SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2312.12620

"It Can Relate to Real Lives": Attitudes and Expectations in Justice-Centered Data Structures & Algorithms for Non-Majors

Abstract

Prior work has argued for a more justice-centered approach to postsecondary computing education by emphasizing ethics, identity, and political vision. In this experience report, we examine how postsecondary students of diverse gender and racial identities experience a justice-centered Data Structures and Algorithms designed for undergraduate non-computer science majors. Through a quantitative and qualitative analysis of two quarters of student survey data collected at the start and end of each quarter, we report on student attitudes and expectations. Across the class, we found a significant increase in the following attitudes: computing confidence and sense of belonging. While women, non-binary, and other students not identifying as men (WNB+) also increased in these areas, they still reported significantly lower confidence and sense of belonging than men at the end of the quarter. Black, Latinx, Middle Eastern and North African, Native American, and Pacific Islander (BLMNPI) students had no significant differences compared to white and Asian students. We also analyzed end-of-quarter student self-reflections on their fulfillment of expectations prior to taking the course. While the majority of students reported a positive overall sentiment about the course and many students specifically appreciated the justice-centered approach, some desired more practice with program implementation and interview preparation. We discuss implications for practice and articulate a political vision for holding both appreciation for computing ethics and a desire for professional preparation together through iterative design.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Anna Batra, Iris Zhou, Suh Young Choi, Chongjiu Gao, Yanbing Xiao, Sonia Fereidooni, Kevin Lin. 2023-12-19. "It Can Relate to Real Lives": Attitudes and Expectations in Justice-Centered Data Structures & Algorithms for Non-Majors. https://doi.org/10.1145/3626252.3630754

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Work, Wellbeing, and Choice: Empirical Lessons for AI Futures

Advances in AI-driven automation have raised questions about how humans might find wellbeing in a world where paid employment is less necessary or less available than before. Paid work has been variously characterized as both a contributor and an impediment to human wellbeing. What is already known about the relationship between paid work and wellbeing? What factors influence wellbeing among people who do not work---or who do not need to work? And how might these factors bear upon prospective AI-induced economic transformations? To help provide empirical grounding for these questions, we survey the psychological, sociological, and economic literature that investigates the relationship between wellbeing and work. We draw on evidence from multiple populations, including the unemployed, retirees, lottery winners, and financially dependent spouses. This comparative review draws from studies across OECD countries, China, India, and Gulf states. We identify three key factors that mediate the relationship between work status and wellbeing: (1) agency and choice---whether the exit from work is voluntary or involuntary, as well as long-term agency; (2) the availability of alternative sources of work's latent benefits---such as volunteering, hobbies, or state-provisioned employment; and (3) social and systemic context---including cultural norms around work and the robustness of social safety nets. We draw on these three factors to derive specific implications for different AI automation scenarios, connecting the empirical evidence to concrete policy considerations.

cs.CY

From Digital Accountability to Accountable Digitality Through Needs-Aware Information Systems: The Case of Auditable Child-Welfare Judgments

Digital accountability research asks how digital systems can, among other aims, be made transparent, explainable, auditable, contestable, and supportive of ongoing learning and improvement. This paper reverses the question: how can digital transformation make established human institutions more accountable? It theorizes this reversal as accountable digitality and specifies needs-aware information systems as the mediating mechanism. The hard and paradigmatic case is child-welfare judgment, where best-interest procedures must protect children, preserve confidentiality, and respect judicial independence while enabling aggregate learning about needs, reasons, exceptions, and disparities. The case is used diagnostically and illustratively to derive and examine the design logic, not as empirical evidence or validation. Conceptual design-oriented analysis decomposes and recombines digital and legal accountability under child-rights constraints, deriving a canonical theory-to-design chain, contingent mechanisms, implications, and safeguards. It advances IS responsibility and ethics research by showing how privacy-preserving, co-created, needs-aware information systems can support institutional self-knowledge and auditable justice.

cs.CY

(Whose defaults?) Is artificial intelligence reorienting archaeological methods?

Generative AI and the practice of "vibe coding" are changing how archaeologists carry out computational research, but their effects on the discipline's range of methods is still understudied. In this paper, we evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) are narrowing the variety of methods archaeologists use. We first analysed approximately 119,000 archaeology abstracts from Scopus, covering publications from 2010 to 2025. Using a locally run LLM, we identified the computational methods reported in each abstract and organised them into 25 broad categories (L2) and 241 finer clusters (L3). A Bayesian Dirichlet-multinomial model of method composition within sub-disciplines found a small but credible shift in method use after 2023. However, this shift was smaller than the variation already present across the full study period. No individual technique showed a significant change, and overall methodological diversity increased rather than declined. We then ran a controlled experiment to see whether LLMs recommend a narrower set of methods than archaeologists have used in practice. Two different open-weight models were asked to suggest methods for 28 archaeological research problems, with prompts providing three levels of methodological guidance: novice, intermediate, and expert. Recommendation diversity was much lower than in the published literature, particularly without methodological guidance. The models also tended to favour methods that were widely used before 2023, and their recommendations more closely resembled the post-2023 literature. Taken together, these results are consistent with LLMs pushing methodological choice towards convergence, although our study cannot establish a causal effect. They raise a broader question: how can archaeology retain methodological diversity as LLMs become more involved in research?

cs.CY