AI Literacy as Experimental Practice: Students as Investigators

There is ongoing academic debate on whether one can teach AI literacy to undergraduate students across majors, and if yes, how. This article reports a case study: a three-week midterm project embedded in an undergraduate “AI-for-all” course. Students designed reasoning tasks, ran controlled comparisons across widely used chatbots, and evaluated both answer correctness and explanation validity. Through field experience, students with no STEM background learned what consumer chatbots can and cannot do, documenting systematic brittleness across models that “sounded right but reasoned wrong.” More critically, students built understanding of how to evaluate AI outputs. The midterm gave them agency as investigators rather than passive users. Eager to share their discoveries, they are co-authors of this article. Together, we offer here to educators and the broader scientific community a concrete example of the operationalization of AI literacy as experimental practice. The method, however, is not specific to the classroom. It shows any user how to test an AI system rather than trust it blindly.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Communications of the ACM
Published
2026-08-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3827916
Primary Topic
AI in Service Interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI Literacy as Experimental Practice: Students as Investigators

Amarda Shehu, Aarav Sethi, Aroush Baig, Ashley Petty et al.
Communications of the ACM
AI in Service Interactions
article

AI Literacy as Experimental Practice: Students as Investigators

Amarda Shehu, Aarav Sethi, Aroush Baig, Ashley Petty, Jaewon Jang, Eleanor Hay, Logan Massimo, Brandon Pak, Griffin Allen, Adonyas Ababu, Eman Mirza, Sara Nuwayhid, Carter Jones, Andy Hay, Luis Granados, Matt Dean, Garrett McMullin, Giovanni Vitela, Caleb Jackson, Corbin Rogers, Jagan Yetukuri, Layla Hantush, Tereana Battle, Jacob Schiek, Quanyang Li, Ethan Douglass, Dryden Rancourt, Winston Williams, Taeseo Seok, Asma Akbary, Hadiya Muddasar, Kate Demarco, Lily Rodriguez, Ariana Maldonado, Adrian Lopez, Elias Beall, Christopher Byrom
article en

Abstract

There is ongoing academic debate on whether one can teach AI literacy to undergraduate students across majors, and if yes, how. This article reports a case study: a three-week midterm project embedded in an undergraduate “AI-for-all” course. Students designed reasoning tasks, ran controlled comparisons across widely used chatbots, and evaluated both answer correctness and explanation validity. Through field experience, students with no STEM background learned what consumer chatbots can and cannot do, documenting systematic brittleness across models that “sounded right but reasoned wrong.” More critically, students built understanding of how to evaluate AI outputs. The midterm gave them agency as investigators rather than passive users. Eager to share their discoveries, they are co-authors of this article. Together, we offer here to educators and the broader scientific community a concrete example of the operationalization of AI literacy as experimental practice. The method, however, is not specific to the classroom. It shows any user how to test an AI system rather than trust it blindly.

Communications of the ACM
George Mason University (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
AI in Service Interactions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.