Is Your Model "MADD"? A Novel Metric to Evaluate Algorithmic Fairness for Predictive Student Models

Predictive student models are increasingly used in learning environments due to their ability to enhance educational outcomes and support stakeholders in making informed decisions. However, predictive models can be biased and produce unfair outcomes, leading to potential discrimination against some students and possible harmful long-term implications. This has prompted research on fairness metrics meant to capture and quantify such biases. Nonetheless, so far, existing fairness metrics used in education are predictive performance-oriented, focusing on assessing biased outcomes across groups of students, without considering the behaviors of the models nor the severity of the biases in the outcomes. Therefore, we propose a novel metric, the Model Absolute Density Distance (MADD), to analyze models' discriminatory behaviors independently from their predictive performance. We also provide a complementary visualization-based analysis to enable fine-grained human assessment of how the models discriminate between groups of students. We evaluate our approach on the common task of predicting student success in online courses, using several common predictive classification models on an open educational dataset. We also compare our metric to the only predictive performance-oriented fairness metric developed in education, ABROCA. Results on this dataset show that: (1) fair predictive performance does not guarantee fair models' behaviors and thus fair outcomes, (2) there is no direct relationship between data bias and predictive performance bias nor discriminatory behaviors bias, and (3) trained on the same data, models exhibit different discriminatory behaviors, according to different sensitive features too. We thus recommend using the MADD on models that show satisfying predictive performance, to gain a finer-grained understanding on how they behave and to refine models selection and their usage.

A Framework to Counteract Suboptimal User-Behaviors in Exploratory Learning Environments: an Application to MOOCs

While there is evidence that user-adaptive support can greatly enhance the effectiveness of educational systems, designing such support for exploratory learning environments (e.g., simulations) is still challenging due to the open-ended nature of their interaction. In particular, there is little a priori knowledge of which student's behaviors can be detrimental to learning in such environments. To address this problem, we focus on a data-driven user-modeling framework that uses logged interaction data to learn which behavioral or activity patterns should trigger help during interaction with a specific learning environment. This framework has been successfully used to provide adaptive support in interactive learning simulations. Here we present a novel application of this framework we are working on, namely to Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), a form of exploratory environment that could greatly benefit from adaptive support due to the large diversity of their users, but typically lack of such adaptation. We describe an experiment aimed at investigating the value of our framework to identify student's behaviors that can justify adapting to, and report some preliminary results.