Back to Assessment
assessment credential recordpublished
AAB-ASSESSMENT-009-SYSTEMATIC-REVIEW-OF-AI-LITERACY-SCALES

Systematic Review of AI Literacy Scales

Research synthesis for Researchers, assessment designers, standards bodies. With the opportunities and challenges stemming from the artificial intelligence developments and its integration into society, AI literacy becomes a key concern. Utilizing quality AI literacy instruments is crucial for understanding and promoting AI literacy development. This systematic review assessed the quality of AI literacy scales using the COSMIN tool aiming to aid researchers in choosing instruments for AI literacy assessment. This review identified 22 studies validating 16 scales targeting various populations including general population, higher education students, secondary education students, and teachers. Overall, the scales demonstrated good structural validity and internal consistency. On the other hand, only a few have been tested for content validity, reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness. None of the scales have been tested for cross-cultural validity and measurement error. Most studies did not report any interpretability indicators and almost none had raw data available. There are 3 performance-based scale available, compared to 13 self-report scales. It is positioned for International research.

Assessment method
Quality review of AI literacy scales
Last verified
2025-01-12
Updated
2025-01-12

Assessment intelligence brief

Validity signal, alignment, and AAB assessment rating

Research synthesis for Researchers, assessment designers, standards bodies. With the opportunities and challenges stemming from the artificial intelligence developments and its integration into society, AI literacy becomes a key concern. Utilizing quality AI literacy instruments is crucial for understanding and promoting AI literacy development. This systematic review assessed the quality of AI literacy scales using the COSMIN tool aiming to aid researchers in choosing instruments for AI literacy assessment. This review identified 22 studies validating 16 scales targeting various populations including general population, higher education students, secondary education students, and teachers. Overall, the scales demonstrated good structural validity and internal consistency. On the other hand, only a few have been tested for content validity, reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness. None of the scales have been tested for cross-cultural validity and measurement error. Most studies did not report any interpretability indicators and almost none had raw data available. There are 3 performance-based scale available, compared to 13 self-report scales. It is positioned for International research.

5.0Authority
5.0Validity
5.0Alignment
4.5Evidence trace
AABValidity
AuthorityIssuer credibility and assessment expertise
5.0
ValidityClarity of construct, method, and credential claim
5.0
AlignmentFit with AI literacy, durable skills, or AAB evidence needs
5.0
Evidence traceCompleteness of source-linked metadata
4.5

Highlights

  • Reviews existing AI literacy instruments and their measurement quality.
  • Helps AAB decide which AI literacy instruments are credible enough for pilots, case registry metadata, or evaluation studies.
  • With the opportunities and challenges stemming from the artificial intelligence developments and its integration into society, AI literacy becomes a key concern. Utilizing quality AI literacy instruments is crucial for understanding and promoting AI literacy development. This systematic review assessed the quality of AI literacy scales using the COSMIN tool aiming to aid researchers in choosing instruments for AI literacy assessment. This review identified 22 studies validating 16 scales targeting various populations including general population, higher education students, secondary education students, and teachers. Overall, the scales demonstrated good structural validity and internal consistency. On the other hand, only a few have been tested for content validity, reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness. None of the scales have been tested for cross-cultural validity and measurement error. Most studies did not report any interpretability indicators and almost none had raw data available. There are 3 performance-based scale available, compared to 13 self-report scales.
  • A systematic review of AI literacy scales - npj Science of Learning
  • With the opportunities and challenges stemming from the artificial intelligence developments and its integration into society, AI literacy becomes a key concern. Utilizing quality AI literacy instruments is crucial for understanding and promoting AI...

Rating rationale

Systematic Review of AI Literacy Scales receives a 5.0 / 5 AAB assessment record rating based on authority 5.0, validity 5.0, alignment 5.0, evidence depth 4.5.

Issuer authorityAssessment method clarityAI literacy alignmentEvidence trace completeness

Source trace

Rating and summary are based on 2 linked sources, 2 retrieved pages, registry metadata, and AAB source trace notes.

nature.comA systematic review of AI literacy scales - npj Science of Learning

With the opportunities and challenges stemming from the artificial intelligence developments and its integration into society, AI literacy becomes a key concern. Utilizing quality AI literacy instruments is crucial for understanding and promoting AI literacy development. This systematic review assessed the quality of AI literacy scales using the COSMIN tool aiming to aid researchers in choosing instruments for AI literacy assessment. This review identified 22 studies validating 16 scales targeting various populations including general population, higher education students, secondary education students, and teachers. Overall, the scales demonstrated good structural validity and internal consistency. On the other hand, only a few have been tested for content validity, reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness. None of the scales have been tested for cross-cultural validity and measurement error. Most studies did not report any interpretability indicators and almost none had raw data available. There are 3 performance-based scale available, compared to 13 self-report scales.

Retrieved source
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.govA systematic review of AI literacy scales - PMC

With the opportunities and challenges stemming from the artificial intelligence developments and its integration into society, AI literacy becomes a key concern. Utilizing quality AI literacy instruments is crucial for understanding and promoting AI ...

Retrieved source
assessmentassessment designersassessment-credentialcredentialdirect-ai-literacy-ai-competency-assessmentsinternational researchk-12research synthesisresearchersstandards bodies