Teaching Students to Question the Machine: An AI Literacy Intervention Improves Students' Regulation of LLM Use in a Science Task

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.01955v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2026 12:19:43 GMT
• Title: Teaching Students to Question the Machine: An AI Literacy Intervention Improves Students' Regulation of LLM Use in a Science Task
• Abstract summary: The rapid adoption of generative artificial intelligence in schools raises concerns about students' uncritical reliance on its outputs.<n>These skills are still developing in middle school, making students vulnerable to over-trust and premature acceptance of AI outputs.<n>We report a controlled classroom study examining whether a two-hour AI literacy workshop improves students' interaction strategies and quality of final answers.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The rapid adoption of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in schools raises concerns about students' uncritical reliance on its outputs. Effective use of large language models (LLMs) requires not only technical knowledge but also the ability to monitor, evaluate, and regulate one's interaction with the system, processes closely tied to metacognitive regulation. These skills are still developing in middle school, making students particularly vulnerable to over-trust and premature acceptance of AI outputs. Because classroom time and teacher training resources are constrained, there is a pressing need to develop and evaluate AI literacy interventions that can be implemented under realistic school conditions. We report a controlled classroom study examining whether a two-hour AI literacy workshop improves students' interaction strategies and quality of final answers in LLM-supported science problem solving. A total of 116 students (grades 8-9; ages 13-15) completed six science investigation tasks using a generative AI system. Two days prior, the intervention group attended the workshop, which combined information about how LLMs work and fail with practical guidance on prompting and response evaluation; the control group received no training. Trained students showed less uncritical reliance on the system: they more often reformulated queries, asked follow-up questions, and more accurately judged response correctness, leading to better performance. In contrast, GenAI and metacognitive self-report scores did not predict performance, suggesting that effective use of generative AI depends less on self-reported measures and more on explicit training in interaction regulation. Overall, the results show that brief, scalable AI literacy instruction can meaningfully improve how middle-school students use generative AI in school-like learning activities.

Related papers

• Socrates went Nuclear: Comparing Interaction Strategies for AI systems in a Learning Context using Brain Sensing [66.03354630509942]
  This paper reports on a study where we compare three designs for user-AI interaction in a learning context.<n>Fifty study participants were tasked with learning about nuclear safety protocols.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-01T02:24:35Z)
• Is Solving Better Than Evaluating GenAI Solutions? [45.714140455691485]
  This study compares evaluating GenAI-generated solutions with traditional problem solving in a junior-level algorithms course.<n>We found no statistically significant differences between groups in midterm scores, final exam scores, overall course grades, or exam problems structurally aligned with the homework interventions.<n>Students received significantly higher homework scores when evaluating GenAI-generated solutions, but this localized advantage did not translate into downstream gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-30T02:08:29Z)
• From Prompting to Epistemic Proactivity: Temporal Trajectories of Student-AI Interaction in Mathematics Learning [2.024558551027881]
  GenAI is increasingly used by students as learning companions.<n>This study examined Grade-9 students' dialogue with a general-purpose LLM during mathematics practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-26T14:54:37Z)
• Regulating the AI Tutor: Intentions, Help-Seeking, and Self-Regulated Learning in Adolescent GenAI Use [2.024558551027881]
  This work-in-progress examines open-ended conversational data from 98 Grade-9 students across three German Gymnasium schools.<n>We collected pre-post domain knowledge, pre-chat learning needs, and self-reported cognitive load.<n>Although students overwhelmingly selected scaffolded support before the chat, their interactions were dominated by instrumental requests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-07T10:47:52Z)
• Framing, Judging, Steering: An Assessable Competency Model for Teach-ing Students to Reason With Generative AI [47.027290803102666]
  We propose CoRe-3 (Co-Reasoning), a competency model factoring productive AI use into three assessable skills.<n>We ground the skills in theory, state five testable propositions, and instantiate them in CoReasoningLab.<n>Human-rater agreement and outcomes are next; we release the instrument, data, and protocol.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T10:25:31Z)
• Trust and Reliance on AI in Education: AI Literacy and Need for Cognition as Moderators [2.0391237204597363]
  We investigate how students' trust relates to their appropriate reliance on an AI assistant during programming problem-solving tasks.<n>We operationalize reliance behaviorally as the extent to which students' responses reflected appropriate use of the AI assistant's suggestions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-01T16:38:47Z)
• Learning to Use AI for Learning: How Can We Effectively Teach and Measure Prompting Literacy for K-12 Students? [1.413488665073795]
  There is a growing need to equip the next generation with the ability to apply, interact with, evaluate, and collaborate with AI systems responsibly.<n>To address this need, we designed an Large-Language Model (LLM)-based module to teach prompting literacy.<n>We conducted two iterations of classroom deployment in 11 authentic secondary education classrooms, and evaluated 1) AI-based auto-grader's capability; 2) students' prompting performance and confidence changes towards using AI for learning; and 3) the quality of learning and assessment materials.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-19T15:54:51Z)
• Robots and Children that Learn Together : Improving Knowledge Retention by Teaching Peer-Like Interactive Robots [41.94295877935867]
  This study introduces Interactive Reinforcement Learning as a cognitive model for teachable social robots.<n>Children in the LbT condition achieved significantly higher retention gains compared to those in the self-practice condition.<n>This work makes two contributions: (1) it introduces Interactive RL as a pedagogically effective and scalable model for peer-robot learning, and (2) it demonstrates, for the first time, the feasibility of deploying multiple autonomous robots simultaneously in real classrooms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-23T07:51:04Z)
• AI instructional agent improves student's perceived learner control and learning outcome: empirical evidence from a randomized controlled trial [29.45751702212421]
  This study examines the impact of an AI instructional agent on students' perceived learner control and academic performance in a medium demanding course with lecturing as the main teaching strategy.<n>Students in the AI instructional agent group reported significantly higher levels of perceived learner control compared to the other groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T16:13:27Z)
• Let people fail! Exploring the influence of explainable virtual and robotic agents in learning-by-doing tasks [45.23431596135002]
  This study compares the effects of classic vs. partner-aware explanations on human behavior and performance during a learning-by-doing task. Results indicated that partner-aware explanations influenced participants differently based on the type of artificial agents involved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-15T13:22:04Z)
• Do great minds think alike? Investigating Human-AI Complementarity in Question Answering with CAIMIRA [43.116608441891096]
  Humans outperform AI systems in knowledge-grounded abductive and conceptual reasoning. State-of-the-art LLMs like GPT-4 and LLaMA show superior performance on targeted information retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T03:53:26Z)
• YODA: Teacher-Student Progressive Learning for Language Models [82.0172215948963]
  This paper introduces YODA, a teacher-student progressive learning framework. It emulates the teacher-student education process to improve the efficacy of model fine-tuning. Experiments show that training LLaMA2 with data from YODA improves SFT with significant performance gain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-28T14:32:15Z)
• Learning to Prompt in the Classroom to Understand AI Limits: A pilot study [35.06607166918901]
  Large Language Models (LLM) and the derived chatbots, like ChatGPT, have highly improved the natural language processing capabilities of AI systems. However, excitement has led to negative sentiments, even as AI methods demonstrate remarkable contributions. A pilot educational intervention was performed in a high school with 21 students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-04T07:51:37Z)
• Explainable Active Learning (XAL): An Empirical Study of How Local Explanations Impact Annotator Experience [76.9910678786031]
  We propose a novel paradigm of explainable active learning (XAL), by introducing techniques from the recently surging field of explainable AI (XAI) into an Active Learning setting. Our study shows benefits of AI explanation as interfaces for machine teaching--supporting trust calibration and enabling rich forms of teaching feedback, and potential drawbacks--anchoring effect with the model judgment and cognitive workload.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-24T22:52:18Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.