CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1Digital literacy in educationArtificial Intelligence in EducationLibrary Science and Information Literacy

AI & Data Competencies: Scaffolding holistic AI literacy in Higher Education

Open access
Kennedy, Kathleen, Gupta, Anuj·2025·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2510.24783arXiv 2510.24783
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This chapter introduces the AI & Data Acumen Learning Outcomes Framework, a comprehensive tool designed to guide the integration of AI literacy across higher education. Developed through a collaborative process, the framework defines key AI and data-related competencies across four proficiency levels and seven knowledge dimensions. It provides a structured approach for educators to scaffold student learning in AI, balancing technical skills with ethical considerations and sociocultural awareness. The chapter outlines the framework's development process, its structure, and practical strategies for implementation in curriculum design, learning activities, and assessment. We address challenges in implementation and future directions for AI education. By offering a roadmap for developing students' holistic AI literacy, this framework prepares learners to leverage generative AI capabilities in both academic and professional contexts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2510.24783

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • AI and data competencies can be defined across four proficiency levels and seven knowledge dimensions.

    “Kennedy and Gupta (2025) define AI and data competencies across four proficiency levels and seven knowledge dimensions, a structure that maps readily onto a level-by-domain matrix.”

    From From AI Literacy to AI Fluency: A Developmental Framework for Higher Education (2026) · cites this paper as Kennedy and Gupta, 2025

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Still being checked.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Almahasees, Z., & Qadan, A. (2023). ChatGPT: Risks, opportunities, and challenges in education. Education & Information Technologies, 28 (8), 10669-10692. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10639-023-11746-0
  2. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
  3. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.
  4. Bates, T., Cobo, C., Mariño, O., & Wheeler, S. (2020). Can artificial intelligence transform higher education?. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17 , 112.
  5. Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim code . Polity Press. Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. David McKay Company.
  6. Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., Bernstein, M. S., Bohg, J., Bosselut, A., Brunskill, E., Brynjolfsson, E., Buch, S., Card, D., Castellon, R., Chatterji, N., Chen, A., Creel, K., Davis, J. Q., Demszky, D., ... Liang, P. (2021). On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv . https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv. 2108.07258 · DOI
  7. Borenstein, J., & Howard, A. (2021). Emerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education. AI and Ethics, 1 , 61-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00002-7 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Choi, Y., Choi, M., & Kim, M. (2023). Interdisciplinary artificial intelligence education: A systematic literature review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4 , 100107.
  9. Crawford, K. (2021). Atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence . Yale University Press.
  10. Deloitte. (2023). State of AI in the Enterprise, 5th Edition . https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/focus/cognitive-technologies/state-of-ai-and-intelligent-automation-in-businesssurvey.html
  11. Dignum, V. (2018). Ethics in artificial intelligence: Introduction to the special issue. Ethics and Information Technology, 20 (1), 1-3.
  12. Dignum, V. (2022). The role and challenges of education for responsible AI. London Review of Education, 20 (1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.20.1.12 · DOI
  13. Eaton, E., Koenig, S., Schulz, C., Maurelli, F., Lee, J., Eckroth, J., ... & Machado, T. (2022). Blue sky ideas in artificial intelligence education from the EAAI symposium. AI Magazine, 43 (1), 57-64.
  14. Fjeld, J., Achten, N., Hilligoss, H., Nagy, A., & Srikumar, M. (2020). Principled artificial intelligence: Mapping consensus in ethical and rights-based approaches to principles for AI . Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3518482 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Grosz, B. J., Grant, D. G., Vredenburgh, K., Behrends, J., Hu, L., Simmons, A., & Waldo, J. (2019). Embedded EthiCS: Integrating ethics across CS education. Communications of the ACM, 62 (8), 54-61.
  16. IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. (2019). Ethically Aligned Design: A Vision for Prioritizing Human Well-being with Autonomous and Intelligent Systems, First Edition. IEEE. https://standards.ieee.org/content/ieee-standards/en/industry-connections/ec/autonomous-systems.html
  17. Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1 (9), 389-399.
  18. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., ... Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103 , Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.lindif.2023.102274
  19. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41 (4), 212-218.
  20. Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Lubart, T. (2005). How can computers be partners in the creative process: Classification and commentary on the special issue. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63 (4-5), 365-369.
  22. Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism . NYU Press. OECD. (2023). OECD AI Principles overview. https://oecd.ai/en/ai-principles
  23. Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. (2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2 (1), 433-474.
  24. Pasquale, F. (2022). Platform economy and techno-regulation: A framework for academic freedom in the digital age. First Monday, 27 (7). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v27i7.12778 · DOI
  25. Piaget, J. (1936). Origins of intelligence in the child. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  26. Reich, J., Buttimer, C. J., Fang, A., Hillaire, G., Hirsch, K., Larke, L. R., Littenberg-Tobias, J., Moussapour, R. M., Napier, A., Slama, R., & Thompson, M. (2023). Remote learning guidance from state education agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic: A first look. Educational Researcher, 52 (1), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X221078236 · DOI
  27. Touretzky, D., Gardner-McCune, C., Martin, F., & Seehorn, D. (2019). Envisioning AI for K-12: What should every child know about AI? Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 33 (1), 9795-9799. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33019795 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  29. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17 (2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14697610.1976.tb00381.x · DOI
  30. Zhu, M., Sari, A., & Lee, M. M. (2021). Interdisciplinary project-based learning in artificial intelligence education: An empirical study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59 (7), 1210-1238.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kennedy, K., & Gupta, A.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2510.24783
arXiv
2510.24783
OpenAlex
W7102786596
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital literacy in education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
Keywords
AI literacy, data literacy, artificial intelligence in education, competency framework, scaffolding, higher education curriculum design, generative AI, AI ethics, sociocultural awareness, assessment methods

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