The Responsible AI Literacy in Education (RAIL-Ed) framework is introduced, developed through a systematic review and qualitative framework analysis of 67 studies (2023-2025), grounded in critical, pragmatist, sociocultural, and human-centered traditions.
Abstract
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.
The rapid emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has transformed academic writing, learning, and knowledge production in higher education. This constructivist grounded theory study explored how future teachers construct responsible AI-mediated academic literacy in their academic work. The study examined how pre-service teachers use AI-assisted tools, negotiate authorship and ownership, protect academic integrity, balance efficiency with learning, preserve personal voice, and respond to institutional and social expectations. Data were generated through semistructured interviews, observations, field notes, and analytic memoing involving teacher education students with experience using generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, and related platforms.
Analysis followed constructivist grounded theory procedures, including initial coding, focused coding, constant comparative analysis, theoretical sampling, memo writing, and theoretical integration.
Findings generated five major categories: AI as a supportive learning and writing resource rather than a replacement for human thinking; negotiating authorship, ownership, and academic integrity in AIassisted writing; balancing efficiency, learning, and dependence through ethical decision-making;
preserving personal voice, authenticity, and human agency; and navigating institutional expectations, policies, and social influences in responsible AI use. These categories converged into the core category of constructing responsible AI-mediated academic literacy through Human-Guided Ethical Engagement. The study generated the Responsible AI-Mediated Academic Literacy Framework (RAALF), which explains responsible AI use as a cyclical, reflective, and human-directed process. The findings suggest that AI literacy in teacher education must extend beyond technical tool use toward ethical self-regulation, authorship preservation, critical evaluation, transparency, and professional responsibility.
Erlinda C. Caerlang· QualiSearch Journal of Educa...· 0 citations
This research demonstrates how a pedagogy synergistically combining CDA with hands-on AI interaction fosters deeper digital citizenship, enhances critical thinking, and improves employability skills, and recommends curriculum design that reward critical engagement over mere output generation.
Pethias Siame· International Journal of Mul...· 0 citations
A conceptual framework offering AI designers, teacher educators, and policymakers a psychologically grounded, empirically mapped, and internationally contextualised basis for developing AI-supported educational systems that advance equity, learner engagement, and meaningful educational transformation is proposed.
Arpana Koul· Review of Artificial Intelli...· 0 citations
It is argued that teachers require prompting skills, critical evaluation of AI output, understanding of automated scoring systems, and pedagogical strategies to redesign assessments, and that these competences must be embedded in initial and in service teacher education.
Karin Vogt· Language Testing in Focus: A...· 0 citations
A taxonomy of literacy practices for engaging with AI, grounded in the new literacies of online reading comprehension, is proposed, providing educators with language and observable markers for supporting students' evolving literacy practices.
Amy Hutchison, Marissa J. Filderman, Chinecherem Ezeihejafor· TechTrends· 0 citations
An ethical and pedagogical framework for integrating GenAI into foreign language education and a six-stage AI mediated communicative task cycle that guides learners from task orientation, guided prompting, and drafting or rehearsal to critical revision, transparent submission or performance, and reflective transfer are proposed.
Dionelio Jesús Moreno Villalobos· International Journal of Edu...· 0 citations