MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989122556

AI Education and Design Fiction

2025· article· en· W6989122556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetNarrativeBridge (graph theory)Component (thermodynamics)Adaptation (eye)Reflection (computer programming)Empirical researchEmpirical evidence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As artificial intelligence (AI) increasingly permeates various sectors of society, it becomes crucial to develop educational approaches that prepare students for the concepts, applications, consequences and ethical considerations of AI. This dissertation investigates how current AI education strategies can be enhanced to better prepare K-12 students for the challenges associated with understanding and navigating AI’s impact on society. Specifically, it examines the potential of Design Fiction Pedagogy (DFP) in advancing AI education for addressing a gap in existing pedagogical methods. The research employs both theoretical studies and an empirical case study. The theoretical component develops a model of DFP, which integrates speculative design with narrative learning principles. The empirical investigation involves a case study of two separate week-long AI camps conducted in Ontario, Canada, where DFP was applied to engage students in exploring possible AI futures. Key findings reveal that design fiction, as a pedagogical method, may offer benefits for AI education. The DFP model has the potential to enhance AI education through its flexible adaptation in various settings. By integrating speculative design and narrative techniques, DFP makes abstract AI concepts and applications more accessible and relevant, fostering a deeper understanding among students. Additionally, it encourages students to consider the ethical implications and future impacts of AI technologies, promoting both ethical reflection and critical thinking. This approach may improve AI educational outcomes and equip students with the mindset and skills needed to navigate the applications and consequences of AI with a future-oriented perspective. By highlighting the potential of design fiction to bridge theoretical and practical aspects of AI, this research offers insights for educators and researchers aiming to prepare students for the challenges of a technology-driven future. DFP’s integration into AI education represents a step towards more engaging and effective teaching strategies. Further exploration and refinement of DFP is needed, to better understand its role in shaping educational practices and enhancing students’ readiness for an increasingly complex technological landscape.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207