首页 > 最新文献

Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence最新文献

英文 中文
Affective computing in online higher education: A systematic literature review 网络高等教育中的情感计算:系统文献综述
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100499
Krist Shingjergji , Deniz Iren , Corrie Urlings , Roland Klemke
Although affective states play a crucial role in education, they are often difficult to communicate and observe in online learning environments. This challenge has led to growing research on systems that can automatically detect affective states. This systematic literature review used PRISMA to analyze 96 studies on affective computing in online higher education, published between 2019 and 2024. The findings show that the most frequently studied affective states include learning-centered states, such as engagement, confusion, frustration, sentiment, as well as basic emotions, such as happiness, anger, sadness, surprise, and fear.
Terminology often overlaps, and basic emotions are commonly used as proxies for learning-centered states. The most used modality is facial expression, with the dominant detection approach being deep learning, particularly convolutional neural networks. Most studies rely on self-collected datasets that, due to privacy concerns, are not publicly shared, limiting reproducibility and generalizability. FER2013, collected in a generic context, and DAiSEE, collected in an online educational setting, are the most used public datasets. A key limitation is that most systems are not evaluated in real classrooms, revealing a gap between technological development, and educational application. Ethical considerations are often overlooked, with privacy, when addressed, being the main focus. Finally, the review’s findings highlight the need for stronger integration between education and technology through interdisciplinary collaboration and real-world validation.
尽管情感状态在教育中发挥着至关重要的作用,但在在线学习环境中,情感状态往往难以沟通和观察。这一挑战导致对能够自动检测情感状态的系统的研究越来越多。本系统文献综述使用PRISMA分析了2019年至2024年间发表的96项关于在线高等教育情感计算的研究。研究结果表明,最常被研究的情感状态包括以学习为中心的状态,如投入、困惑、沮丧、情绪,以及基本情绪,如快乐、愤怒、悲伤、惊讶和恐惧。术语经常重叠,基本情绪通常被用作以学习为中心状态的代理。最常用的模式是面部表情,主要的检测方法是深度学习,特别是卷积神经网络。大多数研究依赖于自我收集的数据集,由于隐私问题,这些数据集没有公开共享,限制了再现性和概括性。FER2013是在一般情况下收集的,DAiSEE是在在线教育环境中收集的,是最常用的公共数据集。一个关键的限制是,大多数系统没有在真实的教室中进行评估,这暴露了技术发展与教育应用之间的差距。道德方面的考虑往往被忽视,隐私问题往往成为主要焦点。最后,该综述的发现强调了通过跨学科合作和现实验证加强教育与技术之间整合的必要性。
{"title":"Affective computing in online higher education: A systematic literature review","authors":"Krist Shingjergji ,&nbsp;Deniz Iren ,&nbsp;Corrie Urlings ,&nbsp;Roland Klemke","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100499","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100499","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Although affective states play a crucial role in education, they are often difficult to communicate and observe in online learning environments. This challenge has led to growing research on systems that can automatically detect affective states. This systematic literature review used PRISMA to analyze 96 studies on affective computing in online higher education, published between 2019 and 2024. The findings show that the most frequently studied affective states include learning-centered states, such as engagement, confusion, frustration, sentiment, as well as basic emotions, such as happiness, anger, sadness, surprise, and fear.</div><div>Terminology often overlaps, and basic emotions are commonly used as proxies for learning-centered states. The most used modality is facial expression, with the dominant detection approach being deep learning, particularly convolutional neural networks. Most studies rely on self-collected datasets that, due to privacy concerns, are not publicly shared, limiting reproducibility and generalizability. FER2013, collected in a generic context, and DAiSEE, collected in an online educational setting, are the most used public datasets. A key limitation is that most systems are not evaluated in real classrooms, revealing a gap between technological development, and educational application. Ethical considerations are often overlooked, with privacy, when addressed, being the main focus. Finally, the review’s findings highlight the need for stronger integration between education and technology through interdisciplinary collaboration and real-world validation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"10 ","pages":"Article 100499"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145739286","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Exploring AI-generated feedback in peer-discussion contexts: A mixed-methods study of essay writing in secondary classrooms 在同行讨论环境中探索人工智能生成的反馈:中学课堂论文写作的混合方法研究
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-18 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100504
Irina Engeness
This mixed-methods study investigates how an AI-powered writing tool providing automated feedback compares with peer-generated feedback in supporting secondary students' essay writing. Two research questions guided the study: (1) Did using an AI-powered tool with AI-generated feedback yield greater gains in writing quality from the first to the final draft compared with a standard editor with peer feedback? (2) How did students’ engagement in the writing process differ in the target (used AI-generated feedback) and comparison (used peer feedback) groups, as evidenced by teacher–student and peer–peer interactions and how were these patterns associated with their conceptual understanding of essay content?
Eighty-one ninth-grade students from six Norwegian classrooms participated, with three classes using the AI-powered Essay Assessment Technology (EAT) and three relying on peer feedback. Quantitative analyses of first and final drafts showed that both groups improved, but students using EAT achieved statistically significant gains in writing quality. However, moderate inter-rater reliability limits the strength of these findings.
Qualitative analysis of classroom video data revealed distinct engagement patterns. Students in the EAT group drew on AI-generated “covered” subthemes (ideas already present in their writing) and “suggested” subthemes (relevant ideas not yet included) to refine their essays, fostering more systematic discussions of essay content. In contrast, students in the peer-feedback group focused more on surface-level issues, such as spelling and word count, with less consistent attention to essay content.
These findings suggest that AI-generated feedback, when embedded in peer discussion and teacher-facilitated classrooms, can strengthen the development of students’ conceptual understanding of essay content. Analyses indicate that structured AI feedback supported greater gains compared with peer feedback alone. The study highlights the pedagogical potential of AI-powered tools as part of formative assessment practices, while underscoring the critical role of teacher facilitation and structured feedback in fostering deeper engagement with essay content.
这项混合方法研究调查了在支持中学生论文写作方面,提供自动反馈的人工智能写作工具与同行生成的反馈相比如何。两个研究问题指导了这项研究:(1)与具有同行反馈的标准编辑器相比,使用具有人工智能生成反馈的人工智能工具是否在从初稿到最终稿的写作质量方面取得了更大的进步?(2)学生在目标组(使用人工智能生成的反馈)和比较组(使用同伴反馈)中对写作过程的参与有何不同,师生互动和同伴互动证明了这一点,这些模式如何与他们对文章内容的概念性理解相关联?来自挪威6个教室的81名九年级学生参加了这次活动,其中3个班级使用人工智能作文评估技术(EAT),另外3个班级依靠同伴反馈。对初稿和终稿的定量分析表明,两组学生都有所提高,但使用EAT的学生在写作质量上取得了统计学上的显著提高。然而,适度的评分者间信度限制了这些发现的强度。课堂视频数据的定性分析揭示了不同的参与模式。EAT小组的学生利用人工智能生成的“覆盖”子主题(他们写作中已经存在的观点)和“建议”子主题(尚未包含相关观点)来完善他们的文章,促进对文章内容的更系统的讨论。相比之下,同伴反馈组的学生更多地关注拼写和字数等表面问题,而对论文内容的关注较少。这些发现表明,人工智能产生的反馈,当嵌入到同伴讨论和教师促进的课堂时,可以加强学生对论文内容的概念性理解的发展。分析表明,与单独的同行反馈相比,结构化的人工智能反馈支持更大的收益。该研究强调了人工智能工具作为形成性评估实践的一部分的教学潜力,同时强调了教师促进和结构化反馈在促进学生更深入地参与论文内容方面的关键作用。
{"title":"Exploring AI-generated feedback in peer-discussion contexts: A mixed-methods study of essay writing in secondary classrooms","authors":"Irina Engeness","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100504","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100504","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This mixed-methods study investigates how an AI-powered writing tool providing automated feedback compares with peer-generated feedback in supporting secondary students' essay writing. Two research questions guided the study: (1) Did using an AI-powered tool with AI-generated feedback yield greater gains in writing quality from the first to the final draft compared with a standard editor with peer feedback? (2) How did students’ engagement in the writing process differ in the target (used AI-generated feedback) and comparison (used peer feedback) groups, as evidenced by teacher–student and peer–peer interactions and how were these patterns associated with their conceptual understanding of essay content?</div><div>Eighty-one ninth-grade students from six Norwegian classrooms participated, with three classes using the AI-powered Essay Assessment Technology (EAT) and three relying on peer feedback. Quantitative analyses of first and final drafts showed that both groups improved, but students using EAT achieved statistically significant gains in writing quality. However, moderate inter-rater reliability limits the strength of these findings.</div><div>Qualitative analysis of classroom video data revealed distinct engagement patterns. Students in the EAT group drew on AI-generated “covered” subthemes (ideas already present in their writing) and “suggested” subthemes (relevant ideas not yet included) to refine their essays, fostering more systematic discussions of essay content. In contrast, students in the peer-feedback group focused more on surface-level issues, such as spelling and word count, with less consistent attention to essay content.</div><div>These findings suggest that AI-generated feedback, when embedded in peer discussion and teacher-facilitated classrooms, can strengthen the development of students’ conceptual understanding of essay content. Analyses indicate that structured AI feedback supported greater gains compared with peer feedback alone. The study highlights the pedagogical potential of AI-powered tools as part of formative assessment practices, while underscoring the critical role of teacher facilitation and structured feedback in fostering deeper engagement with essay content.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100504"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145568741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
From intuition to action: Exploring teachers’ ethical awareness in the use of AI tools in education 从直觉到行动:探索教师在教育中使用人工智能工具的道德意识
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-18 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100502
Chun Sing Maxwell Ho , John Chi-Kin Lee
This study investigates how teachers perceive and understand ethical issues arising from the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in education, and identifies the factors influencing their ethical awareness. Grounded in the Social Intuitionist Model (SIM), which emphasizes intuitive and emotionally driven moral judgments, the research explores teachers’ ethical perceptions as shaped by classroom experiences (micro/meso contexts) and broader social, cultural, and institutional influences (macro contexts) surrounding AI integration. Using a case study approach, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 26 teachers from primary and secondary schools, selected for their experience with AI integration. Thematic analysis revealed a four-pathway intuitive process: Functional-First, Triggered Ethical Awakening, Ethical Reflection and Reevaluation, and Ethical Adjustment. Teachers initially adopted AI for efficiency, but ethical awareness emerged through discomfort with issues such as student overreliance, biased content, and privacy breaches. Factors influencing awareness were categorized into individual (e.g., reflective disposition, technical understanding), interpersonal (e.g., peer dialogue), and school elements (e.g., workload, institutional support). The findings revealed that ethical awareness is dynamic and socially embedded, often initiated by emotional responses and reinforced through professional interactions. The study contributes original insights into the intuitive mechanisms of ethical recognition for teachers in the Chinese context. It underscores the need for structured ethical training, supportive school environments, and policy alignment to foster responsible AI use in education.
本研究调查了教师如何感知和理解在教育中使用人工智能(AI)所产生的伦理问题,并确定了影响他们伦理意识的因素。该研究以强调直觉和情感驱动的道德判断的社会直觉主义模型(SIM)为基础,探讨了围绕人工智能整合的课堂经验(微观/中观背景)和更广泛的社会、文化和制度影响(宏观背景)对教师的伦理观念的影响。采用案例研究方法,通过对26名中小学教师的半结构化访谈收集数据,这些教师是根据他们在人工智能整合方面的经验挑选出来的。主题分析揭示了一个四路径的直觉过程:功能优先、触发性伦理觉醒、伦理反思与再评价、伦理调整。教师最初采用人工智能是为了提高效率,但由于对学生过度依赖、有偏见的内容和侵犯隐私等问题感到不安,道德意识开始浮现。影响意识的因素分为个人因素(如反思倾向、技术理解)、人际因素(如同伴对话)和学校因素(如工作量、机构支持)。研究结果表明,道德意识是动态的,并嵌入社会,通常由情绪反应引发,并通过专业互动加强。本研究对中国情境下教师伦理认知的直觉机制有独到见解。报告强调需要有组织的道德培训、支持性的学校环境和政策协调,以促进在教育中负责任地使用人工智能。
{"title":"From intuition to action: Exploring teachers’ ethical awareness in the use of AI tools in education","authors":"Chun Sing Maxwell Ho ,&nbsp;John Chi-Kin Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100502","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100502","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigates how teachers perceive and understand ethical issues arising from the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in education, and identifies the factors influencing their ethical awareness. Grounded in the Social Intuitionist Model (SIM), which emphasizes intuitive and emotionally driven moral judgments, the research explores teachers’ ethical perceptions as shaped by classroom experiences (micro/meso contexts) and broader social, cultural, and institutional influences (macro contexts) surrounding AI integration. Using a case study approach, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 26 teachers from primary and secondary schools, selected for their experience with AI integration. Thematic analysis revealed a four-pathway intuitive process: Functional-First, Triggered Ethical Awakening, Ethical Reflection and Reevaluation, and Ethical Adjustment. Teachers initially adopted AI for efficiency, but ethical awareness emerged through discomfort with issues such as student overreliance, biased content, and privacy breaches. Factors influencing awareness were categorized into individual (e.g., reflective disposition, technical understanding), interpersonal (e.g., peer dialogue), and school elements (e.g., workload, institutional support). The findings revealed that ethical awareness is dynamic and socially embedded, often initiated by emotional responses and reinforced through professional interactions. The study contributes original insights into the intuitive mechanisms of ethical recognition for teachers in the Chinese context. It underscores the need for structured ethical training, supportive school environments, and policy alignment to foster responsible AI use in education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100502"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145568749","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Modeling the sustainability perspectives on personalized digital games for digital citizenship education: A PLS-SEM approach 数字化公民教育中个性化数字游戏的可持续性视角建模:PLS-SEM方法
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-17 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100498
Patcharin Panjaburee , Gwo-Jen Hwang , Ungsinun Intarakamhang , Niwat Srisawasdi
As digital citizenship becomes an essential educational priority in the digital age, there is a growing need for sustainable and engaging instructional designs that foster students' ethical and responsible use of technology. Addressing this gap, this study modeled the sustainability perspectives underlying personalized digital game-based learning through a partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach. A longitudinal repeated-measures design was conducted with 372 lower secondary students in Thailand, using fuzzy logic and decision tree algorithms to personalize ethical digital scenarios. The proposed model examined how pedagogical design, content quality, usability, behavioral decisions, and motivation shape students' perceptions of sustainability. Results indicated that sustained motivation at later learning stages was the strongest predictor of perceived sustainability, while pedagogical and experiential factors exerted significant indirect effects through motivational engagement. The analysis also confirmed the longitudinal influence of early motivational experiences on later engagement, emphasizing the importance of adaptive feedback and reflective learning processes. These findings advance understanding of how AI-driven personalization can promote sustainable digital citizenship learning by integrating adaptive pathways, culturally relevant content, and motivational scaffolds to support long-term behavioral change. Implications for educational design, pedagogy, and policy are discussed to guide the development of scalable AI-supported learning environments.
随着数字公民成为数字时代重要的教育重点,越来越需要可持续和引人入胜的教学设计,以培养学生道德和负责任的使用技术。为了解决这一问题,本研究通过偏最小二乘结构方程建模(PLS-SEM)方法对个性化数字游戏学习的可持续性前景进行了建模。对泰国372名初中学生进行了纵向重复测量设计,使用模糊逻辑和决策树算法来个性化道德数字场景。提出的模型考察了教学设计、内容质量、可用性、行为决策和动机如何塑造学生对可持续性的看法。结果表明,后期学习阶段的持续动机是感知可持续性的最强预测因子,而教学和经验因素通过动机投入发挥了显著的间接影响。分析还证实了早期动机体验对后期投入的纵向影响,强调了适应性反馈和反思性学习过程的重要性。这些发现有助于理解人工智能驱动的个性化如何通过整合适应性途径、文化相关内容和激励框架来支持长期行为改变,从而促进可持续的数字公民学习。讨论了对教育设计、教学法和政策的影响,以指导可扩展的人工智能支持的学习环境的发展。
{"title":"Modeling the sustainability perspectives on personalized digital games for digital citizenship education: A PLS-SEM approach","authors":"Patcharin Panjaburee ,&nbsp;Gwo-Jen Hwang ,&nbsp;Ungsinun Intarakamhang ,&nbsp;Niwat Srisawasdi","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100498","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100498","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As digital citizenship becomes an essential educational priority in the digital age, there is a growing need for sustainable and engaging instructional designs that foster students' ethical and responsible use of technology. Addressing this gap, this study modeled the sustainability perspectives underlying personalized digital game-based learning through a partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach. A longitudinal repeated-measures design was conducted with 372 lower secondary students in Thailand, using fuzzy logic and decision tree algorithms to personalize ethical digital scenarios. The proposed model examined how pedagogical design, content quality, usability, behavioral decisions, and motivation shape students' perceptions of sustainability. Results indicated that sustained motivation at later learning stages was the strongest predictor of perceived sustainability, while pedagogical and experiential factors exerted significant indirect effects through motivational engagement. The analysis also confirmed the longitudinal influence of early motivational experiences on later engagement, emphasizing the importance of adaptive feedback and reflective learning processes. These findings advance understanding of how AI-driven personalization can promote sustainable digital citizenship learning by integrating adaptive pathways, culturally relevant content, and motivational scaffolds to support long-term behavioral change. Implications for educational design, pedagogy, and policy are discussed to guide the development of scalable AI-supported learning environments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100498"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145568750","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Evaluating the potential of ChatGPT-reformulated essays as written feedback in L2 writing 评估chatgpt重新制定的论文在第二语言写作中的书面反馈潜力
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-17 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100500
Yingzhao Chen
Reformulation is a form of written corrective feedback to help second language (L2) learners improve their writing. This study examined whether ChatGPT could produce reformulations that (1) retain the meanings of the original essays and (2) are linguistically more developed than learners’ original essays. In addition, three types of ChatGPT prompts were compared to see which type yielded better reformulations. One thousand two hundred argumentative essays written for the TOEFL iBT® independent writing task were submitted to ChatGPT. ROUGE-L scores, used as a proxy for meaning retention, showed that ChatGPT reformulations largely retained the meaning of the original essays. A qualitative examination was conducted to examine the major types of changes ChatGPT made. For linguistic features, the ChatGPT reformulations were compared with the original essays for syntactic complexity, lexical sophistication, lexical diversity, and cohesion. Results showed that while ChatGPT reformulations were more developed for most linguistic features than the original essays, the reformulations did worse in cohesion. ChatGPT prompts with specific instructions produced reformulations with more developed linguistic features than a generic prompt. Findings were discussed in terms of how to use ChatGPT to generate reformulations and how to use the reformulations to improve L2 writing.
改写是一种帮助第二语言学习者提高写作水平的书面纠正反馈形式。本研究考察了ChatGPT是否可以产生:(1)保留原始文章的含义,(2)在语言上比学习者的原始文章更发达的重新表述。此外,还比较了三种类型的ChatGPT提示,以查看哪种类型产生更好的重新配方。1200篇托福网考独立写作的议论文被提交给了ChatGPT。ROUGE-L分数,作为意思保留的代理,表明ChatGPT重新表述在很大程度上保留了原始文章的意思。进行了定性检查,以检查ChatGPT所做的主要类型的更改。在语言特征方面,我们比较了ChatGPT改写后的文章与原文在句法复杂性、词汇复杂性、词汇多样性和衔接方面的差异。结果表明,虽然ChatGPT的重组在大多数语言特征上比原始文章更发达,但重组在衔接方面做得更差。与通用提示相比,带有特定指令的ChatGPT提示产生了具有更发达语言特征的重新表述。研究结果讨论了如何使用ChatGPT生成重新表述,以及如何使用重新表述来提高第二语言写作。
{"title":"Evaluating the potential of ChatGPT-reformulated essays as written feedback in L2 writing","authors":"Yingzhao Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100500","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100500","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Reformulation is a form of written corrective feedback to help second language (L2) learners improve their writing. This study examined whether ChatGPT could produce reformulations that (1) retain the meanings of the original essays and (2) are linguistically more developed than learners’ original essays. In addition, three types of ChatGPT prompts were compared to see which type yielded better reformulations. One thousand two hundred argumentative essays written for the TOEFL iBT® independent writing task were submitted to ChatGPT. ROUGE-L scores, used as a proxy for meaning retention, showed that ChatGPT reformulations largely retained the meaning of the original essays. A qualitative examination was conducted to examine the major types of changes ChatGPT made. For linguistic features, the ChatGPT reformulations were compared with the original essays for syntactic complexity, lexical sophistication, lexical diversity, and cohesion. Results showed that while ChatGPT reformulations were more developed for most linguistic features than the original essays, the reformulations did worse in cohesion. ChatGPT prompts with specific instructions produced reformulations with more developed linguistic features than a generic prompt. Findings were discussed in terms of how to use ChatGPT to generate reformulations and how to use the reformulations to improve L2 writing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100500"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145568214","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
An exploration of the role of generative AI in fostering creativity in architectural learning environments 探索生成式人工智能在建筑学习环境中培养创造力的作用
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-17 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100501
Carlos Medel-Vera , Sandy Britton , William Francis Gates
This paper explores the role of generative AI (GenAI) in supporting creativity within architectural education through the lens of a student-led AI drawing competition. The research addresses two questions: (1) how creative are students' text prompts and the resulting AI-generated images, and is there a relationship between them? and (2) to what extent do students perceive GenAI as a supportive tool in their creative process? Drawing on a mixed-methods approach, the study combines semantic analysis of text prompts, aesthetic evaluation of AI-generated images, and a Creativity Support Index (CSI) survey, complemented by sentiment analysis of student feedback. The semantic analysis reveals varying levels of conceptual richness across prompts, with higher divergence correlating to more open-ended and expressive image results. The CSI data indicates strong support for exploratory and goal-directed creativity, with high scores in exploration and results-worth-effort dimensions. These findings suggest that GenAI can function as both a collaborator and provocateur in design pedagogy, facilitating creative ideation while inviting new pedagogical strategies centred on prompt literacy and reflective design. The study concludes by discussing implications for integrating AI tools into design education, emphasising the pedagogical value of prompt literacy, and calling for further research on creative agency and authorship in hybrid human–AI workflows.
本文通过学生主导的人工智能绘画比赛,探讨了生成式人工智能(GenAI)在建筑教育中支持创造力的作用。该研究解决了两个问题:(1)学生的文本提示和由此产生的人工智能生成的图像有多大的创造性,它们之间是否存在关系?(2)学生在多大程度上认为GenAI是他们创作过程中的支持性工具?该研究采用混合方法,结合了文本提示的语义分析、人工智能生成图像的美学评估和创造力支持指数(CSI)调查,并辅以对学生反馈的情感分析。语义分析揭示了不同提示的概念丰富程度,更高的差异与更多的开放式和表达性图像结果相关。CSI数据表明探索性和目标导向的创造力得到了强有力的支持,在探索和结果价值-努力维度上得分很高。这些发现表明,GenAI在设计教学中既可以充当合作者,也可以充当挑衅者,促进创造性思维,同时引入以快速识字和反思性设计为中心的新教学策略。该研究最后讨论了将人工智能工具整合到设计教育中的影响,强调了快速识字的教学价值,并呼吁进一步研究人类-人工智能混合工作流程中的创意代理和作者身份。
{"title":"An exploration of the role of generative AI in fostering creativity in architectural learning environments","authors":"Carlos Medel-Vera ,&nbsp;Sandy Britton ,&nbsp;William Francis Gates","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100501","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100501","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper explores the role of generative AI (GenAI) in supporting creativity within architectural education through the lens of a student-led AI drawing competition. The research addresses two questions: (1) how creative are students' text prompts and the resulting AI-generated images, and is there a relationship between them? and (2) to what extent do students perceive GenAI as a supportive tool in their creative process? Drawing on a mixed-methods approach, the study combines semantic analysis of text prompts, aesthetic evaluation of AI-generated images, and a Creativity Support Index (CSI) survey, complemented by sentiment analysis of student feedback. The semantic analysis reveals varying levels of conceptual richness across prompts, with higher divergence correlating to more open-ended and expressive image results. The CSI data indicates strong support for exploratory and goal-directed creativity, with high scores in exploration and results-worth-effort dimensions. These findings suggest that GenAI can function as both a collaborator and provocateur in design pedagogy, facilitating creative ideation while inviting new pedagogical strategies centred on prompt literacy and reflective design. The study concludes by discussing implications for integrating AI tools into design education, emphasising the pedagogical value of prompt literacy, and calling for further research on creative agency and authorship in hybrid human–AI workflows.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100501"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145568751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Trajectories of AI policy in higher education: Interpretations, discourses, and enactments of students and teachers 高等教育中人工智能政策的轨迹:学生和教师的解释、话语和制定
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-15 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100496
Jack Tsao
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in higher education has introduced a spectrum of ethical challenges, significantly impacting learning outcomes, pedagogies, and assessments. Based on the experiences and perspectives of students and teachers at a research-intensive university in Hong Kong, the study draws on qualitative interview data with 58 undergraduate and graduate students and 12 teachers conducted in early 2025. Through the concept of policy trajectories (Ball, 1993; Ball et al., 2012), the research analyses the interconnections between material contexts and discursive constructions in how AI policies (and their absence) are framed, interpreted, enacted, and resisted. The findings reveal general concerns about academic integrity, fairness, equity, privacy, and data security, including specifically the invisible labour in dealing with ambiguous policies, uneven enforcement strategies, loopholes to avoid detection, disparities in access to state-of-the-art tools, and the cognitive and other developmental impacts due to overreliance on GenAI tools. Institutional ambiguity in policy supported experimentation and the appearance of progress, but risked individualising failure on teachers and students. Some actionable insights for university leaders and policymakers, teaching development centres, and individual teachers and programme coordinators include clearer messaging, the need for adaptive policies and guidelines with ongoing student and teacher participation, availability of digital libraries of toolkits, case studies and other resources, building in early “failure experiences”, and exposing students to authentic real-world applications and encounters to cultivate awareness on the limitations of GenAI. Ultimately, policy responses need to be both contextually and pragmatically sensitive, requiring on-the-ground experimentation and care by teachers.
高等教育中的生成式人工智能(GenAI)带来了一系列伦理挑战,对学习成果、教学方法和评估产生了重大影响。该研究基于香港一所研究型大学学生和教师的经验和观点,采用了2025年初对58名本科生和研究生以及12名教师进行的定性访谈数据。通过政策轨迹的概念(Ball, 1993; Ball et al., 2012),该研究分析了人工智能政策(及其缺席)如何被框架、解释、制定和抵制的物质背景和话语结构之间的相互联系。调查结果揭示了对学术诚信、公平、公平、隐私和数据安全的普遍担忧,特别是在处理模棱两可的政策、不平衡的执行策略、避免检测的漏洞、获取最先进工具的差距以及过度依赖GenAI工具造成的认知和其他发展影响方面。政策中的制度模糊性支持了实验和进步的表象,但却有可能导致教师和学生的个人失败。为大学领导和政策制定者、教学发展中心、教师个人和项目协调员提供的一些可操作的见解包括:更清晰的信息传递、在学生和教师持续参与的情况下制定适应性政策和指导方针的必要性、工具箱、案例研究和其他资源的数字图书馆的可用性、建立早期“失败经验”、让学生接触真实世界的应用和遭遇,以培养对GenAI局限性的认识。最终,政策反应需要对环境和实际情况都敏感,需要实地实验和教师的关心。
{"title":"Trajectories of AI policy in higher education: Interpretations, discourses, and enactments of students and teachers","authors":"Jack Tsao","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100496","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100496","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in higher education has introduced a spectrum of ethical challenges, significantly impacting learning outcomes, pedagogies, and assessments. Based on the experiences and perspectives of students and teachers at a research-intensive university in Hong Kong, the study draws on qualitative interview data with 58 undergraduate and graduate students and 12 teachers conducted in early 2025. Through the concept of policy trajectories (Ball, 1993; Ball et al., 2012), the research analyses the interconnections between material contexts and discursive constructions in how AI policies (and their absence) are framed, interpreted, enacted, and resisted. The findings reveal general concerns about academic integrity, fairness, equity, privacy, and data security, including specifically the invisible labour in dealing with ambiguous policies, uneven enforcement strategies, loopholes to avoid detection, disparities in access to state-of-the-art tools, and the cognitive and other developmental impacts due to overreliance on GenAI tools. Institutional ambiguity in policy supported experimentation and the appearance of progress, but risked individualising failure on teachers and students. Some actionable insights for university leaders and policymakers, teaching development centres, and individual teachers and programme coordinators include clearer messaging, the need for adaptive policies and guidelines with ongoing student and teacher participation, availability of digital libraries of toolkits, case studies and other resources, building in early “failure experiences”, and exposing students to authentic real-world applications and encounters to cultivate awareness on the limitations of GenAI. Ultimately, policy responses need to be both contextually and pragmatically sensitive, requiring on-the-ground experimentation and care by teachers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100496"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145568745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Assessing students’ DRIVE: A framework to evaluate learning through interactions with generative AI 评估学生的动力:通过与生成式人工智能的互动来评估学习的框架
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-13 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100497
Manuel Oliveira, Carlos Zednik, Gunter Bombaerts, Bert Sadowski, Rianne Conijn
As generative AI (GenAI) transforms how students learn and work, higher education must rethink its assessment strategies. This paper introduces a conceptual framework, DRIVE, and a taxonomy to help educators evaluate student learning based on their interactions with GenAI chatbots. Although existing research maps student-GenAI interactions to writing outcomes, practice-oriented tools for assessing evidence of domain-specific learning beyond general AI literacy skills or general writing skills remain underexplored. We propose that GenAI interactions can serve as a valid indicator of learning by revealing how students steer the interaction (Directive Reasoning Interaction) and articulate acquired knowledge into the dialogue with AI (Visible Expertise). We conducted a multi-methods analysis of GenAI interaction annotations (n = 1450) from graded essays (n = 70) in STEM writing-intensive courses. A strong positive correlation was found between the quality GenAI interactions and final essay scores, validating the feasibility of this assessment approach. Furthermore, our taxonomy revealed distinct GenAI interaction profiles: High essay scores were connected to a ”targeted improvement partnership” focused on text refinement, whereas high interaction scores were linked to a ”collaborative intellectual partnership” centered on idea development. In contrast, below-average scores were associated with ”basic information retrieval” or ”passive task delegation” profiles. These findings demonstrate how the assessment method (output vs. process focus) may shape students’ GenAI usage. Traditional assessment can reinforce text optimization, while process-focused evaluation may reward an exploratory partnership with AI. The DRIVE framework and the taxonomy offer educators and researchers a practical tool to design assessments that capture learning in AI-integrated classrooms.
随着生成式人工智能(GenAI)改变学生的学习和工作方式,高等教育必须重新思考其评估策略。本文介绍了一个概念框架,DRIVE和一个分类法,以帮助教育工作者根据他们与GenAI聊天机器人的互动来评估学生的学习。尽管现有的研究将学生与基因人工智能的互动映射到写作结果,但除了一般的人工智能读写技能或一般的写作技能之外,用于评估特定领域学习证据的实践导向工具仍未得到充分探索。我们建议,通过揭示学生如何引导互动(指令推理互动)并将获得的知识表达到与AI的对话(可见专业知识)中,GenAI互动可以作为学习的有效指标。我们对STEM写作强化课程中评分论文(n = 70)中的GenAI交互注释(n = 1450)进行了多方法分析。在GenAI交互的质量和最终论文分数之间发现了强烈的正相关,验证了这种评估方法的可行性。此外,我们的分类揭示了不同的GenAI互动特征:高作文分数与专注于文本精炼的“目标改进伙伴关系”有关,而高互动分数与专注于想法发展的“协作智力伙伴关系”有关。相比之下,低于平均水平的分数与“基本信息检索”或“被动任务委派”相关。这些发现证明了评估方法(输出与过程焦点)如何影响学生对GenAI的使用。传统的评估可以加强文本优化,而以过程为中心的评估可能会奖励与人工智能的探索性合作伙伴关系。DRIVE框架和分类为教育工作者和研究人员提供了一个实用的工具来设计评估,以捕捉人工智能集成教室中的学习情况。
{"title":"Assessing students’ DRIVE: A framework to evaluate learning through interactions with generative AI","authors":"Manuel Oliveira,&nbsp;Carlos Zednik,&nbsp;Gunter Bombaerts,&nbsp;Bert Sadowski,&nbsp;Rianne Conijn","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100497","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100497","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As generative AI (GenAI) transforms how students learn and work, higher education must rethink its assessment strategies. This paper introduces a conceptual framework, DRIVE, and a taxonomy to help educators evaluate student learning based on their interactions with GenAI chatbots. Although existing research maps student-GenAI interactions to writing outcomes, practice-oriented tools for assessing evidence of domain-specific learning beyond general AI literacy skills or general writing skills remain underexplored. We propose that GenAI interactions can serve as a valid indicator of learning by revealing how students steer the interaction (Directive Reasoning Interaction) and articulate acquired knowledge into the dialogue with AI (Visible Expertise). We conducted a multi-methods analysis of GenAI interaction annotations (<em>n</em> = 1450) from graded essays (<em>n</em> = 70) in STEM writing-intensive courses. A strong positive correlation was found between the quality GenAI interactions and final essay scores, validating the feasibility of this assessment approach. Furthermore, our taxonomy revealed distinct GenAI interaction profiles: High essay scores were connected to a ”targeted improvement partnership” focused on text refinement, whereas high interaction scores were linked to a ”collaborative intellectual partnership” centered on idea development. In contrast, below-average scores were associated with ”basic information retrieval” or ”passive task delegation” profiles. These findings demonstrate how the assessment method (output vs. process focus) may shape students’ GenAI usage. Traditional assessment can reinforce text optimization, while process-focused evaluation may reward an exploratory partnership with AI. The DRIVE framework and the taxonomy offer educators and researchers a practical tool to design assessments that capture learning in AI-integrated classrooms.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100497"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145519443","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Digital equity and computational thinking privilege: The case of first-year engineering and computing students' attitudes towards artificial intelligence 数字公平与计算思维特权:一年级工程与计算机专业学生对人工智能的态度
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100495
Noemi V. Mendoza Diaz , So Yoon Yoon , Nancy Gertrudiz Salvador
Attitudes can constitute barriers to engineering, computing, and artificial intelligence (AI) enculturation, contributing to and resulting from digital inequity. Building upon research on computational thinking privilege, we explored first-year students' (a) perceived future impact of AI on their career prospects and (b) backgrounds (e.g., gender, underrepresented minority (URM) status, and First-Generation status) associated with their attitudes toward AI, computational thinking, and course performance. Computational thinking was measured using our newly validated Engineering Computational Thinking Diagnostic (ECTD), while course performance was assessed based on final grades in an introductory computing course at a Southwestern institution—the first coding experience for many students. For the fall 2021 participant cohort of 163 first-year engineering and computing students, 40.9 % expressed positive attitudes toward AI in their career prospects, with 48.9 % of them having prior computer science course experience. Regarding their backgrounds, the number of CS courses taken before college significantly correlated with their attitudes toward AI, ECTD scores, and course grades—irrespective of gender, URM status, residence, First-Generation, or First-Time-in-College status. These findings support the notion that computational thinking privilege, shaped by prior exposure and access to resources, contributes to digital inequity and influences attitudes. Specifically, students' cognitive attitudes toward AI have the potential to shape AI literacy and education, potentially perpetuating inequities in an increasingly AI-driven world.
态度可能构成工程、计算和人工智能(AI)文化适应的障碍,助长和导致数字不平等。基于对计算思维特权的研究,我们探讨了一年级学生(a)对人工智能对其职业前景的未来影响的感知,以及(b)与他们对人工智能、计算思维和课程表现的态度相关的背景(如性别、未被充分代表的少数族裔(URM)地位和第一代地位)。计算思维是用我们最新验证的工程计算思维诊断(ECTD)来衡量的,而课程表现是根据西南大学一门计算机入门课程的最终成绩来评估的——这是许多学生的第一次编程经历。在2021年秋季的163名工程和计算机专业的一年级学生中,40.9%的人对人工智能在他们的职业前景中持积极态度,其中48.9%的人之前有过计算机科学课程的经验。就他们的背景而言,大学前学习的计算机科学课程的数量与他们对人工智能的态度、ECTD分数和课程成绩显著相关,而不考虑性别、URM状态、居住地、第一代或第一次进入大学的状态。这些发现支持这样一种观点,即计算思维特权是由先前的接触和资源获取所形成的,它导致了数字不平等并影响了人们的态度。具体来说,学生对人工智能的认知态度有可能影响人工智能素养和教育,在一个日益由人工智能驱动的世界里,这种不平等可能会持续下去。
{"title":"Digital equity and computational thinking privilege: The case of first-year engineering and computing students' attitudes towards artificial intelligence","authors":"Noemi V. Mendoza Diaz ,&nbsp;So Yoon Yoon ,&nbsp;Nancy Gertrudiz Salvador","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100495","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100495","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Attitudes can constitute barriers to engineering, computing, and artificial intelligence (AI) enculturation, contributing to and resulting from digital inequity. Building upon research on computational thinking privilege, we explored first-year students' (a) perceived future impact of AI on their career prospects and (b) backgrounds (e.g., gender, underrepresented minority (URM) status, and First-Generation status) associated with their attitudes toward AI, computational thinking, and course performance. Computational thinking was measured using our newly validated Engineering Computational Thinking Diagnostic (ECTD), while course performance was assessed based on final grades in an introductory computing course at a Southwestern institution—the first coding experience for many students. For the fall 2021 participant cohort of 163 first-year engineering and computing students, 40.9 % expressed positive attitudes toward AI in their career prospects, with 48.9 % of them having prior computer science course experience. Regarding their backgrounds, the number of CS courses taken before college significantly correlated with their attitudes toward AI, ECTD scores, and course grades—irrespective of gender, URM status, residence, First-Generation, or First-Time-in-College status. These findings support the notion that computational thinking privilege, shaped by prior exposure and access to resources, contributes to digital inequity and influences attitudes. Specifically, students' cognitive attitudes toward AI have the potential to shape AI literacy and education, potentially perpetuating inequities in an increasingly AI-driven world.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100495"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145568752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Conceptualizing AI literacies for children and youth: A systematic review on the design of AI literacy educational programs 儿童和青少年人工智能素养的概念化:人工智能素养教育项目设计的系统回顾
Q1 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2025-10-30 DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100491
Osnat Atias, Areej Mawasi
The growing presence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in society increases the exposure of children and youth to these technologies. In response, recent research introduced educational programs that foster AI knowledge and competencies, collectively comprising AI literacy. This study presents a systematic review of 23 articles published up to 2023 describing AI literacy programs for children and youth. We examined: (1) motivations for teaching AI literacy, (2) conceptualizations of AI literacy that informed program design, and (3) learning theories and pedagogical methods employed. The analysis identified five motivational themes: workforce, informed users, purposeful creators, advocacy, and social good. Seventeen AI literacy frameworks and conceptual models were identified and grouped into four themes: competency-based, computational, sociotechnical, and practice-based. Application of a three-dimensional model of literacy (operational, sociocultural, and critical), shows that the operational dimension predominates in both frameworks and program designs, the sociocultural dimension is less accentuated, and the critical dimension is least evident. Cognitive constructivism emerged as the dominant learning theory guiding program design, often supported by hands-on activities and project-based learning methods. This systematic review advances understanding of the conceptual drivers shaping AI literacy programs for children and youth. The findings highlight the need for stronger conceptualizations of sociocultural and critical AI literacies and for their more balanced integration into educational programs. Addressing these gaps would better support broad motivations for teaching AI to children and youth, such as fostering social and ethical understanding and agency, and guide future research towards more comprehensive and critically informed frameworks.
人工智能(AI)在社会中日益增长的存在增加了儿童和青少年对这些技术的接触。作为回应,最近的研究引入了培养人工智能知识和能力的教育项目,这些知识和能力共同构成了人工智能素养。本研究对截至2023年发表的23篇描述儿童和青少年人工智能扫盲计划的文章进行了系统回顾。我们研究了:(1)教授人工智能素养的动机,(2)为课程设计提供信息的人工智能素养概念,以及(3)所采用的学习理论和教学方法。分析确定了五个激励主题:劳动力、知情用户、有目的的创造者、倡导和社会公益。确定了17个人工智能素养框架和概念模型,并将其分为四个主题:基于能力、计算、社会技术和基于实践。三维识字模型(操作性、社会文化和批判性)的应用表明,在框架和计划设计中,操作性维度占主导地位,社会文化维度不那么突出,批判性维度最不明显。认知建构主义成为指导程序设计的主导学习理论,经常得到实践活动和基于项目的学习方法的支持。这一系统综述促进了对儿童和青少年人工智能扫盲计划形成的概念驱动因素的理解。研究结果强调,需要加强对社会文化和批判性人工智能素养的概念化,并将其更平衡地融入教育计划。解决这些差距将更好地支持向儿童和青少年教授人工智能的广泛动机,例如促进社会和伦理理解和能动性,并指导未来的研究朝着更全面和批判性知情的框架发展。
{"title":"Conceptualizing AI literacies for children and youth: A systematic review on the design of AI literacy educational programs","authors":"Osnat Atias,&nbsp;Areej Mawasi","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100491","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100491","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The growing presence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in society increases the exposure of children and youth to these technologies. In response, recent research introduced educational programs that foster AI knowledge and competencies, collectively comprising AI literacy. This study presents a systematic review of 23 articles published up to 2023 describing AI literacy programs for children and youth. We examined: (1) motivations for teaching AI literacy, (2) conceptualizations of AI literacy that informed program design, and (3) learning theories and pedagogical methods employed. The analysis identified five motivational themes: workforce, informed users, purposeful creators, advocacy, and social good. Seventeen AI literacy frameworks and conceptual models were identified and grouped into four themes: competency-based, computational, sociotechnical, and practice-based. Application of a three-dimensional model of literacy (operational, sociocultural, and critical), shows that the operational dimension predominates in both frameworks and program designs, the sociocultural dimension is less accentuated, and the critical dimension is least evident. Cognitive constructivism emerged as the dominant learning theory guiding program design, often supported by hands-on activities and project-based learning methods. This systematic review advances understanding of the conceptual drivers shaping AI literacy programs for children and youth. The findings highlight the need for stronger conceptualizations of sociocultural and critical AI literacies and for their more balanced integration into educational programs. Addressing these gaps would better support broad motivations for teaching AI to children and youth, such as fostering social and ethical understanding and agency, and guide future research towards more comprehensive and critically informed frameworks.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100491"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145465709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1