# Educating the Agentic Engineer: Curricula, Collaboration, and Continuous Learning in the AI Era

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.29610 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.29610/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 20 of its 62 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 31 Jul 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Software engineering coding agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/software-engineering-coding-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03442/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10620/) (2023)
- [The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilot](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.06590/) (2023)
- [Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.15000/) (2022)
- [Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence: Reliable, Safe & Trustworthy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.04087/) (2020)
- [Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.02977/) (2024)
- [Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.06668/) (2019)
- [Explanations Can Reduce Overreliance on AI Systems During Decision-Making](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.06823/) (2022)
- [Measuring the Impact of Early-2025 AI on Experienced Open-Source Developer Productivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.09089/) (2025)
- [Programming Is Hard -- Or at Least It Used to Be: Educational Opportunities And Challenges of AI Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.01020/) (2022)
- [Studying the effect of AI Code Generators on Supporting Novice Learners in Introductory Programming](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.07427/) (2023)
- [The Robots are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing Education](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.00658/) (2023)
- [Computing Education in the Era of Generative AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.02608/) (2023)
- [The Widening Gap: The Benefits and Harms of Generative AI for Novice Programmers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.17739/) (2024)
- [What is it like to program with artificial intelligence?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.06213/) (2022)
- [Substance Beats Style: Why Beginning Students Fail to Code with LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.19792/) (2024)
- [Human-AI Collaboration and the Transformation of Software Engineering Work](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.03394/) (2026)
- [Teaching with AI: A Systematic Review of Chatbots, Generative Tools, and Tutoring Systems in Programming Education](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.03884/) (2025)
- [The Rise of AI-Native Software Engineering: Implications for Practice, Education, and the Future Workforce](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.12986/) (2026)
- [From Determinism to Delegation: AI-Native Software Engineering and the Evolution of the Agentic Engineer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.28791/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Generative and agentic artificial intelligence (AI) are reconfiguring software and systems engineering from a discipline centered on human authorship of artifacts to one focused on directing, verifying, and governing autonomous systems. This transition demands a new professional archetype, the agentic engineer, whose enduring value lies in intent specification, orchestration of multi-agent workflows, critical evaluation of machine-generated outputs, and ethical judgment. This article presents an integrative conceptual synthesis across engineering education, computing education, human--AI interaction, human factors, and the learning sciences to derive an evidence-grounded educational architecture for this archetype. We introduce the ACCEL framework (Agentic Competencies through Curricula, Collaboration, and Enduring Learning), which organizes five competency pillars and maps them to three delivery vectors: curricula, collaboration, and continuous learning. Drawing on agency theory, trust-in-automation research, and empirical studies of AI-assisted programming, including evidence that AI benefits are unevenly realized and often misperceived, we propose a scaffolded curriculum, a delegation--verification pedagogical loop for human--AI teaming, redesigned assessment, governance-literate ethics integration, and alignment with current curricular guidelines and international AI competency frameworks. We identify key risks, including automation bias, deskilling, superficial engagement, and diffuse accountability, and conclude that educating the agentic engineer requires systemic transformation rather than incremental curricular change: instruction must shift from producing artifacts to exercising judgment over increasingly autonomous socio-technical systems.