Faculty development activity for K-12 and higher education

Use AI controversy as a civic and pedagogical opportunity.

This interactive studio turns the article's topics into provocative scenarios, deep dives, reflective pauses, and assignment-design prompts. Faculty can discuss the tensions first, then design student learning experiences that treat AI as a contested social issue rather than only a tool to permit or ban.

Explore scenarios Build an assignment

Session snapshot

Best for
Department meetings, PD days, graduate teaching seminars, policy workshops
Format
Individual reflection, small-group deliberation, assignment studio, gallery walk
Time
45, 75, or 120 minutes
Output
A faculty-created assignment plan with student-facing discussion protocols

How the activity works

From controversy to constructive design

Each scenario asks faculty to work through four moves: identify the real tension, examine evidence, practice reflective disagreement, and design a student task that makes room for multiple defensible positions.

1

Trigger

Open with a scenario that makes the stakes visible without demanding one correct answer.

2

Evidence

Use the linked sources to complicate first impressions and introduce credible disagreement.

3

Reflection

Pause for private writing before public conversation so participants can name assumptions and uncertainty.

4

Design

Translate the faculty conversation into a student assignment with guardrails, roles, and assessment criteria.

Article-derived scenarios

Choose a tension to teach

Filter, open a scenario, save notes, and add promising cards to the assignment builder.

0 scenarios Tip: open a card, then use "Add to builder" to combine issues into a student assignment.

Assignment builder

Turn several tensions into a student learning experience

Select scenarios above, then generate a draft assignment plan. Everything runs in the browser; notes are stored only on this device unless exported.

Selected tensions

No scenarios selected yet.

Facilitator guide

Run this as a faculty conversation

45-minute sprint

  1. 5 min: silent quickwrite on a personal AI teaching dilemma.
  2. 15 min: small groups discuss one scenario using evidence links.
  3. 15 min: redesign one assignment moment.
  4. 10 min: share one guardrail and one open question.

75-minute workshop

  1. 10 min: framing and norms for disagreement.
  2. 20 min: scenario deep dive with source jigsaw.
  3. 25 min: assignment builder studio.
  4. 20 min: gallery walk and peer critique.

120-minute institute

  1. 15 min: map local anxieties and policy constraints.
  2. 35 min: scenario role-play across stakeholder positions.
  3. 35 min: draft assignments and rubrics.
  4. 20 min: stress-test for equity, accessibility, and academic integrity.
  5. 15 min: commitments and next steps.

Suggested conversation norms

Use claims with evidence, separate people from positions, name uncertainty, paraphrase a view before challenging it, and design for student safety without removing intellectual friction.