CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 437Teaching and Learning ProgrammingArtificial Intelligence in EducationDigital literacy in education

Artificial intelligence and computer science in education: From kindergarten to university

Kandlhofer, Martin, Steinbauer, Gerald, Hirschmugl-Gaisch, Sabine, Huber, Petra·2016·2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)
DOI 10.1109/fie.2016.7757570
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) already plays a major role in our daily life (e.g. intelligent household appliances like robotic vacuum cleaners or AI-based applications like Google Maps, Google Now, Siri, Cortana, ...). Sound knowledge about AI and the principles of computer science will be of vast importance for future careers in science and engineering. Looking towards the near future, jobs will largely be related to AI. In this context literacy in AI and computer science will become as important as classic literacy (reading/writing). By using an analogy with this process we developed a novel AI education concept aiming at fostering AI literacy. The concept comprises modules for different age groups on different educational levels. Fundamental AI/computer science topics addressed in each module are, amongst others, problem solving by search, sorting, graphs and data structures. We developed, conducted and evaluated four proof-of-concepts modules focusing on kindergarten/primary school as well as middle school, high school and university. Preliminary results of the pilot implementations indicate that the proposed AI education concept aiming at fostering AI literacy works.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/fie.2016.7757570

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Articles mostly either described curricular developments or specific courses trying to foster AI literacy (11 studies, 37%).

    “We found that articles mostly either described curricular developments (e.g., plans on how to structure curricula regarding AI literacy in university) or specific courses trying to foster AI literacy (11 studies, 37%; Lee et al., 2022;Lee, 2021a;Kandlhofer et al., 2016;Xu & Babaian, 2021;Park & Suh, 2021;Kong et al., 2021;Vazhayil et al., 2019;Rodríguez-García et al., 2020;Shih et al., 2021;Lin et”

    From Artificial intelligence literacy in higher and adult education: A scoping literature review (2022) · cites this paper as Kandlhofer et al., 2016

  • Kandlhofer et al. found the complexity of AI literacy to be increasing along the different levels of education.

    “Kandlhofer et al. (2016) found the complexity of AI literacy to be increasing along the different levels of education.”

    From Artificial intelligence literacy in higher and adult education: A scoping literature review (2022) · cites this paper as Kandlhofer et al., 2016

  • Burgsteiner et al. (2016) and Kandlhofer et al. (2016) defined AI literacy as the ability to understand the basic techniques and concepts behind AI in different products and services.

    “Burgsteiner et al. (2016) and Kandlhofer et al. (2016) defined AI literacy as the ability to understand the basic techniques and concepts behind AI in different products and services.”

    From Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review (2021) · cites this paper as Kandlhofer et al. (2016)

  • Kandlhofer et al. used paper-and-pencil exercises to assess students' existing knowledge of AI concepts such as graphs, trees and data structures as evidence of student AI proficiency.

    “Kandlhofer et al. (2016) used paper-and-pencil exercises to assess students' existing knowledge of AI concepts such as graphs, trees and data structures as evidence of student AI proficiency.”

    From Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review (2021) · cites this paper as Kandlhofer et al. (2016)

  • University students could conduct projects or research to describe problems formally and on a higher abstraction level.

    “They could conduct projects or research to describe problems formally and on a higher abstraction level (Kandlhofer et al., 2016).”

    From Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review (2021) · cites this paper as Kandlhofer et al., 2016

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kandlhofer, M., Steinbauer, G., Hirschmugl-Gaisch, S., & Huber, P.
Affiliations
  • Graz University of Technology (AT)
  • University of Teacher Education Styria (AT)
ORCID
Venue
2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2016-10
Pages
1-9
ISSN
0190-5848 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1109/fie.2016.7757570
OpenAlex
W2557717610
Cited by
437
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 92 · 2025: 115 · 2024: 94 · 2023: 59 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.66
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital literacy in education
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, computer science education, AI literacy, learning modules, sorting, graphs, data structures, elementary school, junior high school, high schools, universities, lifelong learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review