AI literacy interventions show a large, statistically significant overall positive effect on student AI literacy outcomes (g = 0.837)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 Educational interventions on AI literacy yield a large and statistically significant average effect of g = 0.837 across 59 studies and 172 effect sizes. → Suya Liu 2026

Evidence¶

Suya Liu 2026¶

Suya Liu, Ziyan Lin, Oi Lam Ng, Yijian Yang, Yun Dai. (2026). AI literacy interventions in education: A meta-analysis of effects and moderators. Educational Research Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100813

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r2

Three-level random-effects meta-analysis of 59 (quasi-)experimental studies with 172 effect sizes from 7211 participants, using Hedges' g and REML estimation. The pooled estimate was "g = 0.837 (SE = 0.073, 95% CI [0.692, 0.982], t = 11.393, p < .001)".

"the three-level random-effects model yielded a large and statistically significant average effect of educational interventions on AI literacy, g = 0.837 (SE = 0.073, 95% CI [0.692, 0.982], t = 11.393, p < .001)"

Studies bearing on this claim¶

Does explicit instruction raise learners' AI and digital literacy, and for whom? This table gathers the studies behind this claim and the 14 narrower claims that bear on it: 11 distinct studies (8 causal, 1 quant-synthesis, 1 review, 1 qualitative), q2–q3, 5 of 11 with an effect size coded. One row per study, codes as each entry records them; no effect is averaged and no verdict is drawn. Built by scripts/synthesize_claim.py from eval/synthesis/; a row that looks wrong is fixed on the claim it comes from.

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Gen-AI has a moderate positive overall effect on students' higher-order thinking (g = 0.609) across 29 experimental and quasi-experimental studies — related
• Effects of AI literacy interventions vary considerably across contexts, with most variance between studies (71.361%) and a wide prediction interval — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Geographical region significantly moderates AI literacy intervention effects, with Europe and East Asia outperforming North America — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The MIT DAILy curriculum significantly improved middle and early high school learners' AI literacy compared to control groups — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Instructional approach, AI technology type, assessment instrument, educational level, and publication year do not significantly moderate AI literacy intervention effects — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Fourth-graders receiving AI-enhanced media literacy instruction outperformed control-group peers on post-test critical media reading, writing, and total literacy with large effect sizes — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• A 30-minute generative AI literacy training increased intelligence analysts' overall accuracy at distinguishing real from AI-generated images by 9 percentage points — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Training improved accuracy in every digital-forensics experience group and most generative-AI familiarity groups, with the largest estimated gains among analysts with no forensics experience and frequent generative-AI users — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Structured AI-supported writing instruction produced a very large posttest advantage in digital critical thinking/AI literacy (DCTS) over traditional instruction — a narrower finding that bears on this claim