MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412870720 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2025.19576

Developing AI Literacy Competencies Among First-Year Engineering Students

2025· article· en· W4412870720 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Elias Poitras-Whitecalf, Khawla Shnaikat, Susan Okwuegbuna, Emily Marasco, Ann Barcomb

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsLiteracyMathematics educationMedical educationPsychologyEngineeringPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to become a significant component of modern engineering, it is important that incoming students learn foundational AI concepts to prepare for related challenges and opportunities in their careers. This study proposes the creation of research-informed online training for incoming engineering students to build their competencies in AI literacy and effective and responsible use of AI. Educational personas were created to better understand the experiences of incoming student. These personas ranged from students with no prior exposure to AI to those with an in-depth understanding of generative AI and large language models. Eight distinct units were established, each accompanied by targeted learning objectives and informed by several factors: gaps identified in the personas, insights from the literature reviews, and the specific skill deficiencies highlighted by the rubric. An online learning module was created in RISE, an online course development platform that supports interactive and engaging learning experiences. Designed activities included sorting exercises and matching definitions, which helped reinforce key concepts. Pilot testing of the final module was performed in an introductory coding course for first-year engineering students. Preliminary feedback from students and teaching team members has been highly positive, highlighting the potential for broader applicability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207