Cited by 9Artificial Intelligence in EducationDigital literacy in educationTeaching and Learning Programming

AI Literacy for Underserved Students: Leveraging Cultural Capital from Underserved Communities for AI Education Research

Open access
Cao, Huajie Jay, Choi, Kahyun, Park, Claire, Lee, Hee Rin·2025·Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

As Artificial Intelligence (AI) continues to influence various aspects of society, the need for AI literacy education for K-12 students has grown. An increasing number of AI literacy studies aim to enhance students’ competencies in understanding, using, and critically evaluating AI systems. However, despite the vulnerabilities faced by students from underserved communities—due to factors such as socioeconomic status, gender, and race—these students remain underrepresented in existing research. To address this gap, this study focuses on leveraging the cultural capital that students acquire from their communities’ unique history and culture for AI literacy education. Education researchers have demonstrated that identifying and mobilizing cultural capital is an effective strategy for educating these populations. Through collaboration with 26 students from underserved communities—including those who are socioeconomically disadvantaged, female, or people of color—this paper identifies three types of cultural capital relevant to AI literacy education: 1) resistant capital, 2) communal capital, and 3) creative capital. The study also emphasizes that collaborative relationships between researchers and students are crucial for mobilizing cultural capital in AI literacy education research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3706598.3713173

Cites

119 of 119 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Jim Cummins. 1986. Bilingual education and anti-racist education. Interracial Books for Children Bulletin 17 (1986) 9–12.
  2. 10.5555/3721488.3721497 · DOI
  3. Gianluca Schiavo, Valeria Fabretti, et al. 2023. Towards an Inclusive AI Education: Overcoming Challenges and Promoting Equity in K12 AI Curriculum Development. In CHI 2023 AI Literacy Workshop.
  4. Daniel Solorzano. 1992. Chicano mobility aspirations: A theoretical and empirical note. Latino Studies Journal 3 1 (1992) 48–66.

Cited by

Still being checked.

Authors
Cao, H. J., Choi, K., Park, C., & Lee, H. R.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • Chippewa Middle School, Okemos, Michigan, USA
Venue
Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2025-04-25
Pages
1-15
OpenAlex
W4409735374
Cited by
9
References
119
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3
FWCI
11.88
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Institute of Museum and Library Services (LG-250059-OLS-21)
  • National Science Foundation (2431223)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital literacy in education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
Keywords
AI literacy, underserved students, cultural capital, artificial intelligence in education, educational equity, culturally responsive teaching, AI in education research

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