Equity in Edtech by Design
Keywords:
EdTech, equity, educational technologies, pedagogikkSynopsis
This report aims to provide guidance for improving equitable EdTech design, policy and practice. We identified relevant academic literature and captured best practices in identifying equitable EdTech features, as well as biassed design and organisational practices in EdTech. Our approach draws from existing literature indicating that accepted standards and indicators have generally proven to positively influence developer and consumer awareness, as well as policy-makers’ decision-making.
References
Anthony, L. (2023). AntConc (Version 4.2.4) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from: https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
Azevedo, R., Bouchet, F., Duffy, M., Harley, J., Taub, M., Trevors, G., Cloude, E., Dever, D., Wiedbusch, M., Wortha, F. & Cerezo, R. (2022). Lessons learned and future directions of MetaTutor: Leveraging multichannel data to scaffold self-regulated learning with an intelligent tutoring system. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.813632
Baek, C. & Aguilar, S. J. (2023). Past, present, and future directions of learning analytics research for students with disabilities. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55 (6), 931-946.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2067796
Baker, R. S. & Hawn, A. (2022). Algorithmic Bias in Education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32 (4), 1052-1092.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00285-9
Bertrand, M. & Marsh, J. (2021). How data-driven reform can drive deficit thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, 102 (8), 35-39.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00317217211013936
Birch, H.J.S. & Demmans Epp, C. (2023). Diverse stakeholders on educational technology development teams: supporting software developers and children. Education Tech Research Dev, 71, 2021-2046.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10252-x
Boulton, H., Brown, D., Standen, P., Belmonte, M., Kwiatkowska, G., Hughes-Roberts, T. & Taheri, M. (2018). Multi-modalities in classroom learning environments [Paper presentation]. INTED2018 Proceedings: 12th Annual International Technology, Education and Development Conference.
https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2018.0264
Bray, A., Devitt, A., Banks, J., Sanchez Fuentes, S., Sandoval, M., Riviou, K., Byrne, D., Flood, M., Reale, J. & Terrenzio, S. (2024). What next for Universal Design for Learning? A systematic literature review of technology in UDL implementations at second level. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55 (1), 113-138.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13328
Bright, S. & Calvert, E. (2023). Educational Technology: Barrier or Bridge to Equitable Access to Advanced Learning Opportunities? Gifted Child Today, 46 (3), 187-200.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175231168711
CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org (accessed 14/02/2024)
Chen, N., Sørensen, T. A. & Spence, C. (2024). Crossmodal correspondence. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1385480.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1385480
Christopoulos, A., Mystakidis, S., Pellas, N. & Laakso, M.-J. (2021). ARLEAN: An Augmented Reality Learning Analytics Ethical Framework. Computers, 10, 92.
https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10080092
Close, K., Warr, M. & Mishra, P. (2024). The ethical consequences, contestations, and possibilities of designs in educational systems. TechTrends, 68 (1), 186-194.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00900-7
Crossley, S. A., Roscoe, R. & McNamara, D. S. (2014). What is successful writing? An investigation into the multiple ways writers can write successful essays. Written Communication, 31 (2), 184- 214.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088314526354
D'Ignazio, C. & Klein, L. F. (2020). Data Feminism. The MIT Press.
https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11805.001.0001
Dockterman, D. (2024, April 17). The Other EdTech Evidence. [Pulse article]. LinkedIN. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/other-edtech-evidence-david-dockterman-5qfde/?trackingId=%2F%2BsxMgRYReazYue3WHMxpQ%3D%3D
Duran, A., Dahl, L. S., Stipeck, C. & Mayhew, M. J. (2020). A critical quantitative analysis of students' sense of belonging: Perspectives on race, generation status, and collegiate environments. Journal of College Student Development, 61 (2), 133-153.
https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2020.0014
Durham, C. (2024). Centering Equity for Multilingual Learners in Preservice Teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Teacher Education, 1-14.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231223460
Dzaman, S., Fenlon, D., Maier, J. & Marchione, T. (2022). 2.2 Clearly Define Learning Outcomes. Universal Design for Learning: One Small Step.
Esteban-Guitart, M. & Moll, L. C. (2014). Funds of identity: A new concept based on the funds of knowledge approach. Culture & Psychology, 20 (1), 31-48.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X13515934
Fernández-Batanero, J-M., Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J. & López-Meneses, E. (2024). Fostering Motivation: Exploring the Impact of ICTs on the Learning of Students with Autism. Children, 11 (1), 119.
https://doi.org/10.3390/children11010119
Freire, P. & Macedo, D. P. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word & the world. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey Publishers.
Garcia, A. & Lee, C. H. (2020). Equity-Centered Approaches to Educational Technology. In M. J. Bishop, E. Boling, J. Elen & V. Svihla (Eds), Handbook of Research in Educational Communications and Technology. Learning Design (5th ed.), 247-261. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36119-8_10
Gaskins, N. (2023). Interrogating Algorithmic Bias: From Speculative Fiction to Liberatory Design. TechTrends, 67 (3), 417-425.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00783-0
Giannini, S. (2024, March 19). Today we mark the first-ever International Day for #DigitalLearning, an important reminder of technology's potential to expand access, enhance learning outcomes, and combat inequalities in and through education. [Post]. LinkedIN. https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7175889629441638400/
Gobert, J. D., Sao Pedro, M., Raziuddin, J. & Baker, R. (2013). From log files to assessment metrics: Measuring students' science inquiry skills using educational data mining. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22 (4), 521-563.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.837391
Hadfield-Hill, S., & Zara, C. (2024). Being participatory through the use of app-based research tools. In Being Participatory: Researching with Children and Young People: Co-constructing Knowledge Using Creative, Digital and Innovative Techniques (pp. 169-195). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47787-4_8
Huffman, S. (2018). The digital divide revisited: What is next? Education, 128 (3), 239-246.
Hunt, J., Taub, M., Marino, M., Duarte, A., Bentley, B., Holman, K. & Banzon, A. (2022). Enhancing engagement and fraction concept knowledge with a universally designed game based curriculum. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 20 (1), 77-95.
Kinder-Kurlanda, K. & Fahimi, M. (2024). Making Algorithms Fair: Ethnographic Insights from Machine Learning Interventions. In J. Jarke, B. Prietl, S. Egbert, Y. Boeva, H. Heuer & M. Arnold (Eds), Algorithmic Regimes. Amsterdam University Press.
https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.11895528.17
Kormos, E. & Wisdom, K. (2023). Digital divide and teaching modality: Its role in technology and instructional strategies. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 9985-10003.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11488-5
Kucirkova, N. (2023, 27 March). Are EdTech companies the casualties or winners of educational evidence wars? [BERA blog] https://www.bera.ac.uk/blog/are-edtech-companies-the-casualties-or-winners-of-educational-evidence-wars
Kucirkova, N. (2024). The 5Es of Evidence and SDGs, Springer Nature Research Communities, https://communities.springernature.com/posts/the-5es-of-evidence-and-sdgs
Kucirkova, N. I. & Tosun, S. (2023). Children's olfactory picturebooks: Charting new trends in early childhood education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 1-10.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-023-01457-z
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35 (7), 3-12.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035007003
Lazou, C. & Tsinakos, A. (2023). Critical Immersive-Triggered Literacy as a Key Component for Inclusive Digital Education. Education Sciences, 13 (7), 696.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070696
Livingstone, S. & Third, A. (2017). Children and young people's rights in the digital age: An emerging agenda. New media & society, 19 (5), 657-670.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686318
Lloyd-Esenkaya, T., Lloyd-Esenkaya, V., O'Neill, E. & Proulx, M. J. (2020). Multisensory inclusive design with sensory substitution. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5 (1), 37.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-020-00240-7
Lopez, P. (2021). Bias does not equal bias: A socio-technical typology of bias in data-based algorithmic systems. Internet Policy Review, 10 (4).
https://doi.org/10.14763/2021.4.1598
Macgilchrist, F. (2019). Cruel optimism in edtech: When the digital data practices of educational technology providers inadvertently hinder educational equity. Learning, Media and Technology, 44 (1), 77-86.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1556217
MacSwan, J. (2020). Academic English as standard language ideology: A renewed research agenda for asset-based language education. Language Teaching Research, 24 (1), 28-36.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818777540
Martin, F., Zhuang, M. & Schaefer, D. (2024). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence in K-12 education (2017-2022). Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100195
Mehta, P., Chillarge, G. R., Sapkal, S. D., Shinde, G. R. & Kshirsagar, P. S. (2023). Inclusion of children with special needs in the educational system, Artificial Intelligence (AI). In A. Kumar, A. Nayyar, R. K. Sachan & R. Jain (Eds), AI-Assisted Special Education for Students with Exceptional Needs, pp. 156-185. IGI Global.
https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-0378-8.ch007
Mitchell, S., Potash, E., Barocas, S., D'Amour, A., & Lum, K. (2021). Algorithmic Fairness: Choices, Assumptions, and Definitions. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 8.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-statistics-042720-125902
Moll, L., C., Amanti, C., Neff, D. & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: using a Qualitative approach to connect homes to classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31 (2), 132-141.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849209543534
Nasiar, N., Baker, R. S., Zou, Y., Zhang, J. & Hutt, S. (2023). Modelling problem-solving strategy invention (PSSI) behavior in an online math environment. In N. Wang, G. Rebolledo-Mendez, V. Dimitrova, N. Matsuda & O.C. Santos (Eds), Artificial Intelligence in Education. Posters and Late Breaking Results, Workshops and Tutorials, Industry and Innovation Tracks, Practitioners, Doctoral Consortium and Blue Sky. AIED 2023. Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 1831. Springer, Cham
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36336-8_70
Nera, G. R. & Nyikadzino, T. (2023). Factors Hampering the Realization of Equity and Quality Education in Zimbabwe's Rural Schools: Experiences of Chipinge Central Circuit, Manicaland. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 1-15.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00219096231207892
Nguyen, A., Gardner, L. A., & Sheridan, D. (2018). A framework for applying learning analytics in serious games for people with intellectual disabilities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49 (4), 673-689.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12625
Nicolai, S., Jordan, K., Taskeen, A., Kaye, T. & Myers, C. (2023). Toward a holistic approach to EdTech effectiveness: Lessons from Covid-19 research in Bangladesh, Ghana, Kenya, Pakistan, and Sierra Leone. International Journal of Educational Development, 102.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102841
Ocumpaugh, J., Roscoe, R. D., Baker, R. S., Hutt, S. & Aguilar, S. J. (2023). Toward Asset‐based Instruction and Assessment in Artificial Intelligence in Education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-023-00382-x
O'Donnell, F. & Sireci, S. G. (2022). Language matters: Teacher and parent perceptions of achievement labels from educational tests. Educational Assessment, 27 (1), 1-26.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2021.2016388
OECD (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and Equity in Education, PISA. Paris: OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en
OECD (2018., Equity in Education: Breaking Down Barriers to Social Mobility, PISA. Paris: OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264073234-en
OECD (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA. Paris: OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
Pham, S. T. H. & Sampson, P. M. (2022). The development of artificial intelligence in education: A review in context. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38 (5), 1408-1421.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12687
Poechhacker, N. & Kacianka, S. (2021). Algorithmic accountability in context: Socio-technical perspectives on structural causal models. Frontiers in Big Data, 3.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2020.519957
Prado, Y. & Warschauer, M. (2024). Voices on the Margins: Inclusive Education at the Intersection of Language, Literacy, and Technology. The MIT Press.
Rizvi, F. & Lingard, B. (2010). Glogalizing Education Policy. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203867396
Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M. & Koedinger, K. R. (2011). Improving students' help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system. Learning & Instruction, 21 (2), 267-280.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.07.004
Roscoe, R. D. & Craig, S. D. (2022). A heuristic assessment framework for the design of self-regulated learning technologies. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 6, 77-94.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-022-00070-4
Rosenheck, L. & Limpiti, P. (2024). Designing for Inclusion, Designing for All. A White Paper by Kahoot!. Available: https://files-cdn.kahoot.it/DesigningForInclusion.pdf
Schuelka, M. J. & Carrington, S. (Eds) (2022). Global Directions in Inclusive Education. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003091950
Smith, K., & Young, V. (2024, January). A new narrative: How unlocking the power of R&D through Inclusive Innovation can transform education. Digital Promise.
https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/202
Tare, M. & Guha, M. L. (2023, June). "We're Hinged. They're Not. It's in that Space that Creativity Happens": Adult co-designers' perspectives on designing technology with children. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference (pp. 574-577).
https://doi.org/10.1145/3585088.3593902
UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework of Action on Special Needs Education. Salamanca.
UNESCO (2021). UNESCO strategy on technological innovation in education (2021-2025). Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000375776
UNESCO GEM Report (2023). Global education monitoring report, 2023: technology in education: a tool on whose terms?
https://doi.org/10.54676/UZQV8501
UNESCO (2024). Challenging systematic prejudices: An investigation into bias against women and girls in large language models. Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000388971 [accessed 8/3/2024].
UNICEF (2020). Minimum quality standards and indicators for community engagement. New York: UNICEF.
UNICEF (2022.) Responsible Innovation in Technology for Children, Digital technology, play and child well-being. RITEC Project funded by the LEGO Foundation.
UNICEF Disability and Inclusion Policy and Strategy, 2022-2030. Available at: https://www.unicef.org/media/134511/file/An%20inclusive%20world,%20starts%20with%20me,%20with%20you,%20with%20all%20of%20us.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology (2024). National Educational Technology Plan, Washington. Available at: https://tech.ed.gov/files/2024/01/NETP24.pdf
Ventrella, F. M. & Cotnam-Kappel, M. (2024). Examining digital capital and digital inequalities in Canadian elementary schools: Insights from teachers. Telematics and Informatics, 86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2023.102070
Verdín, D., Smith, J. M. & Lucena, J. (2021). Funds of knowledge as pre-college experiences that promote minoritized students' interest, self-efficacy beliefs, and choice of majoring in engineering. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 11(1), Article 11.
https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1281
Walker, M. E., Olivera‐Aguilar, M., Lehman, B., Laitusis, C., Guzman‐Orth, D. & Gholson, M. (2023). Culturally Responsive Assessment: Provisional Principles. ETS Research Report Series.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12374
Wang, G., Sun, K., Atabey, A., Pothong, K., Lin, G. C., Zhao, J. & Yip, J. (2023, April). Child-Centred AI Design: Definition, Operation, and Considerations. In Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-6).
https://doi.org/10.1145/3544549.3573821
Warschauer, M. (2012). The digital divide and social inclusion. Americas Quarterly, 6(2), 131-135.
Wernimont, J. (2018). Numbered Lives. Life and Death in Quantum Media. The MIT Press.
https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11455.001.0001
Wodon, Q. (2016). What Matters Most for Equity and Inclusion in Education Systems: A Framework Paper. Working Paper Series no 10. World Bank Group.
World Benchmarking Alliance (2023). Digital Inclusion Benchmark 2023 Insights Report. Available from: https://www.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org/research/2023-digital-inclusion-benchmark-insights-report/
Yan, D. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 28 (11), 13943-13967.
