Students’ demand for AI literacy training in collaboration with teaching staff

Introduction. AI literacy is crucial for maintaining the developmental role of education, ensuring that young people are adequately prepared for the transition to work within the knowledge economy, and promoting prosocial values in the development and application of AI tools. Aim. This study aims to analyse students’ demand for enhanced AI literacy by examining their interactions with educators. Methodology and research methods. The study is grounded in the activity approach within the social sciences. The empirical foundation comprises a formalised survey of students at the University of Tyumen (n = 650). Analytical methods include calculating indices and comparing means, with controls applied to assess the significance of differences. Results. It was revealed that students have a clearly articulated interest solely in developing the activity-based component of AI literacy; they expect to acquire specific skills in using AI to solve educational and professional tasks. The desire to develop the cognitive, reflective, and ethical components may give rise to tensions in the interaction between educators and students, owing to the lack of demand for these aspects. It is demonstrated that the demand for developing AI literacy is higher in the early years of study, and differences related to disciplinary affiliation are also examined. Scientific novelty. Drawing on the authors’ operationalisation, the scientific novelty of the study lies in its identification of the risks associated with students’ predominantly praxeological orientation when using AI tools. Practical significance. The practical significance resides in substantiating a proposal to focus the educator’s pedagogical influence. It is suggested that the value of a comprehensive understanding of AI literacy should be emphasised by highlighting the deficiencies that arise from underestimating the importance of its individual components.

1. Kataev D.V., Belyaev D.A., Tarasov A.N. Dynamics of scientific discourse on artificial intelligence in education: bibliometric analysis and thematic modeling. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2025;34(11):145–168. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2025-34-11-145-168

2. Ma M., Ng D.T.K., Liu Z., Wong G.K.W. Fostering responsible AI literacy: a systematic review of K-12 AI ethics education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2025;8:100422. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100422

3. Gunasekara L., El-Haber N., Nagpal S., Moraliyage H., Issadeen Z., Manic M., et al. A systematic review of responsible artificial intelligence principles and practice. Applied System Innovation. 2025;8:97. doi:10.3390/asi8040097

4. Chiu T.K.F. AI literacy and competency: definitions, frameworks, development and future research directions. Interactive Learning Environments. 2025;33(5):3225–3229. doi:10.1080/10494820.2025.2514372

5. Chee H., Ahn S., Lee J. A competency frameworkfor AI literacy: variations by different learner groups and an implied learning pathway. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2025;56:2146– 2182. doi:10.1111/bjet.13556

6. Bermous A.G. Academic cheating and imitation at higher school as an ontological challenge to the education of the XXI century. Nepreryvnoe obrazovanie: XXI vek = Lifelong Education: The 21st Century. 2023;1. (In Russ.) doi:10.15393/j5.art.2023.8244

7. Chopik O.A. Artificial intelligence as a factor in transforming the subjective position of students in higher education. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2025;34(8-9):54–73. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2025-34-8-9-54-73

8. Kabrin V.I., Galazhinsky E.V., Feshchenko A.V., Matsuta V.V., Barch S.I., Ivanova A.S. The Impact of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT on student creativity. Sibirskiy Psikhologicheskiy Zhurnal = Siberian Journal of Psychology. 2025;96:26–45. (In Russ.) doi:10.17223/17267080/96/2

9. Korte S.-M., Cheung W.M.-Y., Maasilta M., Kong S.-C., Keskitalo P., Wang L., et al. Enhancing artificial intelligence literacy through cross-cultural online workshops. Computers and Education Open. 2024;6:100164. doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100164

10. Ng D.T.K., Leung J.K.L., Chu S.K.W., Qiao M.S. Conceptualizing AI literacy: an exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2021;2:100041. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041

11. Southworth J., Migliaccio K., Glover J., Glover J., Reed D., McCarty C., et al. Developing a model for AI across the curriculum: transforming the higher education landscape via innovation in AI literacy. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2023;4:100127. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100127

12. Carolus A., Koch M.J., Straka S., Latoschik M.E., Wienrich C. MAILS – meta AI literacy scale: development and testing of an AI literacy questionnaire based on well-founded competency models and psychological changeand meta-competencies. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans. 2023;1(2):100014. doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100014

13. Konkol M.M., Marina E.D. Methodological foundations of the meta-digital competence system: a case study in language education. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2025;27(9):9–29. (In Russ.) doi:10.17853/1994-5639-2025-9-9-29

14. Tikhonova N.V., Sabirova D.R. Teacher AI literacy: a theoretical conceptualisation. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2025;27(6):180–206. (In Russ.) doi:10.17853/1994-5639-2025-6-180-206

15. Sysoyev P.V. A Modern teacher’s competence in the field of artificial intelligence: structure and content. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2025;34(6):58–79. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2025-34-6-58-79

16. Pinski M., Benlian A. AI literacy for users – a comprehensive review and future research directions of learning methods, components, and effects. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans. 2024;2(1):100062. doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100062

17. Bodalev A.A. Vospriyatie i ponimanie cheloveka chelovekom = Perception and Understanding of a Person by a Person. Moscow: Moscow University Publishing House; 1982. 200 p. (In Russ.)

18. Örtenblad A.R., Koris R., Pihlak Ü. Does it matter who teaches you? A study on the relevance of matching students’ and teachers’ personalities. The International Journal of Management Education. 2017;15(3):520–527. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2017.10.001

19. Semenova E., Khanolainen D. Exploring student and teacher perceptions of the ideal teacher in Russia. Pedagogy, Culture & Society. 2025;33(4):1219–1236. doi:10.1080/14681366.2024.2342423

20. Zhou M., Peng S. The usage of AI in teaching and students’ creativity: the mediating role of learning engagement and the moderating role of AI literacy. Behavioral Sciences. 2025;15(5):587. doi:10.3390/bs15050587

21. Tarasov S.V., Spasskaya E.B., Proekt Yu.L. The image of a teacher as a factor in assessing the university educational environment and students’ learning motivation. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2025;34(7):52–73. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2025-34-7-52-73

22. Johansson S., Myrberg E. Teacher specialization and student perceived instructional quality: what are the relationships to student reading achievement? Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. 2019;31:177–200. doi:10.1007/s11092-019-09297-5

23. Veikher A.A. Development of the methodology of the activity approach in sociology as an interdisciplinary one. In: Sociologija i obshhestvo: tradicii i innovacii v social’nom razvitii regionov: sbornik dokladov VI Vserossijskogo sociologicheskogo kongressa = Sociology and Society: Traditions and Innovations in the Social Development of Regions. Proceedings of the VI All Russian Sociological Congress; October 14–16, 2020; Tyumen. Tyumen: Russian Society of Sociologists; 2020:41–57. (In Russ.)

24. Medvedev A.M., Zhulanova I.V. Activity approach as a guideline of modern education: initial content and risks of reduction. Mir nauki. Pedagogika i psikhologiya = World of Science. Pedagogy and Psychology. 2021;9(2). (In Russ.) Accessed January 20, 2026. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/deyatelnos-tnyy-podhod-kak-orientir-sovremennogo-obrazovaniya-ishodnoe-soderzhanie-i-riski-reduktsii

25. Lysak I.V. Identity: the essence of the term and the history of its formation. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya = Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2017;(38):130–138. (In Russ.) doi:10.17223/1998863Х/38/14

26. Tight M. Employability: a core role of higher education? Research in Post-Compulsory Education. 2023;28(4):551–571. doi:10.1080/13596748.2023.2253649

27. Ashwin P. Why knowledge is central to “graduateness” – implications for research and policy. Policy Reviews in Higher Education. 2025;9(1):32–46. doi:10.1080/23322969.2024.2434034

28. Starodubtsev V.A. Practice-centered education in higher school. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2021;30(5):75–87. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2021-30-5-75-87

29. Tian J., Zhang R. Learners’ AI dependence and critical thinking: the psychological mechanism of fatigue and the social buffering role of AI literacy. Acta Psychologica. 2025;260:105725. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105725

30. Black R.W., Tomlinson B. University students describe how they adopt AI for writing and research in a general education course. Scientific Reports. 2025;15:8799. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-92937-2

31. Hornberger M., Bewersdorff A., Nerdel C. What do university students know about Artificial Intelligence? Development and validation of an AI literacy test. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2023;5:100165. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100165

32. Zhai C., Wibowo S., Li L.D. The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: a systematic review. Smart Learning Environments. 2024;11:28. doi:10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7

33. Combrinck C., Loubser N. Student self-reflection as a tool for managing GenAI use in large class assessment. Discover Education. 2025;4:72. doi:10.1007/s44217-025-00461-2

34. Sysoyev P.V. Ethics and AI-plagiarism in an academic environment: students’ understanding of compliance with author’s ethics and the problem of plagiarism in the process of interaction with generative artificial intelligence. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2024;33(2):31–53. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2024-33-2-31-53

35. Gouseti A., James F., Fallin L., Burden K. The ethics of using AI in K-12 education: a systematic literature review. Technology, Pedagogy and Education. 2025;34(2):161–182. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2024.2428601

36. Luo T., So W.W.M., Wan Z.H., Wai C.L. STEM stereotypes predict students’ STEM career interest via self-efficacy and outcome expectations. International Journal of STEM Education. 2021;8:36. doi:10.1186/s40594-021-00295-y

37. Kong S.-C., Cheung W.M.-Y., Zhang G. Evaluating an artificial intelligence literacy programme for developing university students’ conceptual understanding, literacy, empowerment and ethical awareness. Educational Technology & Society. 2023;26(1):16–30.