AI Literacy and Teacher Education

Computers and Education Open 6 (2024) 100169
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers and Education Open

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/computers-and-education-open
In search of artificial intelligence (AI) literacy in teacher education: A

scoping review
Katarina Sperling a, *, Carl-Johan Stenberg a, Cormac McGrath b, Anna Åkerfeldt c,
Fredrik Heintz d, Linnéa Stenliden a
a
Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Norrköping 601 74, Sweden
b
Department of Education, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
c
Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
d
Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Artificial intelligence (AI) literacy has recently emerged on the educational agenda raising expectations on
AI education teachers’ and teacher educators’ professional knowledge. This scoping review examines how the scientific
Professional development literature conceptualises AI literacy in relation to teachers’ different forms of professional knowledge relevant for
Teacher training
Teacher Education (TE). The search strategy included papers and proceedings from 2000 to 2023 related to AI
Aristoteles
AI readiness
literacy and TE as well as the intersection of AI and teaching. Thirty-four papers were included in the analysis.
Pre-service teachers The Aristotelian concepts episteme (theoretical-scientific knowledge), techne (practical-productive knowledge),
and phronesis (professional judgement) were used as a lens to capture implicit and explicit dimensions of
teachers’ professional knowledge. Results indicate that AI literacy is a globally emerging research topic in ed
ucation but almost absent in the context of TE. The literature covers many different topics and draws on different
methodological approaches. Computer science and exploratory teaching approaches influence the type of
epistemic, practical, and ethical knowledge. Currently, teachers’ professional knowledge is not broadly
addressed or captured in the research. Questions of ethics are predominantly addressed as a matter of under
standing technical configurations of data-driven AI technologies. Teachers’ practical knowledge tends to trans
late into the adoption of digital resources for teaching about AI or the integration of AI EdTech into teaching. By
identifying several research gaps, particularly concerning teachers’ practical and ethical knowledge, this paper
adds to a more comprehensive understanding of AI literacy in teaching and can contribute to a more well-
informed AI literacy education in TE as well as laying the ground for future research related to teachers’ pro
fessional knowledge.
Introduction to enhance the knowledge of what AI is and its societal consequences, as

well as by individuals lacking backgrounds in computer science, math
Member states should invest in the level of literacy on AI with the general ematics, or AI engineering. This imperative has become particularly
public through robust awareness raising, training, and education efforts, directed toward compulsory education, putting teachers’ professional
including (in particular) in schools. This should not be limited to education on knowledge at the centre of the AI literacy discourse. In parallel, the
the workings of AI, but also its potential impact – positive and negative – on integration of AI based educational technologies into classrooms and
human rights. (Council of Europe, Commissioner for Human Rights, 2019: universities raises pedagogical and ethical concerns, necessitating an
14) understanding of how AI operates in educational contexts, both in the
AI literacy has recently emerged in a landscape rich with a variety of ory and practice [3–5].
literacies [1,2], necessitated by the pervasive presence of AI in AI literacy is already being introduced in various national curricula
contemporary society. As exemplified by the introductory quote from [6–11], but initiatives to incorporate it into Teacher Education (TE)
the Council of Europe, AI literacy is driven by a democratic imperative programmes remain scarce [12]. Given the growing presence of AI in the
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: katarina.sperling@liu.se (K. Sperling).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100169
Received 18 December 2023; Received in revised form 9 March 2024; Accepted 11 March 2024
Available online 15 March 2024
2666-5573/© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
K. Sperling et al. Computers and Education Open 6 (2024) 100169
education sector, TE could play a crucial role in preparing both necessary in relation to particular technological constructs, such as
pre-service and in-service teachers with different forms of professional digital literacy [32,33], computational literacy [34], critical digital literacies
knowledge of how to engage reflectively with AI in their profession. [1], media literacy [35,36], information literacy [37,2] data literacy [38,
Several literature reviews and syntheses have explored AI literacy in 39], visual and visualisation literacy [40–42], and algorithm literacy [43].
various domains, such as K-12 education [13,14], higher education [15, Although there is no universally accepted definition of AI literacy, a
16], and the workplace [17], as well as with respects to general AI lit frequently recurring definition within and outside of the scientific
eracy [18–20]. However, to the best of our knowledge, there exists no literature has been proposed by Long and Magerko [18], p.2]: “a set of
comprehensive literature review specifically dedicated to AI literacy in competencies that enables individuals to critically evaluate AI technologies;
the context of TE. This study is a contribution to the emerging AI1 lit communicate and collaborate effectively with AI; and use AI as a tool online,
eracy field. By focusing on teachers’ professional knowledge, the paper at home, and in the workplace.” This definition closely relates to the term
adds to a more comprehensive understanding of AI literacy in teaching AI readiness, which is often used to describe the understanding and
practices which could inform teacher educators and teachers education implementation of AI-based technologies in education and beyond [44,
policy at large as well as lay the ground for future research related to 45].
teachers and TE. Accordingly, the aim is to examine how existing sci AI literacy initiatives, particularly in primary and secondary educa
entific literature conceptualises AI literacy in relation to teachers’ tion, have significantly increased in number over the past five years (e.g.
different forms of professional knowledge relevant for TE. We address [10,46,47]). In some cases, AI literacy has been conceptualised as an
this through the following research questions: extension of data literacy or digital literacy[20,48,49]. This view can be
found in various national AI curricula for K-12 education, which pre
1. What is the current scope and nature of the scientific literature on AI dominantly take on a technological perspective by covering AI tech
literacy relevant for TE? nologies and applications, including techniques like machine learning,
2. How are teachers’ different forms of professional knowledge re and technologies such as natural language processing [50]. However, it
flected in the literature? is crucial to recognize that AI differs from many other digital technol
ogies in that it often operates autonomously and can adapt according to
To address the second research question related to teachers’ pro the context [51]. As a result, teaching what AI is and does remains
fessional knowledge, we apply the Aristotelian tripartite division of incomplete unless accompanied by explanations addressing crucial is
knowledge: episteme (theoretical-scientific knowledge), techne (prac sues such as AI ethics, data biases, surveillance, and the potential impact
tical-productive knowledge), and phronesis (political-ethical knowledge on employment and sustainable development [52]. In an education
or practical wisdom) as an analytic lens. This terminology, rooted in context, AI literacy may encompass being aware of how data are
ancient philosophy has profoundly influenced the understanding of collected and used by private EdTech companies or on what pedagogical
teachers’ professional knowledge in higher education [21] and is re foundations AI-based technologies operate and deliver teaching [4], and
flected in qualification frameworks outlined in European governing to teach and act accordingly. To better examine how AI literacy is re
documents (e.g., FQ-EHEA22). While, in practice, teachers’ professional flected in relation to teachers’ different forms of professional knowledge
knowledge cannot be fully disentangled or separated, the Aristotelian relevant for TE, we turned to Aristotle’s classical division of knowledge:
terminology, as elaborated in contemporary writing by e.g., Gustavsson episteme (theoretical-scientific knowledge), techne (practical-productive
[22] and Keeling [23], has been deemed valuable in further under knowledge), and phronesis (political-ethical knowledge, or professional
standing of AI literacy related to teachers’ work. The distinctions be judgement) as proposed by contemporary scholars in the field of edu
tween different forms of professional knowledge allows us to be more cation [22,53,54]. This holistic approach has either directly or indirectly
specific in relation to how AI literacy can relate to the multifaceted di influenced the foundational framework defining knowledge in TE across
mensions of the teaching profession and TE, while uncovering blind several Nordic countries, as well as the qualification frameworks out
spots and opportunities for future research gaps. The next section of this lined in European governing documents [55,23], which also motivates
paper further points to the relevance of this terminology by examining its relevance in this study. Although we acknowledge that this division
the developmental trajectory of the literacy concept, and how it relates of knowledge is specific whereas teacher education is country and
to teachers’ professional knowledge as conceptualized in this article. context dependent, we find that the different concepts are open for
interpretation and broad enough to be relevant in many different
A plethora of literacies and teachers’ professional knowledge contexts.
For a long time, the term literacy has been linked to written text and Episteme, techne and phronesis
the ability to comprehend, employ, and express oneself through written
language forms that are either mandated by society or valued by in Teaching practice is, to a large degree, directed towards the interests
dividuals [24,25]. However, in recent decades the expansion of digital of pupils and students, whether in primary, secondary or in higher ed
technologies has affected and changed assumptions about literacy in ucation, by guiding them toward what is educationally beneficial [54].
society [26–31]. This means literacy has become a flexible concept, This requires a holistic set of professional components that could be
aligned with both socio- and technical practices across time, place, and encapsuled by Aristotle’s division of knowledge into episteme, techne,
space [28,2]. Hence, the concept inherently constitutes a constantly and phronesis.
broadening range of capabilities associated with ICT, media and edu Episteme pertains to knowledge of a universal and generalisable na
cation for sustainable development, and global citizenship. Accordingly, ture, meaning that something holds true in a specific manner, irre
the emergence of AI literacy can be aligned with the advent of other spective of the context, and can be conveyed through language [27].
literacies aimed at enhancing critical awareness and “new” competences Thus, episteme can be understood as representing a form of knowledge
that pertains to factual and enduring information, such as Pythagoras’
theorem or the definitive conclusion of World War II.
1 Techne encompasses practical skills acquired through teaching ex
For the purpose of this study, we define AI as “machine-based systems that
can, given a set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommenda periences in different subjects, such as structuring a history lecture,
tions, or decisions that influence real or virtual environments” ([51], p. 16). motivating students who have mathematics anxiety, designing geogra
2
“The Bologna Framework”: Framework of Qualifications for the European phy courses or crafting clear instructions for writing assignments [54].
Higher Education Area (FQ – EHEA) was adopted by the Bologna-Minister These skills can also manifest as embodied knowledge in which the hand
meeting in Bergen 2005. See appendix for the full text (Bologna Process, 2005) or body inherently know how to perform actions, such as pipetting in the
2
Fig. 1. Study selection.
laboratory or typing on a keyboard [56,57]. Techne has also been con did not have a specific question formulated from the outset, we decided
ceptualised as “tacit knowledge” [58,59], thus signifying a practical not to conduct a systematic review [64]. Instead, our goal was to identify
knowledge that is challenging to articulate through words. While techne key characteristics or factors related to a concept, which is why the
has been recognized as a pivotal element in teaching, the everyday life of scoping review methodology was deemed appropriate [65].
teaching and learning is relational and therefore often unpredictable and Initially, our first search focused on TE only. However, that yielded
uncertain. A singular focus on techne within TE carries the risk of only a handful of peer-reviewed papers, which proved inadequate for
oversimplifying teaching practice into a mere collection of techniques our study. Therefore, we expanded our inclusion criteria to encompass
and methods [27]. Therefore, teachers and teacher educators also need studies that focused on K-12 teachers, pre-service teachers, or teacher
the ability to make thoughtful decisions when it comes to applying both educators in the context of AI literacy and AI education. We followed the
knowledge (episteme) and technical skills (techne) in their teaching. In five-stage framework for a scoping review proposed by Arksey and
keeping with Aristotle, this form of knowledge has been identified as O’Malley [65], which involves: 1. Identifying the research question, 2.
phronesis. Identifying relevant studies, 3. Selecting studies, 4. Charting data, and 5.
Developing phronesis means increasing the ability to work with the Collating, summarizing, and reporting results. This systematic approach
unknown and unpredictable [60]. Phronesis, as a form of professional allowed us to include papers stemming from various research designs
discernment, differs from techne in that it is context-specific and based concerning the given topic, and at the same time pinpoint existing
on experience. This type of knowledge cannot solely rely on specific research gaps [66].
theoretical and practical rules; instead, it must adapt to the unique na
ture of each situation [61]. According to Kinsella & Pitman [62], p.2] Identifying the research questions
phronesis involves deliberation that is based on values, concerned with
practical judgement and informed by reflection. This essentially positions To gain a scientifically underpinned understanding of the emergence
phronesis as a moral and ethical capacity to act and the ability to predict of AI literacy in research and identify relevant research questions, we
[63]. sought guidance from two search engine experts (university librarians)
With reference to the above, in this study we understand teachers’ AI and through multiple consultations with these experts, we devised an
literacy as encompassing various dimensions of theoretical and practical effective strategy for capturing literature that pertains to teachers’
knowledge, and where becoming a teacher extends beyond possessing competencies in the context of AI literacy, specifically relevant to TE. In
scientific expertise (episteme) in the technical configuration and appli parallel with formulating specific research questions, we explored
cation of AI. More importantly the teaching profession centres on the different search strategies and key words. Given that AI literacy is
ability to pedagogically guide (techne) subject-specific knowledge to prevalent within the field of computer science and a global phenome
ward students, all while navigating the myriad challenges inherent in non, we chose to include both peer-reviewed scholarly articles and
the teaching and learning process. Successful navigation depends on conference papers written in English.
upholding ethical principles and demonstrating discernment (phronesis)
towards the unknown in various educational situations, whether when Identifying relevant studies
teaching about or with AI. In practice, these forms of knowledge cannot
be fully disentangled or separated. We conducted two separate searches on 10 March 2023, using the
following search query: (‟AI literacy” OR ‟AI read*”) AND (education
Method OR learning) + (AI OR ‟artificial intelligence”) AND ‟teacher education”
in five highly regarded databases: Scopus, Web of Science, ACM, IEEE
To answer our research questions, a scoping review was undertaken Xplore, and ERIC. Search limitations were applied to search for the titles,
to map out the nature of the scientific, peer reviewed literature related to abstracts, and keywords. An initial search for literature on AI literacy in
AI literacy in TE. Considering the novelty of our research topic (AI lit education and AI in teacher education between 2000 and 2023 in the
eracy in Teacher Education) and the explorative approach wherein we five major databases resulted in 650 records (Fig. 1). As the field of AI
3
Table 1 author was consulted to facilitate resolution.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Include Exclude Collating, summarising, and reporting results
Teaching about AI in school or Teaching about AI outside of a school context
teacher training or TE Teaching about AI outside of teacher training or In the final stage, the 34 papers underwent a comprehensive analysis
AI literacy in the context of TE that encompassed both quantitative and qualitative descriptive analysis
education AI literacy with no focus on education and qualitative examination. The quantitative analysis shed light on the
English AI as a means to assess teachers scope, characteristics, methods, and distribution of the included papers
2000-August 2023 Grey literature
All languages apart from English
and grouped the topics into the main themes based on their aim and
Focus solely on developing AI curriculum, research questions. The qualitative analysis was conducted in two
without the involvement of teachers stages. In the first stage, existing themes were identified independently
Teachers’ digital competencies not related to AI by the first and second authors, in a process that can be described as
AI as a technology used in TE
abductive [68], using the Aristotelian concept episteme, techne and
Literature reviews
phronesis as an analytic lens to explore how teachers’ and teacher edu
cators’ forms of knowledge is conveyed. In the second stage, which
involved two rounds of readings, the authors validated the analytical
coding process, leading to the classification of explicit (clearly articu
literacy is developing rapidly and has gained significant scholarly lated) and implicit (underlying, assumed) dimensions of episteme,
attention only in the past year, a supplementary search with the same techne, and phronesis. For instance, explicit techne could involve spe
search query and in the same databases as in on March 10th was carried cific recommendations on how to teach AI, whereas implicit techne
out on 3 August 2023, to identify late and deferred publications. After could be found in the questions asked in surveys or interviews. Conse
applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and removing those quently, in studies that did not explicitly centre on a specific dimension,
already included in the original search, this resulted in an additional 8 we were at times able to uncover the diverse forms of knowledge
records. implicitly by delving further into the findings or methodological ap
proaches. The analytical work and writing process were highly iterative
Study selection and collaborative, involving all authors. Through extensive discussions
that included revisiting the papers, the inductive and deductive analysis,
All search records from the first search (n = 650) were imported into the interpretation of the analytical as well as deliberations on borderline
reference management software (Zotero). In this process, we eliminated cases, we collectively arrived at a comprehensive understanding of how
duplicates (n = 113) and records that did not fall into the categories of AI literacy is being conceptualised in the context of TE in the selected
journal papers or conference proceedings (n = 3). We then conducted a scientific literature.
two-stage screening process to identify publications that met our in
clusion and exclusion criteria (Table 1). To ensure consensus on the Limitations
inclusion and exclusion of papers, we randomly selected 40 papers from
the library for screening by a minimum of the first author and any of the Whilst this scoping review was undertaken as rigorously as possible,
other authors (either author 2, author 3, author 4, author 5 or author 6). it is limited by its search strategy. More than 500 scientific records were
Next, the first author screened the abstracts of all remaining records screened in five research databases that are large and international in
(534) in accordance with the stated inclusion and exclusion criteria and scope. However, grey literature such as theses, posters and book chap
excluded n = 487 papers, for example as articles discussing AI literacy ters were not included in the review, and articles not published in En
outside of the primary and secondary school or teacher education glish were excluded. This approach may have resulted in the omission of
context. This initial screening aimed for sensitivity rather than speci valuable insights, in particular when it comes to papers published in
ficity, prioritizing the inclusion of papers rather than their exclusion. At other languages. Nevertheless, our primary focus in this paper was to
this stage, no papers were excluded based on methodology. develop a comprehensive understanding of AI literacy pertaining to TE
Following the first screening, we identified a total of 47 titles for a based on literature that is grounded in methodological and theoretical
second-stage screening by both the first author and the second author rigor. Moreover, our exploration went beyond the boundaries of our
and additionally either author 3, 4 or author 5. During this phase, we initial search strategy to fully grasp the contemporary discourse on AI
decided to exclude literature reviews, refined our research question literacy in the field of education. We are also aware of the limitations of
formulation and discussed relevant coding strategies. Based on this our chosen analytical lens, which enabled us to capture certain aspects
second screening, we selected 34 articles for further analysis in this of teachers’ knowledge but may have overlooked other facets presented
scoping review. in the papers.
Charting the data Results
The first and second author thoroughly reviewed all the articles to A total of 34 papers serve as the basis for our analysis. In response to
ensure a robust and unanimous interpretation. To extract relevant in our first research question, we describe the current nature and scope of
formation from the studies, a data charting table was created. This table AI literacy relevant to TE as stated in the literature. This section en
included not only bibliographic details but also information about the compasses background details, including publication year, country of
study, study type, theoretical frameworks employed, components origin, and research methods. It also elicits the predominant topics and
related to AI literacy within the study, publication type, and the primary how AI literacy is framed within the papers. Next, we address how
target audience. The first and second authors independently coded all 34 primary and secondary (K-12) teachers’ and teacher educators’ different
studies, and the remaining authors coded a selection of 10–15 papers forms of knowledge are reflected explicitly or implicitly in the literature,
each. All authors independently completed their respective entries in the adopting the Aristotelian tripartite division of knowledge – episteme,
table, and subsequently, these entries were compared and adjusted as techne and phronesis.
necessary to reach a consensus. This approach allowed us to achieve
robust validation in both descriptive and qualitative coding [67]. In
cases where there was a disagreement among any of the authors, a third
4
Research question 1: the scope and nature of AI literacy relevant to TE Appearance of AI literacy
The concept “AI literacy” is referenced in the majority of papers (n =
AI literacy has grown in interest within the scientific community in 23). However, ways to define, operationalize and measure AI literacy
the past two years,3 with a relatively even distribution between con varies widely, and just a limited few of the papers [88,20,75] elaborate
ference papers (n = 15) and journals (n = 19) (Fig. 2.) on what AI literacy is. Such definitions draw primarily on the conceptual
Proceedings primarily stem from conferences related to computer frameworks developed by Long and Magerko [18], Ng [48], and Luckin
science education, artificial intelligence, educational technology, and et al. [45]. Although these frameworks are tentative in their approach,
technology-enhanced learning (TEL). The most frequently featured and not explicitly designed for various teacher and student groups, they
journals include ‟Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence” (n = are also employed to chart teacher competencies and attitudes within
2), ‟Education and Information Technologies” (n = 2), ‟Sustainability” highly specific contexts [40,69].
(n = 2), ‟Künstliche Intelligenz” (n = 2), and the ‟British Journal of AI literacy is also often discussed in combination with other liter
Educational Technology” (n = 2). acies, such as media literacy and digital literacy [70] and data literacy
AI in the context of primary and secondary education is a subject of [81,20], and frequently used interchangeably with concepts such as AI
global interest, reflected in the geographical origins of the first author of readiness [45]; Wa [41], AI education [69,72], and AI thinking [12].
the included papers. Notably, researchers hail from various countries, Given the focus of this review, it is important to note that there was just
with the highest representation coming from Hongkong/China (n = 9) one study, an intervention study with 34 secondary school teachers in
and the United States (n = 7). Other countries with researchers Computer Science, conducted by Vazhail et al. in 2021, that explored AI
contributing to this discussion include Austria (n = 2), Slovenia (n = 2), literacy in TE.
the, Australia (n = 1), Belgium (n = 1), Brazil (n = 1), Canada (n = 1),
Finland (n = 1), Germany (n = 1), India (n = 1), Israel (n = 1), Malta (n =
1), South Africa (n = 1) and Sweden (n = 1), Taiwan (n = 1), Turkey (n = Research question 2: teachers’ different form of professional knowledge
1), United Kingdom (n = 1) as illustrated in Fig. 3. For more detailed
information about the origin country of all 34 papers, we refer to the While all studies include some dimensions of theoretical knowledge
Appendix. (episteme), skills (techne) and practical, professional judgement (phro
nesis) relevant to AI literacy, we found that these aspects emerge either
Topics explicitly or implicitly. This is illustrated on a general level in Fig. 4. To
The studies can be grouped into six main topics based on the aim and exemplify, studies that explicitly explored epistemic dimensions of AI
research questions: Curriculum development, AI literacy frameworks, literacy proposed a clear-cut framework about desirable AI knowledge
Teacher attitudes and (mis)conceptions, How to teach with and about AI, [18]. However, episteme could also be captured implicitly; for example,
Professional development and AI ethics (Table 2). in studies that we have referred to as AI knowledge but that were
Curriculum development-oriented studies (1) focus primarily on stu focusing on a different topic, such as professional development [46] or
dents’ AI literacy, rather than specifying the knowledge required by teachers’ attitudes [75]. The distinction between explicit and implicit
teachers and educators [69,71]. Studies emphasising AI literacy frame knowledge as per episteme, techne and phronesis is further exemplified
works (2) identify different aspects of AI that students as well as teachers in Tables 3–5. Since many studies cover more than one knowledge
should understand [18,73]. Eleven studies address teacher attitudes and dimension, either implicitly or explicitly, they may appear more than
(mis)conceptions (3) about AI. They aim at formulating strategies for once in Fig. 4. The asterisks preceding each article title indicate the
measuring AI literacy or apply existing frameworks to explore the number of knowledge dimensions in which an article appears.
different connections between various dimensions of AI literacy among
teachers, e.g., teachers’ willingness to embrace AI in education or their Theoretical knowledge: episteme
understanding of how AI works in theory and practice [79,74]. Studies Two-thirds of the papers (n = 23) either explicitly or implicitly
centring on How to teach with and about AI (4), e.g., Druga et al. [82] and mention what theoretical knowledge teachers should possess regarding
Wilton et al. [84], focus on the evaluation of AI EdTech. Studies within AI. For the most part, this knowledge appears in fragments, primarily in
this theme also concern the application of AI technologies in teaching implicit ways, as illustrated in Fig. 4.
practice [83,86]. Studies focusing on professional development (5) often
promote peer learning and co-design for fostering AI literacy[12,89]. Explicit episteme. The conceptual studies by Kandlhofer et al. [88], Long
There are also some studies addressing AI ethics (6) in relation to and Magerko [18], and Schüller [20], offer a comprehensive overview of
teachers’ knowledge [92,93]. Some of the studies[18,81] cover several AI literacy, and among these Kandlhofer et al. [88] focus specifically on
of the outlined topics. AI curricula content for primary and secondary (K-12) teachers. Here,
authors introduce a professional and standardised framework tailored
Methods and theoretical approaches for the training and certification of educators and students in the fields
Two-thirds of the papers (n = 22) are empirical, and the remaining of AI and robotics. Topics covered relate to the principles of AI,
one-third (n = 12) are conceptual in nature. Among the empirical arti including AI definitions, practical applications of AI in everyday life,
cles, eight (n = 8) employ a qualitative methodology, eight (n = 8) rely identification and recognition of AI systems, fundamental data struc
on quantitative approaches, and six (n = 6) adopt a mixed-methods tures, the basics of propositional logic, the theoretical as well as prac
approach. In terms of data collection methods within the empirical ar tical aspects of Python programming, principles of natural language
ticles, common methods include individual interviews and question processing, computer vision, and machine learning. The advanced
naires [71,12]. Some studies use focus group interviews [75], statistical modules, designed for teachers and students with prior knowledge in
methods [76], or a combination of these methodologies [81]. No computer science, mathematics, and physics, delve deeper into the
empirical studies are grounded in classroom observations. The concep fundamental mathematical concepts that underpin AI. Notably, in this
tual papers explore definitions of AI literacy and highlights imple framework, robotics and AI are treated as separate topics [88].
mentation frameworks [20,73], or extend AI literacy into specific Long and Magerko’s conference paper titled ‘What is AI literacy?’
pedagogies [83,85] or AI topics related to ethics [92]. (2020) integrates robotics as one of 17 competencies covering a broad
range of topics, including recognizing existing definitions of AI and in
telligence, distinguishing between general and narrow AI, grasping the
3
Our search does not include papers published later than 3 August 2023, fundamentals of machine learning, identifying AI strengths and weak
meaning that it does not cover the entire 2023. nesses, comprehending representations, decision-making processes,
5
Fig. 2. Number of conference papers and journal articles from 2019 until 3 August 2023.
Fig. 3. Geographic distribution.
various aspects of data literacy, insights into how the world is captured,
Table 2
measured and processed through AI, the programming of intelligent
Predominant topics reflected in the literature.
agents, along with considerations related to AI ethics. Their framework
No. Topics Studies Foci is, to a large extent, based on ‘grey literature’, encompassing materials
1 Curriculum [69–72],a (n Studies focusing on curriculum co- such as AI, machine learning, cognitive science, and robotics courses in
development = 4) development – primarily student AI the US.
literacy curricula. Similarly, Schüller [20] proposes a holistic framework in which data
2 AI literacy [14,18,20,41, Articles mapping different aspects
frameworks 45,73] (n = 6) of AI literacy frameworks.
literacy and AI literacy are merged. The framework targets teachers and
3 Teacher attitudes Studies developing quantitative students, as well as policymakers and the general public, and expands on
and (mis) ][6,72, frameworks for measuring the German Data Literacy Framework which in turn focuses on data
conceptions 74–81] (n = conceptions about AI, AI literacy analysis, statistics, and mathematical concepts relevant to AI, along with
11) and willingness to adopt AI in
computer programming. Here, individuals should understand how data
education.
4 How to teach with [82–86] (n = Studies that explore the adoption of is generated, possess the ability to manipulate data based on statistical
and about AI 5) AI applications and digital principles, and have the capacity to create and use AI algorithms in
resources for teaching about AI in decision-making processes. The comprehension of AI’s technological
the classroom. configurations is also explicitly stated in various intervention studies,
5 Professional [12,87–91] (n Mapping ways to enhance teacher
development = 6) AI literacy through professional
where teachers engaged in training activities were exposed to funda
development programmes. mental concepts and procedures related to machine learning (e.g., [81,
6 AI Ethics [92,93] (n = Studies exploring ethical concerns 12]).
2) and considerations in relation to AI Particular attention is directed toward ethics as a form of epistemic
in education.
knowledge, whether explicitly [41,70,92–94] or implicitly [48,75].
6
Fig. 4. The reported implicit and explicit knowledge dimensions (episteme, techne and phronesis) in the included literature.
Table 3 Table 5
Example of explicit and implicit episteme. Example of explicit and implicit phronesis.
Form of Episteme Form of Phronesis
knowledge knowledge
Appears in Explicit Implicit Appears in Explicit Implicit
the paper the paper
Example Mentions the theoretical Definitions of AI knowledge are Example Professional evaluations of Explorations of practical wisdom
concept of AI and the expressed in questionnaire; states AI; discussions on AI ethics through questionnaires; acritical
difference between AI, what students need to know in AI [81] focus on implementation (e.g., [75,
machine learning and deep curricula but not explicitly 80])
learning [71,20] teachers [79,90]
Here, ethics is conceptualised in relation to the technical configurations

of data-driven AI technologies, emphasising the risk of biases and
Table 4
Example of explicit and implicit techne.
discriminatory decisions. As a result, ethics are turned into facts that
teachers should know, rather than approached as a moral and adaptable
Form of Techne
way of thinking and acting in response to various unknown situations
knowledge
Appears in Explicit Implicit and contexts where AI is employed or adopted.
the paper In parallel with the epistemic focus on AI ethics, a notable number of
Example Describes the use of certain AI Evaluations of AI applications;
papers discuss the need for teachers to comprehend the principles un
applications to teach about or Meta-analyses of AI derpinning various AI EdTech to effectively integrate them into their
with AI[83,12] frameworks [82,73] teaching practices [41,45,81,84,91,95]. This knowledge is often
believed to enhance teachers’ willingness to adopt AI EdTech. Thus,
teachers need to understand the principles of where AI is making
7
decisions in the specific AI EdTech, where it offers guidance or infor Yetişensoy [85], and implicitly in e.g., Akgun and Greenhow [92] and
mation for human decision-making, and where it’s tasked with identi Luckin et al. [45]. Pretorius [83] underscores the significance of culti
fying and interpreting patterns to become “AI-ready” and reap the vating prompt engineering skills among students, drawing from her own
advantages of AI in educational settings. In contrast, Wilton et al.’s [96] experience as an educator applying ChatGPT in courses with pre-service
examination of the AI components within various AI technologies as a teachers. Similarly, Yetişensoy and Rapoport [85] advocate for the
means to improve the AI literacy of pre-service teachers showed that benefits of incorporating generative AI into social studies education,
many commercial applications do not provide sufficiently detailed in suggesting how this can be put into practice.
formation about the data collection methods employed by their AI tools, Nazaretsky and colleagues (2022) explore the role of trust in prac
making it difficult to identify how these technologies influence factors titioners’ acceptance of (or resistance to) AI EdTech, and conceptualise
such as bias, ethics, and explainability. AI literacy to “mitigate teachers’ biases” regarding automated grading
and to instil trust in AI EdTech as a technology that can alleviate
Implicit episteme. In the majority of the papers covering teachers’ pro teachers’ workload while resulting in a higher degree of reliability and
fessional development (e.g., [86,87,89]) and curriculum development fairness. The paper aims to address teachers “misconceptions related to
[70–72,90,91], teachers’ epistemic knowledge is reflected in much more human ‛super-powers’ and to expectations that AI-Graders’ recommen
implicit terms, often briefly referring back to existing curricula or dations should always be perfect” (p. 920). To provide teachers with a
frameworks that are not further explained. For instance, in Lee et al. deeper understanding of both the capabilities and constraints of human
[89], the primary focus was on investigating a professional development intelligence and AI EdTech, the authors developed, implemented, and
model, rather than examining the DAILy curriculum adopted in the evaluated a training programme revolving around a specific application
study. The DAILy curriculum4 was designed by MIT educators and en of Natural Language Processing (NLP) and AI for automating the grading
compasses teaching resources, exploratory teaching activities, and of constructed responses in biology. Authors conclude that teachers
computer-based exercises centred around AI concepts, ethical consid often exhibit a “strong confirmation bias” and hold “algorithm aversion”
erations in AI, creative expression using AI, and the relevance of AI to when arguing that automated assessment cannot capture “the big pic
the future. ture” or ‟read between the lines” as effectively as humans.
Epistemic knowledge also resides within the adopted methodological A couple of studies highlight, either explicitly [71] or implicitly [72],
approaches. To provide an illustrative example, the study by Antonenko how teachers have to transform and negotiate the content of a pre
and Abramowitz [79], which focuses on teachers (mis)conceptions, defined AI curriculum, to make the instruction more concrete and
depends on a specific understanding of what teachers ought to know. aligned with students’ experiences. In line with these recommendations,
The authors identify certain beliefs as accurate, such as the idea that ‟AI Henry et al. [70] propose an AI curriculum tailored for children aged
cannot operate independently of humans” and that ‟AI technology is 10–14 that was co-produced with teachers and presented as an
accessible to everyone”. Conversely, they classify other beliefs, such as analogue, role-playing game, inspired by the game “Guess Who?”.
the notions that ‟AI is too intricate for non-experts to grasp”, ‟AI lacks
creativity”, and ‟AI will replace human jobs”, as misconceptions. Implicit techne. Teachers’ practical knowledge related to AI literacy can
Teachers’ responses in relation to these statements are subsequently be found implicitly within the 15 design considerations outlined in the
regarded as indicators of their epistemic knowledge about AI. AI literacy framework by Long and Magerko [18]. These considerations
involve factors such as embedded interactions, collaborative experi
Practical knowledge: techne mentation with AI technology, aligning data with relevance to learners,
In comparison to episteme, techne – teachers’ practical knowledge – gradually unveiling information to prevent cognitive overload, and
is less addressed (n = 18) in the literature. exploring ways for individuals to programme and/or instruct AI agents.
Importantly, these considerations take into account factors like age,
Explicit techne. Out of the 18 papers, four directly focus on methods to prior experience, preconceptions, and the learners’ identities, values,
train teachers, enabling them to feel confident in teaching AI in their and backgrounds.
classrooms [12,87–89]. Lee and colleagues [89] report on their ongoing In many of the papers, teachers’ practical knowledge regarding AI
professional development programme, AI Book Club, which aimed to literacy implies the adoption of digital resources for teaching about AI or
equip teachers with epistemic knowledge about AI and foster an un the integration of AI EdTech into teaching, and the use of digital re
derstanding of ethical issues related to bias in AI. During each week of sources for teaching about AI is often proposed as the most effective and
the programme, participants dedicated an hour to independent reading, suitable method for instructing both students and teachers [73,82,86,87,
reviewing AI activities, and watching videos of other educators teaching 91]. Although there seems to be a plethora of digital AI learning re
these activities, and met online for another hour to discuss the materials sources, these are of varying quality, which, may in turn present chal
and brainstorm ways to adapt them for their classrooms. Teachers lenges to teachers. In an analysis of over 50 AI resources, primarily
appreciated this spaced approach, as it allowed them time to reflect, centred around hands-on activities and exploratory teaching ap
experiment, make mistakes, and ask questions. A crucial component of proaches, and originating from initiatives such as AI4K12, CSTA, and
the programme was the establishment of a collaborative learning envi MIT AI Education, Druga and colleagues (2022) found that existing AI
ronment, where teachers felt at ease grappling with AI concepts resources often fall short in adequately addressing the needs of teachers
collectively. Similarly, Vazhail et al. [12] reflect on how teachers for implementing and customising them in their teaching practices. The
appreciated peer learning when engaging in professional development resources seldom cater to diverse age groups or varying levels of prior
activities related to AI. These involved hands-on activity and explor knowledge. Additionally, the coverage of AI is quite diverse, primarily
atory teaching using the programming language Scratch.5 emphasising the technological dimensions of AI related to perception
The integration of AI EdTech in education stands out as a means to and learning, as stated in the proposed curriculum by Touretzky et al.
enhance teachers’ instructional methods and simultaneously bolster [12], while paying notably less attention to the societal impacts of AI.
their AI literacy. This perspective is explicitly evident in the works of
Nazaretsky et al. [81], Ng et al. [94], Zhao [77], Pretorious [83], and Professional judgement: phronesis
Phronesis has been referred to as the professional competence based
on values, concerned with practical judgement, and informed by
reflection in an explicit manner. Some of the studies adopt different
4
Daily – RAISE (mit.edu) qualitative and quantitative methods to measure ethical concerns and
5
https://scratch.mit.edu/about
8
teachers’ anxieties related to AI [75], teachers’ readiness and willing and make decisions ([18] p.598) or to have the knowledge to critically
ness to embrace AI in education [40,76,96], the cultivation of teachers’ assess and interpret data [20]. Furthermore, a significant portion of the
critical thinking proficiencies [9,96], teachers’ attitudes and epistemic knowledge pertains to what students should understand about
self-determination [74,69], and the considerations teachers make when AI, and there is comparatively little emphasis on what teachers need to
adopting an AI curriculum [71]. convey about AI or incorporate into their teaching within the appro
Several of the qualitative empirical studies that address teachers’ priate educational context, not to mention the essential requirements for
ethical concerns or reflections related to AI, rarely pick up on these di teacher educators to prepare future teachers within this domain. Thus,
mensions. For example, in the study by Vazhayil et al. [12], which aimed we cannot help but wonder how the relatively advanced content pre
to enhance AI literacy among pre-service Indian teachers, teachers’ sented in the referenced frameworks can be made relevant for TE.
concerns or reflections were mostly not acknowledged as components of
teachers’ competencies. The authors concluded that the exploratory The implicit conceptualisation of AI literacy
teaching interventions with Scratch were successful, but as reflected in
their quotes, the teachers remained unconvinced that the proposed The vague and inconsistent use of “AI literacy” in the material stands
teaching approach was suitable for Indian schools. This scepticism in contrast with the predominantly implicitly reflected dimensions of
stemmed from various factors, including concerns related to internet knowledge that teachers are expected to possess. In other words,
access, availability of computer labs, and pedagogical considerations although there still does not exist an agreed definition of what AI literacy
regarding computer use during lessons. Instead of affirming teachers’ entails in relation to teachers’ theoretical, practical, and ethical
professional judgments, the authors concluded that teachers’ perspec knowledge, research initiatives assume this knowledge to be of a specific
tives can act as a barrier to teaching AI. This suggests that there exist type. These assumptions as demonstrated by our study, are largely im
specific ideas regarding how AI should be taught in schools, and which plicit. This in turn influences how AI literacy is advocated for, theorised,
attitudes and values are deemed desirable within the context of AI methodologically researched and, in extension, understood (c.f. [21]).
literacy. Arguments suggesting that AI ‟can liberate teachers from tedious
administrative and instructional tasks, allowing them to focus on inno
Discussion vative endeavours” [41], are considered crucial ‟for the future work
force” [6], and hold the potential to ‟enhance the capabilities of K-12
This study aimed to examine how the scientific literature concep educational systems and promote the social and cognitive development
tualises AI literacy in relation to teachers’ different forms of professional of both students and educators” [92], are very common and highlight a
knowledge relevant for TE. In doing so, we focused on two research perspective that can be described as techno-solutionist [95,97,98].
questions: 1. What is the current scope and nature of the scientific In a similar spirit, AI literacy is predominantly reflected as something
literature on AI literacy relevant for TE? and 2. How are teachers’ that can be taught, evaluated, and measured independently of the spe
different forms of professional knowledge reflected in the literature? cific situated and work-practice-oriented contexts in which it is
Our findings support previous research [16,18,48], in that AI literacy is employed, and where ethical consequences of the implementation and
a rapidly emerging research topic and term, globally. Even though our use of AI are framed in terms of technical challenges that can be
study highlights a rise in the number of published papers in journals and addressed through better design and development of AI. While there
conferences over the past two years, it also demonstrates how the term exists some nuanced approaches that underscore the significance of
“AI literacy” is, with one exception [12], not yet a research focus in the developing AI literacy skills to critically evaluate, communicate with,
field of TE. More importantly, our findings can contribute to the un and effectively use AI [18,75], the specific components of what it means
derstanding of AI literacy within the teaching profession and set the to critically evaluate AI often remain unexplained.
stage for future research within this topic that acknowledges the in The implicit conceptualisation is also reflected in some of the
tricacies and situatedness of teaching. In the next sections, we discuss quantitative studies, where several of the questionnaires used in the
the findings we consider most crucial for future consideration of the surveys, and the hypotheses being tested, were insufficiently presented.
nature of AI literacy, its background in computer science, the related This points to a need for greater transparency and scientific rigor, and
emphasis on digital resources for teaching about AI and AI EdTech in empirical research to gain a deeper understanding of what AI literacy
teaching, and how ethics are reflected. entails in different domains of education [41]. In this regard, we need to
point out that even if a significant number of studies in our review were
A computer science centric initiative qualitative in nature, no study was based on classroom observations,
which in turn provides limited insights into what AI literacy entails in
Despite the surge in and adoption of ‟AI literacy” in the educational teachers’ practice.
context, also in TE, the concept remains notably underdefined and
underexplored in relation to what it means in both educational theory The focus on digital resources and AI EdTech in teaching
and practice. Our study highlights a prevailing focus on computer sci
ence subjects, exploratory teaching approaches, and the incorporation There is a strong inclination toward exploratory teaching pedagogies
of AI EdTech into classroom teaching. We therefore conclude that the involving digital resources for teaching about AI (c.f. [99,100]). Such
term “AI literacy”, instead of being discussed in depth, appears to serve approaches assume that; 1) the most effective learning experience is to
the specific interests of different professional groups, notably re have learners collaboratively experiment with specific digital technol
searchers, educators in higher education, and teachers affiliated with the ogy with their peers, and 2) the pedagogic content of the learning
fields of computer science and computer science education [2]). This is experience is identical to the methods or epistemology of the discipline
not surprising, as AI at its core is a computer science subject, and dis being studied [24]. Building on this pedagogical bias, different digital
cussions on what and how to teach in relation to AI have been ongoing resources are believed to address teachers’ and students’ AI literacy.
for decades. However, it is important to note that AI literacy emerges Therefore, a prevailing trend is to provide pre-packaged solutions for
from a domain not specialized in teachers’ professional knowledge and teachers to experiment with, delving deeper into how these solutions
the educational context, and draws on epistemological traditions that, to affect what can be taught in the classroom. As put in one of the few
a high degree, may differ from the educational sciences. This can be critical notes regarding this pedagogical bias, by Druga and colleagues
reflected in, for example, the high expectations that all teachers and (2022, p.96): these technologies and their designs matter as they shape and
teacher educators in all subjects and across all levels of schooling will be constrain what content knowledge can be taught.
able to actually recognize and describe examples of how computers reason The literature also reflects a somewhat uncritical promotion of AI
9
EdTech in teaching practices, not considering the growing number of Conclusion

critical studies pointing to its problematic implications related to e.g.,
the power structures [101,96], ethical dimensions related to data We conducted a scoping review focusing on how AI literacy relevant
fication and dataveillance [102,103], and educational implications of AI to TE is represented in the scientific literature. Based on a screening of
technologies in education[104–106]. Thus, the focus on digital tech more than 500 papers, we conclude that AI literacy is a rapidly emerging
nology in the realms of teaching with and about AI marks how, rather research topic that has not reached the field of TE. Our focus on
than being tied to a specific body of professional knowledge, AI literacy teachers’ professional knowledge helped us to capture AI literacy in the
depends on the existence and use of digital artifacts. context of teachers’ theoretical-scientific knowledge, practical and
professional judgement. We found that computer science and peda
Ethics as epistemic knowledge gogies based on exploratory teaching influence what type of epistemic,
practical, and ethical knowledge is desirable. Questions of ethics are
The heightened emphasis on ethical concerns and risks linked to AI predominantly addressed as a matter of understanding technical con
systems is manifested implicitly or explicitly in many of the papers, figurations of data-driven AI technologies, and teachers’ practical
reflecting the growing research focus on AI ethics as a comprehensive knowledge tends to translate into the adoption of digital teaching re
domain [107,108]. However, the papers included in this review pre sources for teaching about AI or the integration of AI EdTech into
dominantly conceptualise ethics in relation to the technical configura teaching. Our results points to three distinct implications: 1) there is a
tions of data-driven AI technologies, emphasising that both teachers and need for educational scientists to engage in and define AI literacy in
students should and can act ethically by being aware of how biases in AI different educational contexts, and particularly in TE; 2) teachers need
can result in discriminatory decisions. As a result, ethics is often reduced to be in the frontline of developing the content and teachings methods of
to an epistemic knowledge centred around data and computational ap AI literacy; and 3) in-situ studies are needed to capture, analyse, and
proaches, rather than a moral and adaptable way of thinking and acting further develop teachers’ practical and ethical knowledge in relation to
in response to various unknown situations and contexts where AI is AI literacy.
employed or adopted. As stated elsewhere [4,52], considering that AI in
education involves the application of various types of AI EdTech, the Statements on potential conflicts of interest
ethics of AI literacy should encompass considerations related to teach
ers’ expectations, resource allocation, biases, the role and value of All authors declare that they have no known competing financial
assessment, teachers’ roles, teacher-student relations, and specific interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
pedagogical approaches such as instructionism and constructivism, the work reported in this paper.
among others. While teachers’ attitudes and (mis)conceptions is a
prevalent topic in the literature, our observations that phronesis is the Statements on open data and ethics
least displayed dimension of knowledge, reflects a methodological gap
in the literature, as well as crucial research gaps to fill in years to come. Research data can be shared upon request.
AI literacy in TE–future directions Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the

writing process
Undeniably, teachers’ different dimensions of knowledge will be
imperative to how AI literacy will play out in the realms of education. During the preparation of this work the first author used Chat GPT to
Our literature review suggests that currently, teachers’ knowledge is not check text for spelling, grammar errors and clarity. After using this tool/
comprehensively addressed or captured in the research. More impor service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take
tantly, teachers’ expected knowledge is not what is currently shaping the full responsibility for the content of the publication.
concept of AI literacy. Based on these insights, we suggest three signif
icant research foci for TE that warrant specific attention. Firstly, there is CRediT authorship contribution statement
a pressing need to reach a broader consensus of what the theoretical
knowledge (episteme) of AI literacy, particularly regarding TE and Katarina Sperling: Writing – original draft, Visualization, Valida
teachers, should entail. This should, to a much greater degree, include tion, Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis,
research from the educational sciences. Secondly, it is essential to Conceptualization. Carl-Johan Stenberg: Writing – review & editing,
actively involve teachers in the process of exploring the practical di Visualization, Validation, Investigation, Formal analysis. Cormac
mensions of AI literacy (techne) to ensure that a broad set of situated McGrath: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Meth
professional skills, relevant for different contexts and age groups, are odology, Investigation, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis, Concep
considered. Here, teachers should be involved in the process of defining tualization. Anna Åkerfeldt: Writing – review & editing, Validation,
what AI literacy can mean in their classrooms, not simply by co- Investigation, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis, Conceptualization.
developing or trying out teaching resources founded on specific ideas Fredrik Heintz: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Investigation,
of teaching and learning. Thirdly, a deeper investigation into the im Funding acquisition, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Linnéa Sten
plications of AI literacy in authentic teaching and learning contexts is liden: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Project
warranted to capture AI ethics and teachers’ professional judgment administration, Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisition,
(phronesis), as AI literacy, both as a concept and material artifact, is Formal analysis, Conceptualization.
being introduced in classrooms. Already here we would like to stress a
situated and contextualized approach of AI literacy, which means that Declaration of competing interest
teachers’ episteme, techne and phronesis will never look the same
throughout the entire educational system. However, making all di None.
mensions visible and explicit may bring about a more solid foundation of
AI literacy in TE and education in general, one that is aligned with the Acknowledgements
teaching profession and that serves the best interests of students.
The research for this article was carried out with support of Marianne
and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation. We wouldlike to express our grat
itude to the librarians Cia Gustrén and Marie-Louise Axelsson at
10
Linköping University for initial guidance and advice related to the search strategies.
Appendix
Author/ Study title Study focus Country

Year
[92] Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education: Addressing Societal and Ethical Different aspects of ethical issues surrounding AI, evaluating AIEd tools US
Challenges in K-12 Settings
[79] In-Service Teachers’ (Mis)conceptions of Artificial Intelligence in K-12 Exploring teachers’ (mis)conceptions of AI US
Science Education
[40] Teachers’ readiness and intention to teach artificial intelligence in schools Examining what factors determine the behavioural intention and readiness South
to teach about AI Africa
[74] Towards Intelligent-TPACK: An empirical study on teachers’ professional Developing methods to measure TPACK/AI literacy among teachers Finland
knowledge to ethically integrate artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools into
education
[69] Sustainable curriculum planning for artificial intelligence education: A Using SDT to explore how teachers prepare, implement, and refine an AI China
self-determination theory perspective curriculum
[71] Collaborative construction of artificial intelligence curriculum in primary Investigating how creating and implementing an AI curriculum is China
schools negotiated with external influences.
[87] Make-a-Thon for Middle School AI Educators Implementing a PD-programme for teachers with a focus on community of US
practice and Co-design
[82] The Landscape of Teaching Resources for AI Education Classification and evaluation of AIEd-tools US
[93] Artificial Intelligence in Education - Ethical framework Ethics in AI education Slovenia
[70] Teaching Artificial Intelligence to K-12 Through a Role-Playing Game Develop, implement, and evaluate a role-playing game aimed at learning Belgium
Questioning the Intelligence Concept children some basic concepts in AI; Curriculum development.
[109] The Artificial Intelligence Learning Anxiety and Self-Efficacy of In-Service Examining teaching learning anxiety and self-efficacy using MLSE and Taiwan
Teachers Taking AI Training Courses AILA.
[80] Are Pre-Service Teachers Disinclined to Utilise Embodied Humanoid Social Examining pre-service teachers attitudes toward introducing social robots Slovenia
Robots in the Classroom? in the classroom.
[88] Enabling the Creation of Intelligent Things: Bringing Artificial Intelligence Developing and testing AI/robotics curriculum for teachers, acting as Austria
and Robotics to Schools multipliers
[89] AI Book Club: An Innovative Professional Development Model for AI Developing and testing a PD-programme for teachers and educators US
Education
[90] Engaging Teachers to Co-Design Integrated AI Curriculum for K-12 How to co-design an AI curriculum for core subjects and give design US
Classrooms recommendations for future curricula development
[18] What is AI Literacy? Competencies and Design Considerations Defining a set of competencies and design considerations relating to AI US
literacy
[45] Empowering educators to be AI-ready How to enhance AI readiness in an educational setting UK
[91] A Scaffolding Empathic Methodology in the Robotics Teacher Formation Developing a methodology for teaching teachers about AI and robots (PD), Brazil
Using Log Book and the BNCC References with a special focus on methods of feedback to improve learning among
participants
[81] Teachers’ trust in AI-powered educational technology and a professional Teachers’ knowledge and reflections on using AI-grading Israel
development programme to improve it
[48] AI Literacy: Definition, Teaching, Evaluation and Ethical Issues Reviewing current (2021) literature on the concept of AI literacy and what China
specific competencies this concept implies.
[41] Teachers’ AI digital competencies and twenty-first century skills in the Identifying challenges and opportunities in implementing AI technology. It China
post-pandemic world also synthesizes different frameworks and identifies core AI competencies
[83] Fostering AI literacy: A teaching practice reflection How one can use generative AI as a tool; how to circumvent certain risks Australia
associated with generative AI
[20] Data and AI literacy for everyone Mapping out the competencies implied in data/AI literacy. Highlighting Germany
some German frameworks and applications for teaching about AI
[73] A Differentiated Discussion About AI Education K-12 Mapping out different projects and programmes aimed at fostering AI Austria
Literacy.
[12] Focusing on Teacher Education to Introduce AI in Schools: Perspectives Testing a PD- for programme teachers; reflections on implementing India
and Illustrative Findings education with AI
[75] Artificial Intelligence in K-12 Education: eliciting and reflecting on Teachers and teacher educators’ conceptualizations of AI-literacy; Sweden
Swedish teachers’ understanding of AI and its implications for teaching & identifying problems in implementing AI
learning
[96] Preparing for AI-enhanced education: Conceptualizing and empirically Teachers’ readiness to use AIED, ethics surrounding AI-use China
examining teachers’ AI readiness
[76] Does the Perceived Organizational Support and AI Literacy Affect A quantitative study examining what determines teachers’ creativity when China
Teachers’ AI Instructional Creative Performance? teaching about AI.
[84] Where Is the AI? AI Literacy for Educators Defining AI Literacy and responding to the need for AIED Understanding Canada
and AILE courses. Identifying issues with common AIEd-tools on the
market today
[72] Co-designing Artificial Intelligence Curriculum for Secondary Schools: A CO-designing of an AI curriculum for secondary students China
Grounded Theory of Teachers’ Experience
[72] A Phenomenographic Approach on Teacher Conceptions of Teaching Examining teacher conceptions of teaching AI and categorizing them into China
Artificial Intelligence (AI) in K-12 Schools six outcome spaces
[85] Artificial intelligence literacy teaching in social studies education Learning with AI in social studies Turkey
[86] The road to ai literacy education: From pedagogical needs to tangible game Addressing the need to teach children about basic concepts of AI/ML Malta
design through a computer game. Misconceptions about AI
[77] Developing AI Literacy for Primary and Middle School Teachers in China: Using Ng’s “four dimensions of AI literacy” to quantitively examine China
Based on a Structural Equation Modeling Analysis teachers AI literacy as well as the correlation between these different
dimensions
11
References [27] Järnerot A, Veelo N. Kunskap i 3D”–techne, episteme och fronesis, presenterat
som samspelande dimensioner. Studenten skal bli lærer. Kunnskap. Identitet Og
Profesjonsutvikling; 2020. https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.98.ch3.
[1] Ilomäki L, Lakkala M, Kallunki V, Mundy D, Romero M, Romeu T, Gouseti A.
[28] Kress GR. Literacy in the new media age. Psychology Press; 2003.
Critical digital literacies at school level: a systematic review. Rev Educ 2023;11
[29] Leu DJ, Kinzer CK, Coiro J, Castek J, Henry LA. New literacies: a dual-level theory
(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3425.
of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. J Educ 2017;197
[2] Tuominen K, Savolainen R, Talja S. Information literacy as a sociotechnical
(2):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574171970020.
practice. Libr Q 2005;75(3):329–45. https://doi.org/10.1086/497311.
[30] Serafini F. Reading the visual: an introduction to teaching multimodal literacy.
[3] Chiu TKF. Future research recommendations for transforming higher education
Teachers College Press; 2014.
with generative AI. Comput Educ Artif Intell 2024;6:100197. https://doi.org/
[31] Unsworth L. Multimodal reading comprehension: curriculum expectations and
10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100197.
large-scale literacy testing practices. Pedagog Int J 2014;9(1):26–44. https://doi.
[4] Holmes W, Persson J, Chounta IA, Wasson B, Dimitrova V. Artificial intelligence
org/10.1080/1554480X.2014.878968.
and education: a critical view through the lens of human rights, democracy and
[32] Bawden D. Information and digital literacies: a review of concepts. J Doc 2001;57
the rule of law. Council of Europe; 2022.
(2):218–59. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000007083.
[5] Sperling K, Stenliden L, Nissen J, Heintz F. Still w(AI)ting for the automation of
[33] Gilster P, Glister P. Digital literacy. New York: Wiley Computer Pub; 1997.
teaching: an exploration of machine learning in Swedish primary education using
[34] DiSessa AA. Computational literacy and “the big picture” concerning computers
actor-network theory. Eur J Educ 2022;57(4):584–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/
in mathematics education. Math Think Learn 2018;20(1):3–31. https://doi.org/
ejed.12526.
10.1080/10986065.2018.1403544.
[6] Ayanwale MA, Sanusi IT, Adelana OP, Aruleba KD, Oyelere SS. Teachers’
[35] Livingstone S. What is media literacy? Intermedia 2004;32(3):18–20. http://epri
readiness and intention to teach artificial intelligence in schools. Comput Educ
nts.lse.ac.uk/1027/.
Artif Intell 2022;3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100099.
[36] Potter WJ. Media literacy. Sage Publications; 2018.
[7] Kandlhofer M, Steinbauer G. A driving license for intelligent systems. In:
[37] Behrens SJ. A conceptual analysis and historical overview of information literacy.
Proceedings of the AAAI. Graz University of Technology; 2018. p. 7954–5.
Coll Res Libr 1994;55(4):309–22. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl_55_04_309.
https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v32i1.11399. DO.
[38] Gould R. Data literacy is statistical literacy. Stat Educ Res J 2017;16(1):22–5.
[8] Kim S, Jang Y, Kim W, Choi S, Jung H, Kim S, Kim H. Why and what to teach: AI
https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v16i1.209.
curriculum for elementary school. In: Proceedings of the 35th AAAI conference
[39] Wolff A, Gooch D, Montaner JJC, Rashid U, Kortuem G. Creating an
on artificial intelligence, AAAI 2021; 2021. p. 15569–76. 17B, https://www.
understanding of data literacy for a data-driven society. J Community Inform
scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85123886761&partn
2016;12(3). https://doi.org/10.15353/joci.v12i3.3275.
erID=40&md5=8018e57cb98ba3a9f479cb1cf335ef83.
[40] Avgerinou M, Ericson J. A review of the concept of visual literacy. Br J Educ
[9] Southworth J, Migliaccio K, Glover J, Glover JN, Reed D, McCarty C,
Technol 1997;28(4):280–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00035.
Brendemuhl J, Thomas A. Developing a model for AI Across the curriculum:
[41] Bodén U. Towards visual literacy in school: interactions between students and
transforming the higher education landscape via innovation in AI literacy.
interactive visualizations in social science classrooms. Linköping University
Comput Educ Artif Intell 2023;4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100127.
Electronic Press; 2023. https://doi.org/10.3384/9789180750233.
[10] Touretzky D, Gardner-McCune C, Seehorn D. Machine learning and the five big
[42] Bodén U, Stenliden L. Emerging visual literacy through enactments by visual
ideas in AI. Int J Artif Intell Educ 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-
analytics and students. Des Learn 2019;11(1):40–51. https://doi.org/10.16993/
00314-1.
dfl.108.
[11] Han X, Hu F, Xiong G, Liu X, Gong X, Niu X, Shi W, Wang X. Design of AI +
[43] Ridley M, Pawlick-Potts D. Algorithmic literacy and the role for libraries. Inf
curriculum for primary and secondary schools in Qingdao. In: Proceedings of the
Technol Libr 2021;40(2). https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v40i2.12963.
Chinese automation congress (CAC); 2018. p. 4135–40. https://doi.org/10.1109/
[44] Karaca O, Çalışkan SA, Demir K. Medical artificial intelligence readiness scale for
CAC.2018.8623310.
medical students (MAIRS-MS) – development, validity and reliability study. BMC
[12] Vazhayil A, Shetty R, Bhavani RR, Akshay N. Focusing on teacher education to
Med Educ 2021;21(1):112. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02546-6.
introduce AI in schools: perspectives and illustrative findings. In: Proceedings of
[45] Luckin R, Cukurova M, Kent C, du Boulay B. Empowering educators to be AI-
the IEEE tenth international conference on technology for education (T4E); 2019.
ready. Comput Educ Artif Intell 2022;3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
p. 71–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/T4E.2019.00021.
caeai.2022.100076.
[13] Eguchi A. AI-robotics and AI literacy, 982. Scopus; 2021. p. 75–85. https://doi.
[46] Lee I, Ali S, Zhang H, DiPaola D, Breazeal C. Developing middle school students’
org/10.1007/978-3-030-77022-8_7.
AI literacy. In: Proceedings of the 52nd ACM technical symposium on computer
[14] Ng DTK, Leung JKL, Chu KWS, Qiao MS. AI Literacy: definition, teaching,
science education; 2021. p. 191–7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432513.
evaluation and ethical issues. In: Proceedings of the association for information
[47] Miao F, Holmes W, Huang R, Zhang H. AI and education: a guidance for
science and technology. 58; 2021. p. 504–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.487.
policymakers. UNESCO Publishing; 2021. https://doi.org/10.54675/PCSP7350.
Scopus.
[48] Ng DTK, Leung JKL, Chu SKW, Qiao MS. Conceptualizing AI literacy: an
[15] Bond M, Khosravi H, De Laat M, Bergdahl N, Negrea V, Oxley E, Pham P,
exploratory review. Comput Educ Artif Intell 2021;2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Chong SW, Siemens G. A meta systematic review of artificial intelligence in
caeai.2021.100041.
higher education: a call for increased ethics, collaboration, and rigour. Int J Educ
[49] Olari V, Romeike R. Addressing AI and data literacy in teacher education: a
Technol High Educ 2024;21(1):4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00436-z.
review of existing educational frameworks. In: Proceedings of the ACM
[16] Laupichler MC, Aster A, Schirch J, Raupach T. Artificial intelligence literacy in
international conference proceeding series. Scopus; 2021. https://doi.org/
higher and adult education: a scoping literature review. Comput Educ Artif Intell
10.1145/3481312.3481351.
2022;3:100101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100101.
[50] Miao, F., & Shiohira, K. (2022). K-12 AI curricula. A Mapping of Government-
[17] Cetindamar D, Kitto K, Wu M, Zhang Y, Abedin B, Knight S. Explicating AI
Endorsed AI Curricula. ED-2022/FLI-ICT/K-12 REV.
literacy of employees at digital workplaces. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 2022:1–14.
[51] UNICEF. Policy guidance on AI for children 2.0. New York, NY, USA: UNICEF;
https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2021.3138503.
2021. https://Www.Unicef.Org.
[18] Long D, Magerko B. What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations.
[52] Holmes W, Porayska-Pomsta K. The ethics of artificial intelligence in education:
In: Proceedings of the CHI conference on human factors in computing systems;
practices, challenges, and debates. Taylor & Francis; 2022.
2020. p. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727.
[53] Eisner EW. From episteme to phronesis to artistry in the study and improvement
[19] Long D, Teachey A, Magerko B. Family learning talk in AI literacy learning
of teaching. Teach Teach Educ 2002;18(4):375–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/
activities. In: Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing
S0742-051X(02)00004-5.
systems. Scopus; 2022. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502091.
[54] Kreber C. Reviving the ancient virtues in the scholarship of teaching, with a slight
[20] Schüller K. Data and AI literacy for everyone. Stat J IAOS 2022;38(2):477–90.
critical twist. High Educ Res Dev 2015;34(3):568–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/
https://doi.org/10.3233/SJI-220941. Scopus.
07294360.2014.973384.
[21] Bearman M, Ryan J, Ajjawi R. Discourses of artificial intelligence in higher
[55] Barstad, K. (n.d.). The Norwegian qualification framework. NAFOL Yearbook
education: a critical literature review. High Educ 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/
2012, 192.
s10734-022-00937-2.
[56] Brunstad, P.O. (2007). Faglig klokskap–mer enn kunnskap og ferdigheter. PACEM
[22] Gustavsson B. Kunskapsfilosofi: tre kunskapsformer i historisk belysning.
10, 2, 59–70.
Wahlström & Widstrand; 2000.
[57] Merleau-Ponty M. Phenomenology of perception, trans. C. Smith. New York: The
[23] Keeling R. The Bologna Process and the Lisbon Research Agenda: the European
Humanities Press; 1962. p. 1962.
Commission’s expanding role in higher education discourse. Eur J Educ 2006;41
[58] Polanyi M. The logic of tacit inference. Philosophy 1966;41(155):1–18.
(2):203–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2006.00256.x.
[59] Wiliam D. Comments on bulterman-bos: what should education research do, and
[24] Elley WB. How in the world do students read? IEA study of reading literacy. Int
how should it do it? Educ Res 2008;37(7):432–8. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/
Assoc Eval Educ Achiev 1992. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED360613.
eprint/10001169.
[25] Fransman J. Conceptualising literacy for policy and practice. Adult Educ Dev
[60] Bornemark J. Horisonten finns alltid kvar: om det bortglömda omdömet. Volante;
2008;71. https://www.dvv-international.de/en/adult-education-and-develo
2020.
pment/editions/aed-712008/international-reflections-on-issues-arising-from-the-
[61] Dunne J, Pendlebury S. Practical reason. The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of
benchmarks-and-call-for-action/conceptualising-literacy-for-policy-and-practice.
education. Wiley; 2003. p. 194–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470996294.
[26] Cazden C, Cope B, Fairclough N, Gee J, Kalantzis M, Kress G, Luke A, Luke C,
ch12.
Michaels S, Nakata M. A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures.
[62] Kinsella EA, Pitman A. Phronesis as professional knowledge: practical wisdom in
Harv Educ Rev 1996;66(1):60–92.
the professions, 1. Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.
12
[63] Saugstad T. Educational theory and practice in an Aristotelian perspective. Scand University of Malta; 2021. p. 765–73. https://doi.org/10.34190/GBL.21.155 (P.
J Educ Res 2002;46(4):373–90. Fotaris, Ed.; WOS:000758457500087.
[64] Aromataris E, Pearson A. The systematic review: an overview. AJN Am J Nurs [87] DiPaola D, Moore KS, Ali S, Perret B, Zhou X, Zhang H, Lee I. Make-a-Thon for
2014;114(3):53–8. middle school AI educators. In: Proceedings of the 54th ACM technical
[65] Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int symposium on computer science education; 2023. p. 305–11. https://doi.org/
J Soc Res Methodol 2005;8(1):19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10.1145/3545945.3569743. V. 1.
1364557032000119616. [88] Kandlhofer M, Steinbauer G, Laßnig JP, Baumann W, Plomer S, Ballagi A,
[66] Khalil H, Peters M, Godfrey CM, McInerney P, Soares CB, Parker D. An evidence- Alfoldi I. Enabling the creation of intelligent things: bringing artificial
based approach to scoping reviews. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2016;13(2): intelligence and robotics to schools. In: Proceedings of the IEEE frontiers in
118–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12144. education conference (FIE); 2019. p. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/
[67] Cho J, Trent A. Validity in qualitative research revisited. Qual Res 2006;6(3): FIE43999.2019.9028537.
319–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106065006. [89] Lee I, Zhang H, Moore K, Zhou X, Perret B, Cheng Y, Zheng R, Pu G. AI book club
[68] Dubois A, Gadde LE. Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case an innovative professional development model for AI education. In: Proceedings
research. J Bus Res 2002;55(7):553–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963 of the 53rd ACM technical symposium on computer science education; 2022.
(00)00195-8. p. 202–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3478431.3499318.
[69] Chiu TKF, Chai CS. Sustainable curriculum planning for artificial intelligence [90] Lin P, Van Brummelen J. Engaging teachers to co-design integrated AI curriculum
education: a self-determination theory perspective. Sustainability 2020;(14):12. for K-12 classrooms. In: Proceedings of the CHI conference on human factors in
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145568. computing systems; 2021. p. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445377.
[70] Henry J, Hernalesteen A, Collard A-S. Teaching Artificial Intelligence to K-12 [91] Minami M, Gomes MAC, Suyama R, Panazio ADON, Takahata AK, Kurashima CS,
Through a Role-Playing Game Questioning the Intelligence Concept. Kunstliche de Moura FS, Kleinschmidt JH, del Rio de Souza e Silva Junior L. A scaffolding
Intell (Oldenbourg) 2021;35(2):171–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-021- empathic methodology in the robotics teacher formation using log book and the
00733-7. BNCC references. In: Proceedings of the latin American robotics symposium
[71] Dai Y, Liu A, Qin J, Guo Y, Jong MSY, Chai CS, Lin Z. Collaborative construction (LARS), Brazilian symposium on robotics (SBR) and workshop on robotics in
of artificial intelligence curriculum in primary schools. J Eng Educ 2023;112(1): education (WRE); 2019. p. 435–40. https://doi.org/10.1109/LARS-SBR-
23–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20503. WRE48964.2019.00083.
[72] Yau KW, Chai CS, Chiu TKF, Meng H, King I, Wong SWH, Yam Y. Co-designing [92] Akgun S, Greenhow C. Artificial intelligence (AI) in education: addressing societal
artificial intelligence curriculum for secondary schools: a grounded theory of and ethical challenges in K-12 settings. In Chinn C., Tan E., Chan C., & Kali Y.
teachers’ experience. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on (editors). In: Proceedings of the international conference of the learning sciences,
educational technology, ISET 2022. Scopus; 2022. p. 58–62. https://doi.org/ ICLS. International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS); 2022. p. 1373–6.
10.1109/ISET55194.2022.00020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00096-7.
[73] Steinbauer G, Kandlhofer M, Chklovski T, Heintz F, Koenig S. A differentiated [93] Gartner S, Krasna M. Artificial intelligence in education–ethical framework. In:
discussion about AI education K-12. KI-Künstl Intell 2021;35(2):131–7. https:// Proceedings of the 12th mediterranean conference on embedded computing,
doi.org/10.1007/s13218-021-00724-8. MECO 2023; 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/MECO58584.2023.10155012.
[74] Celik I. Towards Intelligent-TPACK: an empirical study on teachers’ professional [94] Ng DTK, Leung JKL, Su J, Ng RCW, Chu SKW. Teachers’ AI digital competencies
knowledge to ethically integrate artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools into and twenty-first century skills in the post-pandemic world. Educational
education. Comput Hum Behav 2023;138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Technology Research and Development. Scopus. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/
chb.2022.107468. Scopus. s11423-023-10203-6.
[75] Velander J, Taiye MA, Otero N, Milrad M. Artificial Intelligence in K-12 [95] Holmes W, Meng S, Yuan L. Artificial intelligence and education: digging beneath
Education: eliciting and reflecting on Swedish teachers’ understanding of AI and the surface. Chin J ICT Educ 2023;2023(2):16–26. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/
its implications for teaching & learning. Educ Inf Technol 2023. https://doi.org/ id/eprint/10176777.
10.1007/s10639-023-11990-4. [96] Williamson B, Macgilchrist F, Potter J. Re-examining AI, automation and
[76] Wen F, Hu Y, Gu X. Does the perceived organizational support and AI literacy datafication in education. Learn Media Technol 2023;48(1):1–5. https://doi.org/
affect teachers’ AI instructional creative performance?. In: Proceedings of the 10.1080/17439884.2023.2167830.
international conference on advanced learning technologies; 2022. p. 363–7. [97] Morozov E. To save everything, click here: the folly of technological solutionism.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT55010.2022.00113 (M. Chang, N. Chen, M. PublicAffairs; 2013.
Dascalu, D. Sampson, A. Tlili, & S. Trausan-Matu, Eds.; WOS:000885102700106. [98] Selwyn N. Lessons to be learnt? Education, techno-solutionism, and sustainable
[77] Zhao L, Wu X, Luo H. Developing AI literacy for primary and middle school development. In H. Skaug Saetra, (Ed). Technology and sustainable development.
teachers in China: based on a structural equation modelling analysis. 1st ed. Routledge; 2023.
Sustainability 2022;14(21):14549. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114549. [99] Kirschner PA, Sweller J, Clark RE. Why minimal guidance during instruction does
[78] Wang X, Li L, Tan SC, Yang L, Lei J. Preparing for AI-enhanced education: not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based,
Conceptualizing and empirically examining teachers’ AI readiness. Comput. experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educ Psychol 2006;41(2):75–86.
Hum. Behav. 2023;146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107798. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.
[79] Antonenko P, Abramowitz B. In-service teachers’ (Mis)conceptions of artificial [100] Papert S. Mindstorms: computers, children, and powerful ideas. NY: Basic Books;
intelligence in K-12 science education. J Res Technol Educ 2023;55(1):64–78. 1980. p. 255.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2119450. [101] Gulson KN, Witzenberger K. Repackaging authority: artificial intelligence,
[80] Istenic A, Bratko I, Rosanda V. Are Pre-Service Teachers Disinclined to Utilise automated governance and education trade shows. J Educ Policy 2022;37(1):
Embodied Humanoid Social Robots in the Classroom?. In: British Journal of 145–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2020.1785552.
Educational Technology. 52. ERIC; 2021. p. 2340–58. [102] Manolev J, Sullivan A, Slee R. The datafication of discipline: ClassDojo,
[81] Nazaretsky T, Ariely M, Cukurova M, Alexandron G. Teachers’ trust in AI- surveillance and a performative classroom culture. Learn Media Technol 2019;44
powered educational technology and a professional development program to (1):36–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1558237.
improve it. Br J Educ Technol 2022;53(4):914–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/ [103] Pangrazio L, Selwyn N. Personal data literacies’: a critical literacies approach to
bjet.13232. enhancing understandings of personal digital data. New Media Soc 2019;21(2):
[82] Druga S, Otero N, Ko AJ. The landscape of teaching resources for AI education. In: 419–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818799523.
Proceedings of the annual conference on innovation and technology in computer [104] Jarke J, Macgilchrist F. Dashboard stories: how narratives told by predictive
science education, ITiCSE. 1; 2022. p. 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1145/ analytics reconfigure roles, risk and sociality in education. Big Data Soc 2021;8
3502718.3524782. (1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211025561.
[83] Pretorius L. Fostering AI literacy: a teaching practice reflection. J Acad Lang [105] Perrotta C, Selwyn N, Ewin C. Artificial intelligence and the affective labour of
Learn 2023;17(1):T1–8. https://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/vie understanding: the intimate moderation of a language model. New Media Soc
w/891. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221075296.
[84] Wilton L, Ip S, Sharma M, Fan F. Where is the AI? AI literacy for educators. In: [106] Selwyn N. Should robots replace teachers?: AI and the future of education. John
Rodrigo, M.M., Matsuda, N., Cristea, A.I., Dimitrova, V. (eds). In: Proceedings of Wiley & Sons; 2019.
the artificial intelligence in education. Posters and late breaking results, [107] Borenstein J, Grodzinsky FS, Howard A, Miller KW, Wolf MJ. AI ethics: a long
workshops and tutorials, industry and innovation tracks, practitioners’ and history and a recent burst of attention. Computer 2021;54(1):96–102. https://doi.
doctoral consortium. AIED 2022. Lecture notes in computer science. 13356. org/10.1109/MC.2020.3034950.
Cham: Springer; 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11647-6_31. [108] Cerratto Pargman T, McGrath C. Mapping the ethics of learning analytics in
[85] Yetişensoy O, Rapoport A. Artificial intelligence literacy teaching in social studies higher education: a systematic literature review of empirical research. J Learn
education. J Pedagog Res 2023;7(3):100–10. https://doi.org/10.33902/ Anal 2021;8(2):123–39. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2021.1.
JPR.202320866. Scopus. [109] Hsu T-C, Hsu T-P, Lin Y-T. The Artificial Intelligence Learning Anxiety and Self-
[86] Zammit M, Voulgari I, Liapis A, Yannakakis G. The road to AI literacy education: Efficacy of In-Service Teachers Taking AI Training Courses. Scopus; 2023.
from pedagogical needs to tangible game design. Institute of Digital Games, p. 97–101. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAIE56796.2023.00034.
13

AI Literacy and Teacher Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AI Literacy and Teacher Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AI Literacy and Teacher Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Computers and Education Open 6 (2024) 100169

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Education Open

In search of artificial intelligence (AI) literacy in teacher education: A

Introduction to enhance the knowledge of what AI is and its societal consequences, as

Fig. 1. Study selection.

Table 1 author was consulted to facilitate resolution.

Charting the data Results

Fig. 3. Geographic distribution.

Here, ethics is conceptualised in relation to the technical configurations

EdTech in teaching practices, not considering the growing number of Conclusion

AI literacy in TE–future directions Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the

Author/ Study title Study focus Country

You might also like