The paper identifies two main challenges in machine learning education: opaque tools that give learners only a superficial grasp of ML and hinder the development of calibrated trust in AI systems. It introduces ICE‑T, a didactic framework that combines intermodal transfer, computational thinking, and explanatory thinking to provide representational richness, graduated process control, and error contextualization. By linking these facets to trust‑calibration literature, the authors argue that trust should be an explicit educational goal and that ICE‑T offers a scalable method to achieve it.
The paper introduces ICE-T, a didactic framework designed to improve trust in AI systems through education. It combines intermodal transfer, computational thinking, and explanatory thinking to address the opacity of machine learning tools. By linking these facets to research on algorithm aversion and AI literacy, the authors argue that trust calibration should be an explicit educational goal.
arXiv:2604. 01114v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As generative AI systems are integrated into educational settings, students often encounter AI-generated output while working through learning tasks, either by requesting help or through integrated tools.
arXiv:2606. 12441v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The four dominant learning theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism show significant conceptual limitations as generative artificial intelligence (AI) proliferates in educational settings.
arXiv:2512. 12413v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Generative AI tools are increasingly embedded in everyday work and learning, yet their fluency, opacity, and propensity to hallucinate mean that users must critically evaluate AI outputs rather than accept them at face value.
arXiv:2606. 05983v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generative AI makes answers easy and understanding hard, and uncritical use invites cognitive offloading.
arXiv:2608. 13760v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Which reasoning behaviors are associated with correct answers in reasoning models, and does reasoning-oriented training amplify those behaviors?
arXiv:2608.21391v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In this research-to-practice paper we present a survey that can be used to assess students' AI knowledge. As the use of artificial intelligence (AI),...
The paper argues that explainable AI for computer vision has focused too much on developing interpretability methods rather than assessing how interpretable the models themselves are. It proposes a shift toward model-centric evaluation, using existing tools to compare what different models represent and compute, and emphasizes the need to measure whether humans can truly understand these models. The authors review the current toolbox, survey limited model comparison work, draw parallels to systems neuroscience, and outline a future agenda for model-focused XAI.
arXiv:2609.06095v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Motivation: Undergraduate computing students increasingly turn to generative AI (GenAI) tools to understand abstract concepts through analogies. Anal...
arXiv:2607. 21306v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as tutors and thought partners, helping users reason through problems.
arXiv:2606. 00038v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) literacy is increasingly recognized as a foundational competency for all university graduates.
arXiv:2606. 12422v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The integration of large language models (LLMs) into educational assessment represents a transformative shift in classroom grading practices.