Practice Matrix · Micro

AI Literacy and Professional Development

Classroom and learning design · Training, certification and capacity building for students, teaching staff and administrators.

Back to the matrix

practices

Who

Where

Source report

The reading of this intersection

The count in the cell shows density; what the intersection says is carried by the reading below.

Two records place AI literacy inside the learning situation rather than beside it. The first is a published student guide whose rules are operational rather than exhortative: definitions, rules, figures and references are to be verified against at least two reliable sources; the purpose for which the tool was used is to be stated rather than its name; and the course instruction is to be treated as binding, with the guide directing that where use is forbidden the tool is not to be used at all. The second is a module on critical AI literacy offered to students, which makes participation part of study rather than an optional addition to it.

Two further records describe the competence acquired where neither instrument is available. Respondents attribute improved results to their own learning: prompts become specific and goal-directed, extended exchanges are sustained rather than restarted, and use moves from a single general assistant to a set of tools selected for particular purposes. One student describes the effort of explaining a task to the model as itself constituting a learning experience on occasion, which is the strongest pedagogical claim made anywhere in the material in respect of individual use.

The channels through which such learning occurs divide by role, and the division carries implications for equity. Staff describe colleagues and internal knowledge sharing, which are informal but institutionally situated. For students the most common channels are public video and social media, which lie outside the institution altogether. The second round measured the difference underlying this pattern: students reported less access to formal training than staff and relied more heavily on peer collaboration and online resources, and the difference did not narrow between the two survey years.

Who, and where

The actors carrying out the practice and where they are. Where a source does not name the institution, no attribution is made.

Institutions and actors

Anadolu University, Open Education Faculty
UniDistance Suisse

Countries

Türkiye
Switzerland
Multiple countries

Context

Higher education

How it was done

Each record stands with its imprint, its short reading and the sentence found in the source. Quotations are not shortened, so that a reader can check the inference.

Student guide to generative AI with four binding practices

Open the source

A published guide addressed to students positions generative AI as a producer of drafts rather than an authority. It teaches prompt construction from a minimal three-part form up to a five-part template, maps use onto the levels of Bloom's taxonomy, and closes with four practices: withhold identifying data, verify critical claims against at least two sources, treat the course instruction as binding, and state the purpose for which the tool was used.

Institution: Anadolu University, Open Education Faculty
Country: Türkiye
Delivery model: Open and distance
Context: Higher education
Contributed by: Anadolu University
Year: 2026
Maturity: Established
Scalability: Embedded
Transferability: Embedded
Source report: AOF-OGR

Evidence

A published document with an ISBN and a registered identifier, which makes the practice inspectable in full rather than reported at second hand.

Önemli bilgilerin en az iki güvenilir kaynaktan kontrol edilmesinin

AOF-OGR, p. 6

Critical AI literacy module offered to students

A module on critical AI literacy for learning was offered to students from autumn 2025. Placing the subject inside a module rather than a workshop makes participation part of study rather than an optional addition to it.

Institution: UniDistance Suisse
Country: Switzerland
Delivery model: Fully online
Context: Higher education
Contributed by: not stated in the source
Year: 2025
Maturity: Piloted
Scalability: Established
Transferability: Embedded
Source report: D3.2

Evidence

Reported by the institution with the term of first delivery; no evaluation of the module is reported, so the record is coded as newly established.

A module on "Critical AI Literacy for Learning" will be offered to the students from autumn 2025.

D3.2, p. 43

Prompting skill built by the user, and a widening repertoire of tools

Respondents in every group attribute improved results to their own learning: prompts have become more specific and goal-directed, extended exchanges are sustained more deliberately, and use has moved from a single tool to a set of tools selected for particular purposes. Explaining a task to the model is described as constituting a learning experience in itself.

Institution: not stated in the source
Country: Multiple countries
Delivery model: not stated in the source
Context: Higher education
Contributed by: not stated in the source
Year: 2026
Maturity: Established
Scalability: Piloted
Transferability: Embedded
Source report: R3

Evidence

Named by the report as one of the most frequently mentioned themes under change over the preceding year, with verbatim quotations from support staff, teachers and students in more than one country.

I've learned how effective prompts work and that the effort involved in explaining to the AI what it should do can sometimes be a learning experience in itself.

R3, p. 3.2.5

Learning the tools through peers, colleagues and public video rather than through provision

Where formal training is absent or limited, competence is acquired through colleagues, peer networks, self-paced material and practical use. The channels differ by role: staff describe internal knowledge sharing and consultation with colleagues, while for students public video and social media are the most common route. The report finds that informal learning acts as a complement to formal provision rather than as a substitute for it.

Institution: not stated in the source
Country: Multiple countries
Delivery model: not stated in the source
Context: Higher education
Contributed by: not stated in the source
Year: 2026
Maturity: Established
Scalability: Piloted
Transferability: Embedded
Source report: R3

Evidence

Reported in the third round through a content analysis of the open answers on training and support, and corroborated by the second round, which measured the difference in access to formal training between students and staff.

students relied more heavily on informal learning methods such as peer collaboration and online resources, whereas staff groups had greater access to structured training through workshops, seminars, and institutional programs

D3.2, p. 48