsley, Northwestern University
  Presenting Author

• Mindy Perry
  Presenting Author

• Megan B. Butler, Northwestern University
  Presenting Author

• Vishesh Kumar, Northwestern University
  Presenting Author