MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412870837 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2025.19712

Thriving in the Age of AI: A Model Curriculum for Developing Competencies in Artificial Intelligence for K-12

2025· article· en· W4412870837 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Qusay H. Mahmoud, Hossam A. Kishawy, Kimberly Davis, Alex Piliounis, Zahraa Bassyouni, Laura Thursby

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
KeywordsThrivingPsychologyCurriculumArtificial intelligenceMathematics educationGerontologyComputer sciencePedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ontario Tech University’s Engineering Outreach developed the course “Thriving in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (AI)” to provide high school students with a foundational understanding of AI, addressing the increasing relevance of these technologies in everyday life, education, and the workforce. This research paper outlines the course curriculum and delivery methods and evaluates the course’s impact on students and educators. The curriculum consists of six core modules that align with the Ontario Curriculum, focusing on equipping youth with essential AI knowledge and exploring its societal implications. The course is delivered through online platforms, workshops, and direct classroom integration, designed to expand access to AI education, particularly for students and educators with limited previous exposure. Using qualitative data from student feedback and quantitative metrics on course interaction, this paper analyzes the course’s effectiveness in improving AI literacy and its influence on educators’ instructional practices. Findings indicate that students who completed the course demonstrated an improved grasp of key AI concepts, preparing them for future career opportunities in an AI-driven world. Additionally, the course has provided educators with strategies for integrating AI into their teaching practices, enhancing their confidence and instructional competencies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207