As artificial intelligence (AI) literacy gains prominence across global educational systems, there is an increasing need to understand how it is conceptualised and implemented in secondary schools. While previous reviews have examined AI literacy in broader K-12 contexts, secondary education remains underexplored. This scoping review synthesised peer-reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2025 that address AI-related curricula, instructional tools, and assessment practices in secondary schools. Following the Arksey and O’Malley framework and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, 49 studies were included and categorised into four analytical domains: AI literacy concepts, AI curriculum development, AI-supported teaching and learning tools, and AI literacy assessment scales. The findings indicate that research on AI literacy in secondary education is rapidly expanding but remains geographically uneven, with a concentration in East Asia and North America. Conceptualisations of AI literacy vary widely, reflecting differing emphases on technical skills, ethical awareness, and socio-technical understanding. Curriculum-focused studies increasingly adopt ethics-integrated, project-based approaches that foster critical thinking, creativity, and the responsible use of AI. Instructional tools are primarily hands-on and application-oriented, functioning primarily to support conceptual understanding or to serve as personalised learning aids. However, assessment practices remain underdeveloped, relying heavily on self-report measures and integrating performance-based or socio-ethical dimensions only to a limited extent. Despite these contributions, the study is limited by secondary data and selected databases. Future work should prioritise the development of robust assessment scales, cross-cultural comparative studies, and policies that move beyond coding and cognitive skills to encompass the ethical use of AI. This study proposes a process-oriented theoretical model of AI literacy development in secondary education and provides practical implications for educators, researchers and policymakers.
Ghosh et al. (Tue,) studied this question.