cs.HCAug 28, 2026

AI as Teammate: Rethinking Task Distribution in Medical Training

Authors: Fendi Tsim, Alina Gutoreva, Anthony Weiss, Nicole Dubosh

Organizations: Behavioral AI Institute, London, UK · College of Human Sciences and Education, KIMEP University, 050010, Abay Avenue 2, Almaty, Kazakhstan · Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street Boston, MA 02115, USA

Read PDF
Ask AI
Cite

Copy citation

DOINot available for this paper

Abstract

Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly generative AI, into medical training has prompted concerns about learner over-reliance, misuse, and erosion of foundational clinical competencies. We propose a conceptual reframing at the decision level: the problem is not misuse but misclassification - a mechanistic failure of real-time metacognitive evaluation in selecting a subzone-inappropriate AI interaction mode. Drawing on "SCAN" (Substitute, Complement, Aid, Non-Negotiable), a human-centric decision-making framework for generative AI task allocation grounded in Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development and metacognition, we advance the emerging social-constructivist conversation around AI in medical education by offering a testable account of AI's role in clinical reasoning development. This framework yields testable predictions for how misclassification can be detected, mitigated, and, more importantly, prevented in the clinical learning environment. Regarding clinical reasoning development, we show how trajectories of skill acquisition (upskilling) and failure (the triad of skill failure: de-skilling, never-skilling, and mis-skilling) operate at the individual task level in ways that fixed-phase, cohort-wide treatments fail to capture. We further identify passive engagement within correctly classified AI-scaffolded tasks as a particularly insidious, detection-resistant pathway to mis-skilling - one requiring subzone re-identification from AI assistance to expert assistance, with human experts serving as epistemic auditors. The paper operationalizes SCAN for clinical curriculum design, supervision, and assessment, and opens an empirical research agenda grounded in cognitive science. This paradigm shift from misuse to misclassification is not semantic: it offers educators a clear perspective on what to look for, what to assess, and what to intervene on.

More in this topic

Generative AI in Education

Generative AI in education uses language and multimodal models to support teaching, learning, feedback, assessment, and educational design.

See all 289 papers

Explore similar work

CardsList
Jun 14, 2026

SCAN: A Decision-Making Framework for Effective Task Allocation with Generative AI

We introduce SCAN -- a human-centric decision-making framework to facilitate learners for effective task allocation with Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) based on Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development and Metacognition. In SCAN, we systematize and formalize AI-human interaction by introducing a task-identification approach with four "sub-zones": Substitute, Complement, Aid, and Non-negotiable. After describing the four sub-zones, we demonstrate how SCAN framework can be applied for knowledge workers in the workplace and students in education to metacognitively "scan" their use of Generative AI. We then discuss how such framework can be related to cognitive load theory, cognitive offloading, sycophancy, three decision-making modes in human-AI interactions (automation, augmentation, and collaboration), future of work such as upskilling and deskilling, and how it accounts for both human-human and human-AI learning. We propose that SCAN offers a great starting point before discussing whether GenAI complements or replaces our abilities when completing a task, with a general objective of sustaining lifelong learning, and a specific goal of reaching hybrid intelligence.

Fendi Tsim, Alina Gutoreva

1Independent Researcher, London, United Kingdom · School of IT and Engineering, Kazakh-British Technical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

Generative AI in EducationHuman-Centered AIHuman-AI Decision MakingHuman-AI Collaboration
AskPDF
Jun 4, 2026

Framing, Judging, Steering: An Assessable Competency Model for Teach-ing Students to Reason With Generative AI

Generative AI makes answers easy and understanding hard, and uncritical use invites cognitive offloading. Schools still measure unaided performance, yet the real task is to produce good work with AI: framing an ill-defined task, judging the output, and steering the model toward a better result. This ability is rarely assessed in its own right; where measured, it collapses into one "prompting" score that cannot diagnose why AI use succeeds or fails. We propose CoRe-3 (Co-Reasoning), a competency model factoring productive AI use into three assessable skills we abbreviate FJS: Framing (specifying an ill-defined task before invoking AI), Judging (evaluating output for errors and unstated assumptions), and Steering (iteratively redirecting the model). Its distinguishing claim is the separation of pre-generation Framing from post-generation Steering, with Judging as the gate between. We ground the skills in theory, state five testable propositions, and instantiate them in CoReasoningLab, an open platform that presents flawed AI output and scores them independently. Over simulated learners (generated and graded by different models), the skills dissociate: each tracks its own manipulated competence while staying flat in the others, and grades become correlated when one competence is shared across all three (convergent and discriminant validity), across grader backends from two providers. Human-rater agreement and outcomes are next; we release the instrument, data, and protocol.

Alexander Apartsin, Yehudit Aperstein

Holon Institute of Technology · Afeka College of Engineering

Generative AI in EducationHuman-AI Collaboration
AskPDF
Apr 9, 2026

Grounding Clinical AI Competency in Human Cognition Through the Clinical World Model and Skill-Mix Framework

The competency of any intelligent agent is bounded by its formal account of the world in which it operates. Clinical AI lacks such an account. Existing frameworks address evaluation, regulation, or system design in isolation, without a shared model of the clinical world to connect them. We introduce the Clinical World Model, a framework that formalizes care as a tripartite interaction among Patient, Provider, and Ecosystem. To formalize how any agent, whether human or artificial, transforms information into clinical action, we develop parallel decision-making architectures for providers, patients, and AI agents, grounded in validated principles of clinical cognition. The Clinical AI Skill-Mix operationalizes competency through eight dimensions. Five define the clinical competency space (condition, phase, care setting, provider role, and task) and three specify how AI engages human reasoning (assigned authority, agent facing, and anchoring layer). The combinatorial product of these dimensions yields a space of billions of distinct competency coordinates. A central structural implication is that validation within one coordinate provides minimal evidence for performance in another, rendering the competency space irreducible. The framework supplies a common grammar through which clinical AI can be specified, evaluated, and bounded across stakeholders. By making this structure explicit, the Clinical World Model reframes the field's central question from whether AI works to in which competency coordinates reliability has been demonstrated, and for whom.

Seyed Amir Ahmad Safavi-Naini, Elahe Meftah, Josh Mohess +11

Department of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland · Department of Digital Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland · Division of Data-Driven and Digital Medicine (D3M), Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States +9

Human-AI Decision MakingClinical Decision-Making
AskPDF