The Trilingual Triad Framework: Integrating Design, AI, and Domain Knowledge in No-code AI Smart City Course

This study examines how students integrate generative artificial intelligence (AI) into design projects through the lens of the SuperSkillsStack framework, which identifies four key human competencies for effective human-AI collaboration: Agency, Domain Knowledge, Imagination, and Taste. As generative AI increasingly transforms creative practice, design education must consider how human capabilities are cultivated alongside technological tools. Using qualitative thematic analysis, this study analyzes reflective writings from 80 student design teams participating in a human-centered design course. The findings show that students primarily used AI during the early stages of the design process, including brainstorming, information synthesis, and problem framing. However, students consistently relied on human judgment to interpret contextual information, validate AI-generated outputs, and refine design solutions. Domain knowledge derived from field observations enabled students to detect inaccuracies in AI suggestions, while taste played a critical role in evaluating and selecting meaningful ideas. The results suggest that generative AI functions primarily as a cognitive accelerator rather than a replacement for human creativity. The study highlights the importance of cultivating higher-order human capabilities to support effective human-AI collaboration in design education.

Generative AI is reshaping programming education, yet educators often infer students' AI-supported learning from classroom observations alone. This experience report presents a trio-ethnography involving two computing educators with different teaching philosophies and one undergraduate computer science student to examine how these interpretations evolve through dialogue. Across three conversations, the educators reflected on students' AI use, discussed changes to programming pedagogy, and revisited their assumptions after engaging with the student's lived experiences. Rather than simply confirming or contradicting the educators' perspectives, the student's narratives revealed learning processes that were largely invisible in the classroom, prompting both educators to reconsider assumptions about AI use, assessment, transparency, and programming instruction. We argue that trio-ethnography offers a valuable reflective approach for helping computing educators move beyond observable student behaviors toward a richer understanding of AI-supported learning and for informing instructional adaptation in the era of generative AI.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has entered classrooms faster than teachers have been prepared to use it well, producing a GenAI literacy lag in which technological diffusion outpaces educators' conceptual, pedagogical, and ethical readiness. Established AI literacy frameworks predate the widespread adoption of large language models and, while acknowledging ethics, position it as a discrete competency rather than a constitutive commitment, with equity and agency as supplementary design principles. Recent GenAI-specific efforts address isolated features but remain fragmented. We introduce the Responsible AI Literacy in Education (RAIL-Ed) framework, developed through a systematic review and qualitative framework analysis of 67 studies (2023-2025), grounded in critical, pragmatist, sociocultural, and human-centered traditions (Freire, Dewey, Vygotsky, Shneiderman). RAIL-Ed specifies six interdependent pillars: Technical Fluency, Critical Evaluation, Human-AI Collaboration, Contextual Awareness, Ethical Reasoning, and Empowered Agency, marked by three commitments. It is integrative: the absence of any pillar produces a characteristic pedagogical failure. It is developmental: a three-level rubric (Emerging, Competent, Advanced) specifies how each pillar matures across the K-12 teacher-preparation continuum. It is dialectical: the same generative affordance can deepen or displace learning depending on the literacy a teacher brings to it, making the cultivation of that literacy, not the adoption of the tool, the object of design. By treating ethics, equity, and agency as constitutive, RAIL-Ed offers a theoretically grounded basis for curriculum design, teacher education, and policy, aligned with the UNESCO AI Competency Framework for Teachers and the OECD/European Commission AILit Framework. The framework is conceptual, advancing falsifiable propositions for empirical validation.