Agentic education · Learning science

Actionable companion · Feedback & scaffolding

Learning with agency: Teaching artificial intelligence through drug–drug interaction clustering analysis: Integrating project-based learning and large language models

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide, separate from the original research. Proposed actions are not claims or recommendations attributed to the source authors. No independent peer review of this guide is asserted.

Read original paperSearch paper agentCC BY 4.0

Evidence and context

Title and abstract screening; stage labels describe reported settings, not verified numerical ages. Design labels require full-text appraisal. Reported stage(s): Higher education. Verify the participant population and task before transferring the findings.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the linked source license:

In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has increasingly influenced daily life and scientific research. Traditionally, AI-related courses have targeted computer science majors, while systematic instructional opportunities for early-stage undergraduates from non-computing backgrounds remain limited. To bridge this gap, we developed an AI course that integrates project-based learning with large language models (LLMs). Specifically, we designed four progressive assignments based on our research project (i.e., drug–drug interaction network clustering analysis). The course does not require prior knowledge of pharmacology or programming. Instead, LLMs are used as assistive tools to support programming, data analysis, and result interpretation. Students engage in a complete workflow, including data curation, algorithm implementation, and critical evaluation of results. Preliminary feedback shows that this approach supports the development of problem-solving skills and increases student engagement. This study provides a framework for integrating LLMs into project-based learning. We believe that this teaching proposal will be valuable and inspiring for educators seeking to design or enrich similar courses.

What kind of evidence is this?

Supporting AI learning science · Design / feasibility study

Stage: Higher education. Screening labels describe reported context and study-design language. They are not a risk-of-bias rating or proof of effectiveness for an age band.

Limitations and uncertainty · source passage

In this assignment, students are introduced to the 5S strategy‌‌ [36] for prompt design, which emphasizes structured thinking and clarity in human-machine interaction. Students apply the 5S strategy to design prompts that guided LLMs to complete clustering tasks corresponding to Assignments 1–3. To evaluate the performance of LLMs, students compare the clustering results generated by traditional clustering algorithms with those produced by LLMs. The assignment consists of four required questions:

Design the system before the pilot

Use this study to inform a learning mechanism or implementation question. It is not direct evidence that autonomous agents improve learning. Keep the proposed agent behavior separate from what the source actually tested.

  • Give feedback on the learner’s reasoning, then fade hints. Record whether the learner can complete the next task without that scaffold.
  • Measure engagement separately from achievement. Check whether novelty-driven participation persists and whether it translates to independent performance.
  • Use common rubrics, blind scoring where feasible and a fresh unaided reasoning task. Document permissible assistance and avoid treating AI-detector scores as proof of misconduct.

A 90-day district pilot

  1. Days 1–15 · Appraise. Have the curriculum lead and a teacher read the methods and limitations. Record the study design, sample, comparator, outcomes and evidence gaps. Define a local question that the study can help inform.
  2. Days 16–30 · Design. Choose one disciplinary task. Require a first attempt, a documented AI consultation, a critique of the output and an independent explanation. Align the comparison group and scoring rubric with the same objective. Name an accountable owner and set the baseline, success threshold and budget before implementation.
  3. Days 31–60 · Test. Start with a small voluntary cohort, preserve an accessible non-AI route and require teacher review. Use synthetic or de-identified examples; approve data handling and tool terms through district processes.
  4. Days 61–90 · Decide. Blind-score reasoning and accuracy on a new task without AI. Distinguish model examination scores, student perceptions and actual learner gains; only the last directly tests educational benefit. Compare with baseline, document uncertainty and stop or revise if learning worsens, access is unequal or critical errors persist.

The board decision brief

Report the learning problem, evidence quality, participating population, total cost including review time, measured benefit, errors, access differences and remaining uncertainties. Make a dated recommendation to stop, revise or expand. A positive perception survey alone does not establish learning improvement.

Attribution and reuse

Ji Lv; Guixia Liu; Changjun Zhou. Teaching artificial intelligence through drug–drug interaction clustering analysis: Integrating project-based learning and large language models. PLOS Computational Biology (2026-05-13). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014236

Companion prepared 2026-10-30. Original authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract is an attributed source extract; the implementation plan is new AI-assisted editorial material, offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license. This guide has not undergone independent peer review.