Collaborative construction of artificial intelligence curriculum in primary schools

• Published in: Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.) D.C.), 2023-01, Vol.112 (1), p.23-42
• Main Authors: Dai, Yun, Liu, Ang, Qin, Jianjun, Guo, Yanmei, Jong, Morris Siu‐Yung, Chai, Ching‐Sing, Lin, Ziyan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Artificial Intelligence; Classrooms; Coding; Collaboration; Colleges & universities; Computer Science Education; Constructivism (Learning); Cooperation; Core curriculum; Curricula; Curriculum Development; Education; Educational Policy; Elementary Education; Elementary School Teachers; Elementary Schools; Engineering education; Ethnography; Negotiations; primary school; Schools; Stakeholders; Students; teacher agency; Teacher Improvement; Teachers; Teaching Methods; Technology Education; Triangulation
• ISSN: 1069-4730; 2168-9830
• DOI: 10.1002/jee.20503

Background The recent discussion of introducing artificial intelligence (AI) knowledge to K–12 students, like many engineering and technology education topics, has attracted a wide range of stakeholders and resources for school curriculum development. While teachers often have to directly interact with external stakeholders out of the public schooling system, few studies have scrutinized their negotiation process, especially teachers' responses to external influences, in such complex environments. Purpose Guided by an integrated theoretical framework of social constructionism, this research examined the process of how a teacher‐initiated AI curriculum was constructed with external influences. The research focused on teachers' perspectives and responses in mediating external influences into local schools and classrooms. Methods A 3‐year ethnographic study was conducted in relation to an AI curriculum project among 23 Computer Science (CS) teachers from primary schools. Data collected from ethnographic observation, teacher interviews, and artifacts, were analyzed using open coding and triangulation rooted in the ethnographic, interpretivist approach. Results Three sets of external influences were found salient for teachers' curriculum decisions, including the orientation of state‐level educational policies, AI faculty at a partner university, and students' media and technology environments. The teachers' situational logics and strategic actions were reconstructed with thick descriptions to uncover how they navigated and negotiated the external influences to fulfill local challenges and expectations in classrooms and schools. Conclusions The ethnographic study uncovered the dynamic and multifaceted negotiation involved in the collaborative curriculum development, and offers insights to inform policymaking, teacher education, and student support in engineering education.