EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Beth Goldstein
dblp:03/3316
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computing education · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computing education › ethics education
AI ethics education |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Assessing Ethical Thinking about AI · AAAI 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
ethical AI |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Assessing Ethical Thinking about AI · AAAI 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
validity evidence · 0.9assessment design · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | Assessing Ethical Thinking about AIabstractAs is evidenced by the associated AI, Ethics and Society conference, we now take as given the need for ethics education in the AI and general CS curricula. The anticipated surge in AI ethics education will force the field to reckon with delineating and then evaluating learner outcomes to determine what is working and improve what is not. We argue for a more descriptive than normative focus of this ethics education, and propose the development of assessments that can measure descriptive ethical thinking about AI. Such an assessment tool for measuring ethical reasoning capacity in CS contexts must be designed to produce reliable scores for which there is established validity evidence concerning their interpretation and use. Judy Goldsmith, Emanuelle Burton, David Dueber, Beth Goldstein, Shannon Sampson, Michael D. Toland |
AAAI | 4 |
| 2020 | Assessment of CS Students' Ethical Reasoning SkillsabstractThe national push for CS departments to teach students to think about ethical implications of their work raises critical questions about how we approach this pedagogically. In contrast to the typical assessments of CS ethical thinking, which have focused on a student's ability to operate successfully within one kind of normative paradigm, our research group advocates for teaching ethics as an ongoing practice that incorporates multiple normative frameworks and an emphasis on the descriptive element of ethical reflection. In this special session, we will discuss the differences between normative and descriptive ethics, practice describing ethical dilemmas, and work together on developing assessment capabilities for descriptive ethical thinking for CS. Emanuelle Burton, David Dueber, Judy Goldsmith, Beth Goldstein, Shannon Sampson, Michael D. Toland |
SIGCSE | 4 |
| 2009 | Planning for success: The interdisciplinary approach to building Bayesian models
Alex Dekhtyar, Judy Goldsmith, Beth Goldstein, Krol Kevin Mathias, Cynthia Isenhour |
Int. J. Approx. Reason. | 3 |