Practitioner Beliefs and Behaviors in AI-Enhanced Education: DOT Framework Survey Evidence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.29041v1
• Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 19:42:31 GMT
• Title: Practitioner Beliefs and Behaviors in AI-Enhanced Education: DOT Framework Survey Evidence
• Abstract summary: The study investigates AI familiarity, usage patterns, design-oriented practices, and pedagogical beliefs.<n>Results indicate that practitioners hold favorable views of AI as a pedagogical support while maintaining strong commitments to human oversight and critical evaluation.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This study reports findings from a cross-sectional survey (n = 72) of higher education practitioners examining beliefs, behaviors, and institutional conditions related to artificial intelligence (AI) integration in teaching and learning. Grounded in the DOT Framework, which integrates design thinking and open systems theory, the study investigates AI familiarity, usage patterns, design-oriented practices, and pedagogical beliefs. Exploratory factor analysis of 19 belief items identified a three-factor structure: AI Functional Capabilities, Oversight and Governance, and Instructor Collaboration and Planning (α = .90). Results indicate that practitioners hold favorable views of AI as a pedagogical support while maintaining strong commitments to human oversight and critical evaluation. Reported practices emphasize iterative prompting and content generation, with less consistent use of needs assessment and feedback loops. Institutional barriers including limited policy, training, and infrastructure were widely reported. These findings provide preliminary empirical support for the DOT Framework as a descriptive model of practitioner beliefs and practices, while also highlighting gaps between design-oriented theory and current implementation. The study contributes an initial measurement structure and identifies directions for confirmatory validation and outcome-based research linking AI-supported design practices to instructional quality.

Related papers

• Causal Modelling of Support Interventions for Student Competency Assessment [42.46717736329823]
  We advocate adopting a structural causal modelling approach to educational assessment.<n>We analyse the practical relevance of forms of reasoning that remain inaccessible to standard associative models.<n>Although our protocol requires the structural equations to be elicited from experts, the necessary information is purely logical.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-25T14:46:00Z)
• Beyond the Algorithm: Professional Experiences and Perceptions of AI Bias [0.0]
  The purpose of this study was to examine how social bias emerges, is perceived, and can be mitigated within artificial intelligence and machine learning systems.<n>The study focused on the lived experiences and professional insights of AI practitioners rather than sector-specific populations.<n>Findings showed that algorithmic bias arises from historical inequities, exclusionary design assumptions, and organizational pressures that prioritize speed and efficiency over ethical reflection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-13T00:59:17Z)
• Design Principles and Observable Indicators for AI-Enabled Pedagogical Accompaniment: Evidence from the Amico Dual-Mode Prototype in Italy and China [0.0]
  This paper proposes a framework for AI-enabled pedagogical accompaniment, grounded in a human-in-command approach.<n>Building on the Amico project, we operationalize the concept of a relational bridge as a sequence of micro-mediations.<n>The paper outlines an initial cross-context exploration of the prototype in Italy and China and discusses how the two interaction modes, AmicoMio and AmicoTuo, can be used.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-20T03:32:07Z)
• Faculty Orientations Shape Adoption of AI in Research and Teaching [0.0]
  This study examined relationships between AI use, attitudes, institutional context, and instructional practice.<n>Results suggest that existing technology-adoption models may not fully explain adoption in contexts where technologies interact directly with disciplinary reasoning and knowledge production.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T09:47:35Z)
• Principles and Guidelines for Randomized Controlled Trials in AI Evaluation [34.88842637551998]
  This work establishes a foundational framework for standardizing AI evaluation RCTs.<n>We adopt the four-validity framework and extend it with a fifth principle on transparency, repeatability, and verification.<n>We operationalize all five principles into 33 guidelines adapted for AI evaluation RCT contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-03T20:37:48Z)
• How to Assess AI Literacy: Misalignment Between Self-Reported and Objective-Based Measures [6.943056322842481]
  The widespread adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in K-12 education highlights the need for psychometrically-tested measures of teachers' AI literacy.<n>This study developed and evaluated SR and OB measures of teacher AI literacy within the established framework of Concept, Use, Evaluate, and Ethics.<n>Latent profile analysis identified six distinct profiles, including overestimation (SR > OB), underestimation (SR OB), alignment (SR close to OB) and a unique low-SR/low-OB profile among teachers without AI literacy experience.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-03T00:10:41Z)
• AI-Educational Development Loop (AI-EDL): A Conceptual Framework to Bridge AI Capabilities with Classical Educational Theories [8.500617875591633]
  This study introduces the AI-Educational Development Loop (AI-EDL), a theory-driven framework that integrates classical learning theories with human-in-the-loop artificial intelligence (AI)<n>The framework emphasizes transparency, self-regulated learning, and pedagogical oversight.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T15:44:19Z)
• Medical Reasoning in the Era of LLMs: A Systematic Review of Enhancement Techniques and Applications [59.721265428780946]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) in medicine have enabled impressive capabilities, yet a critical gap remains in their ability to perform systematic, transparent, and verifiable reasoning.<n>This paper provides the first systematic review of this emerging field.<n>We propose a taxonomy of reasoning enhancement techniques, categorized into training-time strategies and test-time mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T14:41:31Z)
• Two Experts Are All You Need for Steering Thinking: Reinforcing Cognitive Effort in MoE Reasoning Models Without Additional Training [86.70255651945602]
  We introduce a novel inference-time steering methodology called Reinforcing Cognitive Experts (RICE)<n>RICE aims to improve reasoning performance without additional training or complexs.<n> Empirical evaluations with leading MoE-based LRMs demonstrate noticeable and consistent improvements in reasoning accuracy, cognitive efficiency, and cross-domain generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T17:59:16Z)
• STRICTA: Structured Reasoning in Critical Text Assessment for Peer Review and Beyond [68.47402386668846]
  We introduce Structured Reasoning In Critical Text Assessment (STRICTA) to model text assessment as an explicit, step-wise reasoning process.<n>STRICTA breaks down the assessment into a graph of interconnected reasoning steps drawing on causality theory.<n>We apply STRICTA to a dataset of over 4000 reasoning steps from roughly 40 biomedical experts on more than 20 papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T06:55:37Z)
• A Literature Review of Literature Reviews in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [51.26815896167173]
  We present a comprehensive tertiary analysis of PAMI reviews along three complementary dimensions.<n>Our analyses reveal distinctive organizational patterns as well as persistent gaps in current review practices.<n>Finally, our evaluation of state-of-the-art AI-generated reviews indicates encouraging advances in coherence and organization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:28:50Z)
• The Participatory Turn in AI Design: Theoretical Foundations and the Current State of Practice [64.29355073494125]
  This article aims to ground what we dub the "participatory turn" in AI design by synthesizing existing theoretical literature on participation. We articulate empirical findings concerning the current state of participatory practice in AI design based on an analysis of recently published research and semi-structured interviews with 12 AI researchers and practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T05:30:42Z)
• Active Inference in Robotics and Artificial Agents: Survey and Challenges [51.29077770446286]
  We review the state-of-the-art theory and implementations of active inference for state-estimation, control, planning and learning. We showcase relevant experiments that illustrate its potential in terms of adaptation, generalization and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-03T12:10:26Z)

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.