I recently attended a brief presentation on Ai as it relates legal writing and research courses. Post presentation generated a robust discussion about observations of Ai use in the classroom. Most of the discussion centered on students’ use of Ai to quickly find answers when called upon in class. I sensed a lot of fear and dismay during this discussion, but yet not many answers.
Fears may cause faculty to tighten class policies like restricting computer use or penalizing students for lack of preparedness. But maybe there is a more open-minded way to incorporate Ai into the classroom. Perhaps a way that fosters learning and helps meet our students where they are on their journey.
Cue “Ai vs. Non-Ai Classroom Challenge” lesson plans:
These lessons could be done in a few ways, but the goal is to foster open dialogues about the use of Ai in the classroom, see how it turns out and as the instructor be open to the idea that Ai might harm or help your students.
The theory I want to test for lesson one is, “Do Ai systems truly assist unprepared students during class?” My inclination is no, but I’ll report back when I run this lesson to see if the test proves otherwise.
Here is lesson one’s structure:
Step 1: Remind students in advance to bring their laptops to class. When it is time to review the cases for the day – split the classroom.
Step 2: At the start of the lesson announce; (1) there will be no penalty to students that select the “Ai Group” and no reward for students that select the “Non-Ai Group” and, (2) re-explain that this is a learning experience to evaluate Ai for everyone in the class, including you as the instructor.
Step 3: Prompt students to self-select into the “Non-Ai Group” or the “Ai Group.”
Step 4: Debrief a case with the “Non-Ai Group” and the “Ai Group” as you normally would. Students in the “Non-Ai Group” are permitted to respond to your questions using their notes, case briefs, and text for class. Students in the “Ai Group” are only permitted to enter your question prompts when called upon and can only respond with the Ai generated response – nothing more (even if they prepared for class).
Step 5: Evaluate. What strengths and areas for improvement did the “Non-Ai Group” have in debriefing the cases versus the Ai Group? How might this change students’ considerations of using Ai during class? Be open to the students’ thoughts and input and provide some of your own observations too.
A few weeks later, run lesson two:
Step 1 through 3 are the same as above except assign a brief recording on best practices in creating practice questions prior to class.
Step 4: Break the “Ai” and “Non-Ai” groups into smaller internal groups (3 – 4 people max)
Step 5: Instruct all groups to create a practice prompt using at least two doctrines covered in class. Non-Ai Groups must draft the questions using class materials and their study materials. Ai Groups can only use their minds and the LMS. Give students thirty minutes to draft and refine their practice questions.
Step 6: Have the “Non-Ai Groups” and “Ai Groups” pair and share their work at the end of class and debrief the findings: What is the same and what is different? What did they learn from this lesson?
Step 7: Ask students to submit their draft questions and provide written or recorded feedback on all practice question prompts. Assess the prompts for accuracy and then debrief your observations of the Non-Ai versus Ai questions at the next class. This lesson promotes feedback loops and collectively explores Ai together. It also helps students understand the importance of testing themselves through practice questions.
I want my students to know that I am consciously aware of the society and professional world they will soon step into as lawyers. Now is the time for us to learn together. As my colleague said earlier this week, “steer into the (Ai) skid.” But Ice Cube said it best, “check yourself before you wreck yourself” which in my case means “test myself before I wreck myself” with unfounded fears about Ai use in the classroom.
(Amy Vaughan-Thomas)
