Critical Review & Revision

This AI Spark will implement a qualitative analysis process in Marketing Research classes. Classes will go through all the stages of performing a thematic qualitative analysis on focus group discussions. For every step of the project, students will create Gemini Gems and Gemini Notebook projects to: create a Statement of Work (phase 1), create a Focus Group Moderator Guide (phase 2) and a Pre-qualification Survey (phase 3), clean and anonymize Focus Group Transcripts (phase 4), perform Thematic Analysis (phase 5), and generate a Qualitative Report presentation (phase 6).

This AI Spark learning activity provides a way to help students learn about the topic of the class and about AI. Students often struggle to differentiate between broad, generalized cultural advice found across the open web and rigorous, theory-driven interventions grounded directly in vetted scholarship.

In this activity, students will build a tailored professional knowledge base using Gemini Notebook and apply human-centered AI prompting techniques to generate personalized cover letters and targeted interview preparation materials that authentically reflect their unique qualifications. The activity addresses the tendency of job-seeking students to generate generic, hallucinated, or robotic application materials by teaching them how to restrict the AI to vetted primary sources and run active self-auditing passes.

After students participate in stress interventions, they will use AI to compare and evaluate which strategies may be most beneficial for their lifestyle. The activity addresses the need for students to critically evaluate AI recommendations rather than accepting them over their own experience and supporting evidence.

As the major written assignment in SPM 5605: Sport Governance, students complete a Sport Governance Policy Brief at the end of the semester (Appendix A in Canvas). To scaffold student learning and support the development of this assignment, three AI-supported activities will be incorporated throughout the semester. These activities are intended to assist students at different stages of the writing process and enhance their ability to develop, refine, and communicate policy recommendations effectively (Appendix B in Canvas). 

The AI Deployment Review Board moves graduate nursing students from discussing AI ethics in the abstract to exercising applied governance judgment by seating them on a review board that must reach a defensible, conditional decision about an AI tool or policy the student selects and brings to the board.

This Spark activity demonstrates how sole reliance on generative AI tools without domain knowledge often leads to friction and flawed business decision-making. Students compare their performance using traditional hands-on methods against varying degrees of AI automation to discover how to use AI as an effective augment without sacrificing human knowledge.

This AI activity uses Gemini Gems to help students generate and refine AI prompts that create accurate visual illustrations of complex geotechnical engineering concepts, such as lateral earth pressure and retaining wall systems. Students evaluate and improve the AI-generated illustrations using engineering principles, strengthening their understanding of complex concepts while developing AI literacy, prompt engineering, critical thinking, and visual communication skills. 

This Spark is designed to help athletic coaching students practice and demonstrate their ability to navigate conversations about food logging with youth athletes. It addresses the instructional challenge of having students articulate informed, research-backed positions on adolescent nutrition tracking while maintaining professional scope of practice.

The purpose of this activity is to provide doctoral students with authentic feedback that can be delivered by a professional peer reviewer during a journal article review process and to encourage them to write a response letter to process the feedback provided. Providing meaningful feedback and getting learners to process the feedback are different phenomena, and the latter is less common.