REVIEW 1 cited by
Towards an Operational Responsible AI Framework for Learning Analytics in Higher Education
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Universities are increasingly adopting data-driven strategies to enhance student success, with AI applications like Learning Analytics (LA) and Predictive Learning Analytics (PLA) playing a key role in identifying at-risk students, personalising learning, supporting teachers, and guiding educational decision-making. However, concerns are rising about potential harms these systems may pose, such as algorithmic biases leading to unequal support for minority students. While many have explored the need for Responsible AI in LA, existing works often lack practical guidance for how institutions can operationalise these principles. In this paper, we propose a novel Responsible AI framework tailored specifically to LA in Higher Education (HE). We started by mapping 11 established Responsible AI frameworks, including those by leading tech companies, to the context of LA in HE. This led to the identification of seven key principles such as transparency, fairness, and accountability. We then conducted a systematic review of the literature to understand how these principles have been applied in practice. Drawing from these findings, we present a novel framework that offers practical guidance to HE institutions and is designed to evolve with community input, ensuring its relevance as LA systems continue to develop.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Adaptive Learning Systems: Personalized Curriculum Design Using LLM-Powered Analytics
The paper presents an LLM-powered personalized curriculum framework whose claimed improvements are unsupported by the unrelated datasets and missing evidence.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.