Theoretical and methodological foundations of a hierarchical model of meta-digital competence for interaction with generative language models

Introduction. The widespread adoption of generative language models raises questions regarding user competence. Existing component models of AI literacy identify a range of necessary competencies but do not organise them hierarchically. Level-based digital competence frameworks fail to account for the specific characteristics of generative AI, while Bloom’s taxonomy does not encompass the metacognitive, pragmatic, and ethico-social dimensions of human-AI interaction. Aim. The present study aims to develop and theoretically substantiate a hierarchical model of meta-digital competence specific to interactions with generative language models. Methodology and research methods. The study employs theoretical modelling. The hierarchical model was developed through a critical analysis of component AI literacy models, level-based digital competence frameworks, Bloom’s taxonomy, and theories of distributed cognition, metacognition, situated learning, and responsible AI principles. Results. A five-level MDC model was developed, comprising the operational, cognitive, reflexive, pragmatic, and ethico-social levels. Behavioural indicators and achievement criteria were defined for each level. The ethico-social level is positioned at the top of the hierarchy, as ethical responsibility integrates all preceding levels. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty lies in the development of a hierarchical model specific to generative AI interaction; demonstrating the insufficiency of Bloom’s taxonomy for a comprehensive description of this competence; identifying the pragmatic level, which has no equivalent in existing component AI literacy models; and theoretically justifying the placement of the ethico-social level at the apex of the hierarchy. Practical significance. The practical significance resides in the potential application of the model for designing educational programmes, developing diagnostic tools, and creating assessment procedures aimed at the sequential development of meta-digital competence.

1. Hu K. ChatGPT sets record for fastest-growing user base – analyst note. Reuters. 2023. Accessed February 20, 2026. https://www.reuters.com/technology/chatgpt-sets-record-fastest-growing-user-base-analyst-note-2023-02-01

2. Sabzalieva E., Valentini A. ChatGPT and artificial intelligence in higher education: quick start guide. Paris: UNESCO IESALC. 2023. Accessed February 20, 2026. https://etico.iiep.unesco.org/en/chatgpt-and-artificial-intelligence-higher-education-quick-start-guide

3. Kasneci E., Seßler K., Küchemann S., et al. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences. 2023;103:102274. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

4. Vuorikari R., Kluzer S., Punie Y. DigComp 2.2: the digital competence framework for citizens. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. 2022. doi:10.2760/115376

5. Konkol M.M. Meta-digital competence as a new educational paradigm in the era of artificial intelligence. Uchenye zapiski Rossijskogo gosudarstvennogo social’nogo universiteta = Scientific Notes of the Russian State Social University. 2025;24(2):112–119. (In Russ.) doi:10.17922/2071-5323-2025-24-2-112-119

6. 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

7. Hutchins E. Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1995. Accessed February 20, 2026. https://books.google.ru/books?hl=ru&lr=&id=CGIaNc3F1MgC&oi=fnd&pg=PP11&dq=%22Edwin+Hutchins%22&ots=9Hq-5dru1W&sig=-nKrqlZiiiPAm-fNqJxkc7VyX0xo&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22Edwin%20Hutchins%22&f=false.

8. Konkol M.M., Shishlova E.E. Transformation of university students’ educational agency in the era of AI technologies. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2026;35(2):36–52. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2026-35-2-36-52

9. Flavell J.H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist. 1979;34(10):906–911. Accessed February 20, 2026. doi:10.1037/0003066X.34.10.906

10. Lave J., Wenger E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991. Accessed February 20, 2026. http://wendynorris.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Lave-Wenger-1991-Legitimate-Peripheral-Participation.pdf

11. Bloom B.S., Engelhart M.D., Furst E.J., Hill W.H., Krathwohl D.R. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company; 1956. 207 p. Accessed February 20, 2026. https://eclass.uoa.gr/modules/document/file.php/PPP242/Benjamin%20S.%20Bloom%20-%20Taxonomy%20of%20Educational%20Objectives%2C%20Handbook%201_%20Cognitive%20Domain-Addison%20Wesley%20Publishing%20Company%20%281956%29.pdf

12. Krathwohl D.R. A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory into Practice. 2002;41(4):212–218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

13. Long D., Magerko B. What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Honolulu, HI, USA: ACM; 2020:1–16. doi:10.1145/3313831.3376727

14. 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

15. Laupichler M.C., Aster A., Schirch J., Raupach T. Artificial intelligence literacy in higher and adult education: a scoping literature review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2022;3:100101. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100101

16. 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

17. Casal-Otero L., Catala A., Fernández-Morante C., Taboada M., Cebreiro B., Barro S. AI literacy in K-12: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education. 2023;10(1):29. doi:10.1186/s40594-023-00418-7

18. Almatrafi O., Johri A., Lee H. A Systematic review of AI literacy conceptualization, constructs, and implementation and assessment efforts (2019–2023). Computers and Education Open. 2024;6:100173. doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100173

19. Chiu T.K.F., Ahmad Z., Ismailov M., Sanusi I.T. What are artificial intelligence literacy and competency? A comprehensive framework to support them. Computers and Education Open. 2024;6:100171. doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100171

20. 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. Accessed February 20, 2026. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363366264_Evaluating_an_Artificial_Intelligence_Literacy_Programme_for_Developing_University_Students’_Conceptual_Understanding_Literacy_Empowerment_and_Ethical_Awareness

21. Annapureddy R., Fornaroli A., Gatica-Perez D. Generative AI literacy: twelve defining competencies. Digital Government: Research and Practice. 2025;6(1):1–21. doi:10.1145/3685680

22. Park J. A systematic literature review of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) literacy in schools. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2025;9:100487. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100487

23. Redecker C. European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2017. doi:10.2760/159770

24. Soldatova G. U., Rasskazova E. I., Nestik T. A. Tsifrovoe pokolenie Rossii: kompetentnost’ i bezopasnost’ = Digital Generation of Russia: Competence and Safety. Moscow: Publishing House Smysl; 2017. 375 p. (In Russ.) Accessed March 10, 2026. http://detionline.com/assets/files/research/2017ci-frovoe_pokolenie_rossii.pdf.

25. Miao F., Cukurova M. AI Competency Framework for Teachers. Paris: UNESCO; 2024. doi:10.54675/ZJTE2084

26. Miao F., Shiohira K., Lao N. AI Competency Framework for Students. Paris: UNESCO; 2024. doi:10.54675/JKJB9835

27. Chee K.W. A competency framework for AI literacy: variations by different learner groups and an implied learning pathway. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2024;56(5):2146–2182. doi:10.1111/bjet.13556

28. Hollan J., Hutchins E., Kirsh D. Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer Interaction Research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. 2000;7(2):174–196. doi:10.1145/353485.353487

29. Schraw G., Dennison R.S. Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 1994;19(4):460–475. doi:10.1006/ceps.1994.1033

30. Sidra S., Mason C. Generative AI in human-AI collaboration: validation of the collaborative AI literacy and collaborative AI metacognition scales for effective use. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 2025. doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2543997

31. Jobin A., Ienca M., Vayena E. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence. 2019;1(9):389–399. doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2

32. Floridi L., Cowls J., Beltrametti M., Chatila R., Chazerand P., Dignum V., et al. AI4People – an ethical framework for a good AI society: opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines. 2018;28(4):689–707. doi:10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5

33. Liu X., Zhang L., Wei X. Generative artificial intelligence literacy: scale development and its effect on job performance. Behavioral Sciences. 2025;15(6):811. doi:10.3390/bs15060811

34. Mollick E.R., Mollick L. Assigning AI: seven approaches for students, with prompts. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2023. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4475995