The ethics of designing artificial agents

In their important paper “Autonomous Agents”, Floridi and Sanders use “levels of abstraction” to argue that computers are or may soon be moral agents. In this paper we use the same levels of abstraction to illuminate differences between human moral agents and computers. In their paper, Floridi and Sanders contributed definitions of autonomy, moral accountability and responsibility, but they have not explored deeply some essential questions that need to be answered by computer scientists who design artificial agents. One such question is, “Can an artificial agent that changes its own programming become so autonomous that the original designer is no longer responsible for the behavior of the artificial agent?” To explore this question, we distinguish between LoA1 (the user view) and LoA2 (the designer view) by exploring the concepts of unmodifiable, modifiable and fully modifiable tables that control artificial agents. We demonstrate that an agent with an unmodifiable table, when viewed at LoA2, distinguishes an artificial agent from a human one. This distinction supports our first counter-claim to Floridi and Sanders, namely, that such an agent is not a moral agent, and the designer bears full responsibility for its behavior. We also demonstrate that even if there is an artificial agent with a fully modifiable table capable of learning* and intentionality* that meets the conditions set by Floridi and Sanders for ascribing moral agency to an artificial agent, the designer retains strong moral responsibility.     

What Youth Care About: Exploring Topic Identification for Youth-Led Research in School

The Urban Review - Youth-led participatory action research (YPAR) has been documented to increase youth’s social, emotional, and cognitive outcomes, foster critical thinking and...     

Cooperation and instruction in practical problem solving. Differences in interaction styles of mother-child dyads as related to socio-economic background and cognitive development

This article addresses the role of parents and children in the social construction of children's cognitive competence. A discussion of four approaches (i.e. Sigel, Wertsch, Wood, Diaz et al.) leads to the hypothesis that both the level of instruction content and the degree of cooperation in joint problem solving interactions with adults are related to children's cognitive development. This was tested in a study of 40 mothers and three-year-old children solving a practical problem. Coding videotaped interactions on a content and cooperation dimension yielded moderate to strong correlations with family's socio-economic status and children's cognitive level.     

On ‘Politics,Markets, and American Schools‘

This paper traces the trajectory of New Labour education policy since the formation of the first New Labour government in 1997. During that time the policy discourse has moved from a position of individualized school improvement through competition, to one where there is an emphasis on ‘partnership’ and ‘collaboration’ as key mechanisms for improvement. We note, however, that ‘specialism’, ‘diversity’ and ‘choice’ are still key components of policy and that ‘partnership’ often denotes a deficit model, with more successful schools supporting (or in some cases taking over) less successful ones. Although there are the beginnings of a recognition that social class and social deprivation are factors which make achievement at school more problematic, generally New Labour policy has not attempted to alleviate the tendency to social polarization which has emerged as a result of school choice policies.