Overview
What the framework is trying to do
Veldhuis and colleagues adapt a long-standing critical literacy tradition to AI. The framework uses four dimensions: disrupting the commonplace, considering multiple viewpoints, focusing on the sociopolitical, and taking action.
The model is significant because it does not stop at recognizing bias or harm. It asks learners to interrogate normalized assumptions, examine power and representation, and consider action or transformation.
Framework structure
Core dimensions or competencies
Disrupting the commonplace
Questioning what is normalized or taken for granted about AI.
Considering multiple viewpoints
Examining whose experiences and perspectives are represented or marginalized.
Focusing on the sociopolitical
Connecting AI to power, institutions, culture, politics, surveillance, and inequality.
Taking action
Moving from critique toward design, participation, civic response, or change.
Critical depth
Why this framework is rated Very High
Rated Very High because social power, representation, democratic participation, surveillance, accountability, ecological effects, and action are central to the framework rather than supplemental ethical topics.
Central
Bias, power, equity, epistemic authority, human agency
Present
Privacy, surveillance, labor, environmental impact, transparency
Limited
Accessibility, verification
Not evident
See the Critical Dimensions Index for dimensions not assigned a stronger classification.
Evidence base
What supports the framework?
Scoping/systematic synthesis of empirical critical AI literacy activities
Practical use
Especially useful for
Critical pedagogy, curriculum analysis, qualitative coding, research design, and development of socially oriented AI literacy interventions.
Evaluation
Strengths and limitations
Strengths
- Strong grounding in critical literacy theory.
- Moves beyond ethical awareness toward action.
- Makes sociopolitical and representational questions explicit.
Limitations
- Most underlying interventions involve children and adolescents rather than higher education learners.
- Verification of generated claims is less central than social critique.
Portability
How well does it travel?
Moderate–High. The four critical literacy dimensions transfer well, but higher education implementations should adapt examples and developmental expectations.
Source
Citation
Veldhuis, A., et al. (2025). Critical literacy of AI: A scoping review of how children and youth reflect on the social, political, cultural, ecological, and ethical implications of artificial intelligence. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 43, 100708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100708