Artificial Intelligence (AI) Literacy and Computational Thinking (CT) in Education (10cr)

Objective

Upon completing the course, participants will be able to:
1. Explain and understand the key concepts of Artificial Intelligence, Computational Thinking and programming.
2. Use generative artificial intelligence (genAI) tools to create diverse educational content.
3. Design and apply the basics of emerging technologies, programming and gamification to the ideation, planning, implementation and evaluation of pedagogical solutions.
4. Develop inclusive pedagogical solutions related to emerging technologies and understand the opportunities and challenges of their educational use.
5. Consider the ethical, cultural and social impacts of artificial intelligence in education.

Content

This course provides an accessible introduction to Artificial Intelligence (AI) and computational thinking, tailored for participants without a strong technological background. It equips students with essential skills to understand and apply AI and programming concepts in educational contexts. Through a combination of theoretical foundations and hands-on activities, participants will explore the history, principles, and applications of AI and computational thinking in modern education.
The course emphasizes the transformative potential of emerging technologies, such as generative AI, virtual and augmented realities, and the metaverse, while fostering critical thinking about their pedagogical implications. Participants will also engage with practical exercises to develop computational thinking and problem-solving skills. After the course, students will be prepared to implement innovative, technology-enhanced teaching methods in diverse educational settings.

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)

WRITTEN OUTPUT:
0 Failed = The work is very incomplete, incorrect or contains significant misunderstandings. The work contains unfinished and disjointed text and reflections, the issues presented are not essentially related to the topic. The use of references is non-existent. The coursework does not meet the criteria for an approved coursework in terms of content or scope.
1-2 Adequate and satisfactory
1 The work is brief, superficial or poorly corresponds to the assignment. The coursework shows that the student has a limited understanding and understanding of the issues included in the course and they are presented in an unstructured manner, separately from each other or unilaterally. The use of references is poor, and the work may contain errors or ambiguities. The coursework is narrow-minded and/or enumerative and does not contain argumentative applications or conclusions.
2 The work is brief, superficial or poorly corresponds to the assignment. The coursework demonstrates that the student has an understanding of and grasps the issues covered by the course, but they are presented in an unstructured manner, in isolation or one-sidedly. The use of references is weak, and the work may contain errors or ambiguities. The coursework is narrow-minded and/or lists and does not contain argumentative applications or conclusions.

DIGITAL OUTPUT/VIDEO:
0 The output has not been produced or has been produced very incompletely.
1 The implementation of the output is incomplete and the use of time in the presentation video is inadequate (too short, too long recording, with too long silent periods), the sound quality is poor, and the structure is incomplete. The whole is incomplete.
2 The implementation of the output corresponds satisfactorily to the assignment, demonstrates satisfactory understanding and the ability to utilize programming thinking in the ideation, design and implementation of learning games. The implementation of the presentation video is satisfactory (a little too short, a little long recording, with some too long silent periods), the sound quality is poor, and the structure is quite incomplete. The whole is somewhat incomplete.

Assessment criteria, good (3)

WRITTEN OUTPUT:
3-4 Good and excellent
3 The work corresponds to the assignment, demonstrates understanding and the ability to analyze and justify. The student has formed an overall picture of the issues covered by the course, but there may be shortcomings. The work includes reflective text and reflection, in which things are related to each other to some extent. The use of references is good. The coursework is versatile, and the applications or conclusions are argumentative.
4 The work corresponds to the assignment, demonstrates understanding and the ability to analyze and justify. The student has formed an overall picture of the issues covered by the course, understands and can summarize the essentials. The work includes a reflective text and a reflection in which things are somewhat related to each other. The use of references is good. The coursework is versatile, and the applications or conclusions are argued, and the whole is carefully produced.

DIGITAL OUTPUT/VIDEO:
3 The implementation of the output corresponds to the assignment, demonstrates understanding and the ability to utilize programming thinking in the ideation, design and implementation of learning games. The use of time in the presentation video is good, the sound quality is good, and the structure is good. The whole is good.
4 The implementation of the output corresponds to the assignment, demonstrates good understanding and the ability to utilize programming thinking in the ideation, design and implementation of learning games. The use of time in the introductory video is good, the sound quality is good, and the structure is quite complete. The whole is very good.

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

WRITTEN OUTPUT:
5 Outstanding
The work outlines a broad whole and the knowledge is applied multidimensionally or placed in different contexts. The work shows independent approach and insight. The work is a complete whole, which includes justified own thinking or systematic, structured and analytical text and critical reflection. The answer is well written or implemented. Things are related to each other very well. The use of references is mainly excellent. The work is versatile, the choices are argued, and the approach is initially based on the contents of the course, drawing on the content, a complete and careful whole.

DIGITAL OUTPUT/VIDEO:
5 The implementation of the output corresponds to the assignment, demonstrates excellent understanding and the ability to utilize programming thinking in the ideation, design and implementation of learning games. The use of time in the introductory video is excellent, the sound quality is good, and the structure is excellent. An interesting and coherent whole.

Materials

Learning materials will be given separately for each theme during the course. 

Examples:

Chew, S. W., Cheng, I. L., & Chen, N. S. (2018). Exploring challenges faced by different stakeholders while implementing educational technology in classrooms through expert interviews. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(2), 175–197.

Iwata, M., Pitkänen, K., Laru, J., & Mäkitalo, K. (2019). Developing Computational Thinking Practices through Digital Fabrication Activities. In S.C Kong, et. al. (Eds.). Proceedings of International Conference on Computational Thinking Education 2019. Hong Kong: The Education University of Hong Kong. CoolThink@ JC, 223.

 

Further information

English & Finnish (Lectures in English, course materials in Finnish and English, and extra explanations in Finnish if needed). Assignments can be done in Finnish and English.

Execution methods

Teaching profile: Face-to-face teaching 4 weeks + 4 weeks Flipped Learning HYBRID 1

Assignments and activities in flipped learning: 20h
Workshop exercises: 60h
Online learning and/or individual/group work: 190h

Accomplishment methods

The course language is English, and course materials are in Finnish and English. Assignment can be done in Finnish and English. During the course, students plan, implement and report on themed project works. Students produce digital educational outputs, as well as plan, reflect, report and share their own learning journey in an ePortfolio.