Reorienting Machine Learning Education Towards Tinkerers and ML-Engaged Citizens Natalie
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Reorienting Machine Learning Education Towards Tinkerers and ML-Engaged Citizens by Natalie Lao S.B., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2016) M.Eng., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2017) Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY September 2020 ○c Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2020. All rights reserved. Author................................................................ Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science August 28, 2020 Certified by. Harold (Hal) Abelson Class of 1922 Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Thesis Supervisor Accepted by . Leslie A. Kolodziejski Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Chair, Department Committee on Graduate Students 2 Reorienting Machine Learning Education Towards Tinkerers and ML-Engaged Citizens by Natalie Lao Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science on August 28, 2020, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies are appearing in everyday contexts, from recommendation systems for shopping websites to self- driving cars. As researchers and engineers develop and apply these technologies to make consequential decisions in everyone’s lives, it is crucial that the public under- stands the AI-powered world, can discuss AI policies, and become empowered to engage in shaping these technologies’ futures. Historically, ML application devel- opment has been accessible only to those with strong computational backgrounds working or conducting research in highly technical fields. As ML models become more powerful and computing hardware becomes faster and cheaper, it is now tech- nologically possible for anyone with a laptop to learn about and tinker with ML. This includes audiences without programming or advanced mathematics knowledge, who can use public ML tools to construct both useful technical artifacts and meaningful socio-ethical artifacts around ML. My research investigates the following question: How do we reorient ML engineering education to transform “ML consumers” to be “ML contributors”? In order to illuminate this problem, I have created a Machine Learning Education Framework. In this dissertation, I present the framework and three applications of it: (1) a course based on the framework that aims to develop ML self-efficacy in general college-level audiences; (2) a curriculum rubric basedon the ML Education Framework and analyses of 6 ML/AI courses using the rubric; and (3) two public ML tools for high school and above ML tinkerers that empower them to create personal ML applications through image and audio classification. The ML Education Framework is organized into three interconnected categories: Knowledge (General ML Knowledge, Knowledge of ML Methods, Bias in ML Systems, Societal Implications of ML), Skills (ML Problem Scoping, ML Project Planning, Creating ML Artifacts, Analysis of ML Design Intentions & Results, ML Advocacy, Independent Out-of-Class Learning), and Attitudes (Interest, Identity & Community, Self-Efficacy, Persistence). The three top level categories of the framework werecho- sen to encompass the holistic process of teaching people ML and ensuring continued participation in the field. “Knowledge” about ML will be necessary for individuals to 3 thrive in today’s ML-driven world and builds foundations for further engagement with the technology. ML “Skills” define specific actions and activities that students need to do and practice in order to become ML contributors. The category "Attitudes" reflects long-term societal goals for educational initiatives in ML, and addresses the perspectives that students should develop through an ML course. This framework can be used in creating new ML curricula, in analyzing the results of ML interven- tions, and in situating support tools within ML education for students of a variety of backgrounds and levels. Today a large portion of the world solely resides in the “ML consumer” population. Regulation of ML technologies is nascent. As policymakers think about reasonable legal structures, the public should be able to actively participate in these discussions. It is imperative that we empower these “ML consumers” to become “ML tinkerers” and “ML-engaged citizens”. Thesis Supervisor: Harold (Hal) Abelson Title: Class of 1922 Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 4 Acknowledgments I have received a lot of help and support throughout the past 3 years of my PhD at MIT. First, I want to thank my thesis committee: Hal Abelson, Anantha Chan- drakasan, and Eric Klopfer. Thank you for your mentorship and support throughout this whole process. Hal, I’ve taken your classes and worked on research with you since my junior year of undergrad at MIT. Seeing your pioneering approach over the past years has really inspired me to work in academia and do research related to democra- tizing technology and education. Anantha, I’ve also known you since my undergrad years at MIT. You’ve always pushed me to think more deeply when it comes to re- search, and even though you’re incredibly busy as dean, your thoughtful feedback has helped me consider how to maximize the real-world impact of my work. Eric, your expertise in education has been invaluable to the quality and rigor of this work. Your advice has really helped me refine my Machine Learning Education Framework and the corresponding rubrics into something that hopefully can be used by more people. I also want to thank the people who were instrumental in the papers I’ve written during my PhD. Irene Lee, the 6.S198 staff, and my 6.S198 students helped make the Deep Learning Practicum course a wonderful experience. The Google PAIR and TensorFlow.JS teams were also extremely supportive during this process: I recall we were using deeplearn.js when it first came out, so sometimes we would run into bugs while making the course materials. The folks at Google would help us fix these issues within a few days. I would also like to acknowledge the staff and students from the Internet Policy Research Initiative and the MIT App Inventor team for helping create PIC and PAC, and running our high school workshops. Special shout-outs to Danny Tang, Yuria Utsumi, Nikhil Bhatia, Evan Patton, Jeff Schiller, Karen Lang, Selim Tezel, and Marisol Diaz. Also a big thank you to Ingrid Roche at the Boston Latin Academy for letting us run workshops in her classes. I had many meaningful and rewarding conversations with people in the ML and AI education community when creating my framework and doing my evaluations, and these conversations were instrumental to my research process. Thank you for taking 5 the time to speak with me: Richard Jung and Nicholas Luu from Technovation, Sandhya Simhan and Ortal Arel from deeplearning.ai, Blakeley Payne and Randi Williams from the MIT Media Lab, and Teemu Roos from the University of Helsinki. Finally, I would like to thank my friends, my parents, my fellow graduate students, my fiancé Nicholas Kwok, and my dog Sophie for all of their support throughout these years. MIT and learning how to do research would have been less fun without you all. 6 Contents 1 Introduction 19 1.1 Vision: Everyone can understand and tinker with machine learning . 21 1.2 Photography: An Analogy for Democratizing Machine Learning . 25 1.3 A Brief History of AI . 29 1.4 Defining Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and Deep Learning 32 2 Background: ML Education and Educational Theories as Applied to Teaching ML 33 2.1 The Current State of Machine Learning Education . 33 2.1.1 Technical ML Courses . 34 2.1.2 General Adult ML Courses . 35 2.1.3 K-12 ML Courses . 36 2.2 Education Theories as Applied to ML and AI Education . 43 2.2.1 Self-Efficacy . 44 2.2.2 Constructionism, Computational Action, and Computational Identity . 45 2.2.3 Experiential Learning Approaches as Applied to ML . 47 2.3 Similar Educational Frameworks in Computing and Engineering . 49 2.3.1 Computational Thinking . 51 2.3.2 Conceiving - Designing - Implementing - Operating (CDIO) and Use-Modify-Create (UMC) . 53 3 The Machine Learning Education Framework 57 7 3.1 The Machine Learning Education Framework . 58 3.1.1 Knowledge . 58 3.1.2 Skills . 59 3.1.3 Attitudes . 61 3.1.4 Essential Items of the Framework . 61 3.2 Interconnections within the Framework . 62 4 6.S198: Designing a College-Level Actionable Machine Learning Practicum 67 4.1 Instruments and Assessment . 68 4.2 Application of Educational Theories and the ML Education Framework 69 4.2.1 Experiential learning and Use-Modify-Create in Deep Learning Practicum . 69 4.2.2 Self-Efficacy and Computational Action in Deep Learning Practicum 72 4.2.3 Course Intentions within the ML Education Framework . 74 4.3 Transfer Learning for Empowering Beginners in ML Application Creation 76 4.4 Deep Learning Practicum Version 1 . 76 4.4.1 Student Demographics . 77 4.4.2 Teaching Staff and Industry Mentors . 79 4.4.3 Capstone Projects . 79 4.4.4 Learnings from Version 1 that Informed Version 2 . 80 4.5 Deep Learning Practicum Version 2 . 81 4.5.1 Changes from Version 1 . 81 4.5.2 Student Demographics . 83 4.5.3 Capstone Projects . 83 4.6 Findings and Analysis . 84 4.6.1 Project Themes and Approaches . 84 4.6.2 Self-Efficacy . 94 4.6.3 Mastery of ML Methods . 100 4.6.4 Mastery of ML Artifact Creation Skills . 102 8 4.6.5 Identity and Perceptions . 105 4.7 Discussion . 106 5 An Analysis of Curricula Using the ML Education Framework 111 5.1 ML Education Framework: Curriculum Rubric . 111 5.2 Analysis of 6 ML and AI Curricula Using the Curriculum Rubric .