Deep Learning Pedagogies Enhance AI Literacy in Elementary Students: A Five-Cycle Implementation Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v5i1.720Keywords:
AI Literacy, AMAIL Model Artificial Intelligence (AI), Deep Learning, Elementary EducatioAbstract
The urgency to integrate Artificial Intelligence (AI) literacy into primary education in Indonesia is driven by the increasing presence of AI technologies in everyday life and the nation’s strategic vision to prepare a future-ready workforce. However, current teaching practices remain largely behavioristic and content-driven, lacking the pedagogical depth needed to foster conceptual understanding and ethical engagement with AI. This study addresses this gap by investigating how deep-learning pedagogies—approaches that pursue deep learning as a goal through active, reflective, and collaborative experiences— can be used to improve AI literacy among fifth-grade students. Grounded in design-based research (DBR), the study implemented and refined the Associative Model of AI Literacy (AMAIL), a framework integrating cognitive constructivism, social constructivism, constructionism, and transformative learning theories. The intervention spanned five cycles in three public schools in Salatiga, involving 118 students. Learning outcomes were assessed using pre- and post-tests and student reflections, with analysis conducted through bootstrap methods and Exact McNemar’s tests. Findings showed statistically significant improvements in students’ ability to recognize AI, explain its logic, and reflect on its ethical implications. The study demonstrates how deep-learning approaches, when applied iteratively and contextually, can foster not only technical understanding but also critical and ethical AI literacy in primary education. These findings can inform educators and government stakeholders in designing and implementing pedagogical strategies that support comprehensive AI literacy development at the primary level
References
Almatrafi, O., Johri, A., & Lee, H. (2024). A systematic review of AI literacy conceptualization, constructs, and implementation and assessment efforts (2019–2023). Computers and Education Open, 6, 100173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100173
Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813
Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. research monograph. ERIC.
Chung, K., Kim, S., Jang, Y., Choi, S., & Kim, H. (2025). Developing an AI literacy diagnostic tool for elementary school students. Education and Information Technologies, 30(1), 1013–1044. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13097-w
Davison, A. C., & Hinkley, D. V. (1997). Bootstrap methods and their application. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802843
diSessa, A. A. (2022). A history of conceptual change research: Threads and fault lines. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (3rd ed., pp. 114–133). Cambridge University Press; Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108888295.008
Donaldson, J. P., Han, A., Yan, S., Lee, S., & Kao, S. (2024). Learning experience network analysis for design-based research. Information and Learning Sciences, 125(1/2), 22–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-03-2023-0026
Epstein, Z., Hertzmann, A., Investigators of Human Creativity, Akten, M., Farid, H., Fjeld, J., Frank, M. R., Groh, M., Herman, L., & Leach, N. (2023). Art and the science of generative AI. Science, 380(6650), 1110–1111. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh4451
Gong, C., Jing, C., Chen, X., Pun, C. M., Huang, G., Saha, A., Nieuwoudt, M., Li, H.-X., Hu, Y., & Wang, S. (2023). Generative AI for brain image computing and brain network computing: A review. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 17, 1203104. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1203104
Google. (2024a, January 4). Teachable machine. https://teachablemachine.withgoogle.com/
Google. (2024b, January 15). AutoDraw. https://www.autodraw.com/
Google. (2024c, July 5). Quick, Draw! https://quickdraw.withgoogle.com/
Heyder, T., & Posegga, O. (2021). Extending the foundations of AI literacy. 9. https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2021/is_future_work/is_future_work/9
Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., Puntambekar, S., & Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by DesignTM into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1204_2
Liu, X., & Zhong, B. (2024). A systematic review on how educators teach AI in K-12 education. Educational Research Review, 45, 100642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100642
Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727
Ma, M., Ng, D. T. K., Liu, Z., & Wong, G. K. W. (2025). Fostering responsible AI literacy: A systematic review of K-12 AI ethics education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100422
McNemar, Q. (1947). Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika, 12(2), 153–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02295996
Moon, H., Go, H., Lee, Y., & Kim, S.-W. (2024). Investigating factors in artificial intelligence literacy for Korean elementary school students. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 14(4), 1226–1232. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.14.4.16998
Nasir, N. S., Lee, C. D., Pea, R., & McKinney de Royston, M. (2021). Rethinking learning: What the interdisciplinary science tells us. Educational Researcher, 50(8), 557–565. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211047251
Ojeda-Bazaran, M.-J., Chamba-Eras, L., Coronel-Romero, E., Labanda-Jaramillo, M., Conde-Zhingre, L., Irene-Robalino, D., Fierro-Saltos, W., Orellana-Malla, A., Romero-Flores, M., Cueva-Alvarado, G., Chamba-Eras, I., & Erreyes-Pinzon, D. (2021). State of the art of teaching-learning of artificial intelligence at early ages. 165–172. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1109/LACLO54177.2021.00024
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Glazewski, K., Hmelo-Silver, C., Jantaraweragul, K., Jeon, M., Chakraburty, S., Scribner, A., Lee, S., Mott, B., & Lester, J. (2023). Is elementary AI education possible? 2, 1364. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1145/3545947.3576308
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. In S. Papert & I. Harel (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1–11). Basic Books.
Pusat Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran. (2025). Pembelajaran mendalam—Transformasi pembelajaran menuju pendidikan bermutu untuk semua. Kementrian Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah Republik Indonesia.
Relmasira, S. C., Donaldson, J. P., & Lai, Y. C. (2024). Toward a theory-grounded associative model of AI literacy. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of the Learning Sciences - ICLS 2024, 2057–2058. https://doi.org/10.22318/icls2024.559089
Relmasira, S. C., Lai, Y. C., & Donaldson, J. P. (2023). Fostering AI literacy in elementary science, technology, engineering, art, and mathematics (STEAM) education in the age of generative AI. Sustainability, 15(18). https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813595
Sawyer, R. K. (2022). An introduction to the learning sciences. The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108888295.002
Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
Touretzky, D., Gardner-McCune, C., Martin, F., & Seehorn, D. (2019). Envisioning AI for K-12: What should every child know about AI? Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 33, 9795–9799. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33019795
Trigwell, K., & and Prosser, M. (1996). Changing approaches to teaching: A relational perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 21(3), 275–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079612331381211
Voulgari, I., Zammit, M., Stouraitis, E., Liapis, A., & Yannakakis, G. (2021). Learn to machine learn: Designing a game based approach for teaching machine learning to primary and secondary education students. 593–598. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459990.3465176
Wu, D., Chen, M., Chen, X., & Liu, X. (2024). Analyzing K-12 AI education: A large language model study of classroom instruction on learning theories, pedagogy, tools, and AI literacy. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100295
Yang, W. (2022). Artificial Intelligence education for young children: Why, what, and how in curriculum design and implementation. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100061
Yim, I. H. Y. (2024). Artificial intelligence literacy in primary education: An arts-based approach to overcoming age and gender barriers. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100321
Yim, I. H. Y., & Su, J. (2025). Artificial intelligence literacy education in primary schools: A review. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-025-09979-w
Zhang, H., Lee, I., Ali, S., DiPaola, D., Cheng, Y., & Breazeal, C. (2022). Integrating ethics and career futures with technical learning to promote AI literacy for middle school students: An exploratory study. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00293-3
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Online Learning in Educational Research is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Online Learning in Educational Research agree to the following terms:
Copyright Retention: Authors retain the copyright of their work without any restrictions.
Publishing Rights: Authors retain the right to publish and distribute their work without any restrictions.
License Agreement: By publishing with Online Learning in Educational Research, authors agree that their work will be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA). This license allows others to share and adapt the work, provided that appropriate credit is given, any changes are indicated, and the new creations are licensed under the same terms.
