"Everyone Brings Their Grain of Salt"

Madaio, Michael; Tanoh, Fabrice; Seri, Axel Blahoua; Jasińska, Kaja K.; Ogan, Amy

doi:10.1145/3290605.3300695

Cited by 34 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To answer these research questions, we conducted an iterative co-design process with 48 practitioners working on a variety of AI systems. We drew inspiration from Kuo et al's checklist co-design process [58], as well as other co-design processes, such as those used to design technologies in education [51,61], public transit [92], and housing [91], other domains [93].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To address these challenges, some researchers have started codesigning medical checklists [14,58], drawing on participatory methods widely used in HCI (e.g., [51,61,91]). Borchard et al found that checklist use and efficacy increased when stakeholders were involved in checklist design and implementation [13].…”

Section: Sociocultural Factors and Checklist Efficacymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Co-Designing Checklists to Understand Organizational Challenges and Opportunities around Fairness in AI

Madaio

Stark

Vaughan

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Self Cite

263

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many organizations have published principles intended to guide the ethical development and deployment of AI systems; however, their abstract nature makes them difficult to operationalize. Some organizations have therefore produced AI ethics checklists, as well as checklists for more specific concepts, such as fairness, as applied to AI systems. But unless checklists are grounded in practitioners' needs, they may be misused. To understand the role of checklists in AI ethics, we conducted an iterative co-design process with 48 practitioners, focusing on fairness. We co-designed an AI fairness checklist and identified desiderata and concerns for AI fairness checklists in general. We found that AI fairness checklists could provide organizational infrastructure for formalizing ad-hoc processes and empowering individual advocates. We discuss aspects of organizational culture that may impact the efficacy of such checklists, and highlight future research directions.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sociocultural Factors and Checklist Efficacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-Designing Checklists to Understand Organizational Challenges and Opportunities around Fairness in AI

Madaio

Stark

Vaughan

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Self Cite

263

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the current longitudinal study, we developed and deployed a low‐tech phone‐based language and literacy assessment for primary‐school children in Côte d'Ivoire participating in an ongoing literacy intervention study (Madaio, Kamath, et al, 2019; Madaio, Tanoh, et al, 2019; Madaio et al, 2020, 2022). We used voice calls and SMS messaging to measure language skills (phonological awareness, vocabulary, oral language comprehension) and literacy skills (letter identification, word and pseudoword reading, passage reading and comprehension).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is a Phone‐Based Language and Literacy Assessment a Reliable and Valid Measure of Children's Reading Skills in Low‐Resource Settings?

Sobers,

Whitehead,

N'Goh

et al. 2023

Reading Research Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technology‐based remote research methods are increasingly widespread, including learning assessments in child development and education research. However, little is known about whether technology‐based remote assessments remain as valid and reliable as in‐person assessments. We developed a low‐cost phone‐based language and literacy assessment for primary‐school children in low‐resource communities in rural Côte d'Ivoire using voice calls and SMS. We compared the reliability and validity of this phone‐based assessment to an established in‐person assessment. A total of 685 5th grade children completed language (phonological awareness, vocabulary, language comprehension) and literacy (letter, word, pseudoword, passage reading, and comprehension) tasks in‐person and by phone. Reliability (internal consistency) and predictive validity were high across in‐person and phone‐based tasks. Children's performance across in‐person and phone‐based assessments was moderately to strongly correlated. Phonological awareness and vocabulary skills measured in‐person and by phone significantly predicted in‐person and phone‐based letter, word, and pseudoword reading. Oral language and decoding skills measured in‐person and by phone significantly predicted in‐person and phone‐based passage reading and comprehension. Our phone‐based assessment was a reliable and valid measure of language and reading and feasible for low‐resource settings. Low‐cost technologies offer significant potential to measure children's learning remotely, increasing the inclusion of remote and low‐resource populations in education research.

show abstract

“…The major issue with such a way of thinking in HCI4D is that it has become hegemonic as it is now framed in the name of doing socially good research that stereotype African condition as dystopia and Western situations as utopia. Other examples of saviourism mentality of postcolonial design thinking can be identified in the design and deployment of technological interventions meant for specific African settings (e.g., [112,113,146,198]). This often takes the form of engaging in bungee research activities that export pseudo-solutions to problems that might not even exist [55] and unfortunately by the same mechanisms that define and marginalize them in the first place.…”

Section: Saviourism Of Alternative To Postcolonialitymentioning

confidence: 99%

No More “Solutionism” or “Saviourism” in Futuring African HCI: A Manyfesto

Adamu

2023

ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research in HCI4D has continuously advanced a narrative of ‘lacks’ and ‘gaps’ of the African perspective in technoscience. In response to such misguided assumptions, this paper attempts to reformulate the common and perhaps unfortunate thinking about African practices of design in HCI4D – i.e., largely as a function of African societal predicaments and Western technocratic resolutions. Through critical reflection on a range of issues associated with post-colonialism and post-development, I examine the possibilities that various historical tropes might offer to the reinvention of the African perspective on innovation. This leads to the consideration of how engaging in critical discussions about the future dimensions of African HCI can allow for grappling with the effect of the coloniality of being, power and knowledge. Developing on the ideas of futuring as a way of dealing with the complexities of the present – in this case the coloniality of the imagination - the paper ends by discussing three tactical propositions for ‘remembering’ future identities of African innovation where the values of autonomy are known and acted upon.

show abstract

"Everyone Brings Their Grain of Salt"

Cited by 34 publications

References 50 publications

Co-Designing Checklists to Understand Organizational Challenges and Opportunities around Fairness in AI

Co-Designing Checklists to Understand Organizational Challenges and Opportunities around Fairness in AI

Is a Phone‐Based Language and Literacy Assessment a Reliable and Valid Measure of Children's Reading Skills in Low‐Resource Settings?

No More “Solutionism” or “Saviourism” in Futuring African HCI: A Manyfesto

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About