Search

In this paper, I present contextualizing factors, dimensions, and key markers of algorithm literacies, paying attention to the context of parenting and parenthood amidst datafication. Analyzing data from "think-aloud" interviews with 30 parents of children aged between 0 and 18, across England, I draw upon media and digital literacies scholarship to focus, first, in this paper, on the competencies, conversations, and events which contextualize parents' literacies with algorithmic interfaces. Next, I draw out four dimensions of parents' algorithm literacies including algorithm awareness, technical competencies, critical capacities, and championing their and their children's best interests, identifying practical markers for each dimension. I reflect on the broader implications of these for parenting and parenthood in datafied societies, and note that algorithm literacies are, forever, a work in progress, in fluidity and flux across the diverse courses of parenting journeys, deeply contextualized in the resources and restraints that parents encounter in their daily lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Computer-Aided Assessments (CAAs) have been used increasingly at Brunel University for over 10 years to test students' mathematical abilities. Recently, we have focussed on providing very rich feedback to the students; given the work involved in designing and coding such feedback, it is important to study the impact of the interaction between students and feedback. To make feedback more focussed, examination scripts have been analysed to identify common student errors and misconceptions. These have then been used to code distracters in multiple-choice and responsive numerical input-type questions. Since random parameters are used in all questions developed, distracters have to be coded as algebraic or algorithmic mal-rules. This paper reports on the methodology used to identify students' errors and misconceptions and how the evidence collected was used to code the distracters. The paper also provides hard evidence that real learning has taken place while students have interacted with the CAAs. Statistical analyses of exam performance over eight years indicate that students are able to improve performance in subsequent formative and summative assessments provided that they have truly engaged with the CAA, especially by spending time studying the feedback provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]