NY City School Teacher Evaluation Algorithm Contested

February 25, 2012

Thousands of disputes have arisen over an algorithm used to assess the effectiveness of school teachers in New York City, raising concerns about safe and secure AI practices. As a response, it's crucial to establish guardrails for AI through responsible AI governance. For those interested in shaping the future of AI governance, consider joining HISPI Project Cerebellum JOIN US.

This incident highlights the need for the Map function of HISPI Project Cerebellum TAIM to ensure that such incidents are identified and addressed promptly.

Matched TAIM controls

Suggested mapping from embedding similarity (not a formal assessment). Browse all TAIM controls

MEASURE 2.6 — similarity 0.678, rank 1. TAIM detail and related incidents →
MEASURE 2.9 — similarity 0.666, rank 2. TAIM detail and related incidents →
MAP 1.1 — similarity 0.665, rank 3. TAIM detail and related incidents →

Alleged deployer: new-york-city-dept.-of-education
Alleged developer: new-york-city-dept.-of-education
Alleged harmed parties: teachers

Source

Data from the AI Incident Database (AIID). Cite this incident: https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/9

Data source

Incident data is from the AI Incident Database (AIID).

When citing the database as a whole, please use:

McGregor, S. (2021) Preventing Repeated Real World AI Failures by Cataloging Incidents: The AI Incident Database. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Third Annual Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence (IAAI-21). Virtual Conference.

Pre-print on arXiv · Database snapshots & citation guide

We use weekly snapshots of the AIID for stable reference. For the official suggested citation of a specific incident, use the “Cite this incident” link on each incident page.