重新思考生成式AI素养：面向K-12教师教育的整合型、发展型与辩证型框架
Rethinking Generative AI Literacy: An Integrative, Developmental, and Dialectical Framework for K-12 Teacher Education
浏览论文内容
中文总结 AI 辅助
针对GenAI素养滞后于技术扩散的问题，提出整合型、发展型、辩证型的RAIL-Ed框架，明确六大支柱与三级标准，为K-12教师教育及相关政策提供理论基础。
中文摘要 AI 辅助
生成式人工智能（GenAI）进入课堂的速度远超教师做好充分准备将其用好的速度，由此产生了GenAI素养滞后现象，即技术扩散速度超过了教育工作者在概念、教学法和伦理方面的准备速度。已有的AI素养框架早于大型语言模型的广泛应用，虽承认伦理的重要性，但将其视为一项独立的能力而非构成性承诺，将公平和能动性作为补充的设计原则；近期针对GenAI的特定研究虽涉及孤立特征，但仍呈碎片化状态。我们引入教育领域的负责任AI素养（RAIL-Ed）框架，该框架通过对67项2023-2025年研究的系统综述和定性框架分析开发而成，基于批判理论、实用主义、社会文化和以人为本的传统（弗雷勒、杜威、维果茨基、施奈德曼）。RAIL-Ed明确了六个相互依存的支柱：技术流畅性、批判性评估、人机协作、情境意识、伦理推理和赋能型能动性，体现了三项承诺：它是整合型的，任何一个支柱的缺失都会导致特定的教学失败；它是发展型的，一个三级 rubric（新兴、胜任、高级）明确了每个支柱在K-12教师培养连续体中的成熟过程；它是辩证型的，相同的生成性便利条件可深化或取代学习，取决于教师所具备的素养，因此设计的对象是培养该素养而非采用工具。通过将伦理、公平和能动性视为构成性要素，RAIL-Ed为课程设计、教师教育和政策制定提供了有理论依据的基础，与联合国教科文组织教师AI能力框架以及经合组织/欧盟委员会AILit框架保持一致。该框架属于概念性框架，提出了可证伪的命题以供实证验证。
英文摘要
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has entered classrooms faster than teachers have been prepared to use it well, producing a GenAI literacy lag in which technological diffusion outpaces educators' conceptual, pedagogical, and ethical readiness. Established AI literacy frameworks predate the widespread adoption of large language models and, while acknowledging ethics, position it as a discrete competency rather than a constitutive commitment, with equity and agency as supplementary design principles. Recent GenAI-specific efforts address isolated features but remain fragmented. We introduce the Responsible AI Literacy in Education (RAIL-Ed) framework, developed through a systematic review and qualitative framework analysis of 67 studies (2023-2025), grounded in critical, pragmatist, sociocultural, and human-centered traditions (Freire, Dewey, Vygotsky, Shneiderman). RAIL-Ed specifies six interdependent pillars: Technical Fluency, Critical Evaluation, Human-AI Collaboration, Contextual Awareness, Ethical Reasoning, and Empowered Agency, marked by three commitments. It is integrative: the absence of any pillar produces a characteristic pedagogical failure. It is developmental: a three-level rubric (Emerging, Competent, Advanced) specifies how each pillar matures across the K-12 teacher-preparation continuum. It is dialectical: the same generative affordance can deepen or displace learning depending on the literacy a teacher brings to it, making the cultivation of that literacy, not the adoption of the tool, the object of design. By treating ethics, equity, and agency as constitutive, RAIL-Ed offers a theoretically grounded basis for curriculum design, teacher education, and policy, aligned with the UNESCO AI Competency Framework for Teachers and the OECD/European Commission AILit Framework. The framework is conceptual, advancing falsifiable propositions for empirical validation.
发表机构
- University of Maryland Baltimore County（马里兰大学巴尔的摩分校）
- Kent State University（肯特州立大学）
- Pennsylvania State University（宾夕法尼亚州立大学）
- The University of Alabama（阿拉巴马大学）
- George Washington University（乔治华盛顿大学）
- Pepperdine University（佩珀代因大学）
- Universiti Malaya（马来亚大学）
- Begum Rokeya University（贝古姆·罗姬娅大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。
