Purpose: Pre-class quiz, real-time polls, post-test, exit tickets.
Purpose: Group poster gallery wall; peer feedback posts; take-away reflection wall.
Purpose: Quick classroom consensus checks; real-time misconception identification.
Purpose: Peer-driven flashcard practice for classical conditioning vocabulary.
| AI Tool | Purpose in This Lesson | Critical Engagement Focus |
|---|---|---|
| ChatGPT / Claude / Copilot | Pre-class journal; group critique tasks; slogan generation (Segment 4) | Students evaluate accuracy, biases, completeness; decide adopt/modify/reject |
| Gradescope / Turnitin Revision Assistant | AI formative feedback on portfolio drafts | Students interrogate AI feedback, agree/disagree in reflection statement |
| Grammarly | Writing support for portfolio drafts | Students document AI-mediated modifications in AI Transparency Statement |
| YouTube auto-captions | Accessibility for Khan Academy & Crash Course videos | Instructor notes AI captions may contain errors β students learn AI limitation first-hand |
| Student Need | Support Strategy | Pedagogy Link |
|---|---|---|
| English Language Learners (ELL) | Provide visual glossary of key terms; pair with fluent English speakers; provide sentence starters for reflection questions | Scaffolding in ZPD β students learn academic vocabulary through peer discourse |
| Visual Impairments | All worksheets available electronically (screen-reader friendly); verbal description of all images and animations | Equitable access through verbal description and digital alternatives |
| Hearing Impairments | All videos with verified closed captions; instructor repeats spoken text; visual diagrams supplement verbal instruction | Redundancy of information (visual + verbal) β dual-channel learning |
| Kinesthetic Learners | Sticky notes for quick writes; hands-on card matching (US/UR/NS/CS/CR); gallery walk movement activity | Integrating movement into collaborative activities |
| Advanced Learners / Early Finishers | Extension task: "Design a culturally-specific behavior modification plan that AI could not generate." Lead class debrief during Closure. | Extension tasks at higher Bloom's levels (Create, Evaluate) β peer co-teaching within ZPD |
| Attention Difficulties | 20-minute activity changes with clear structure; explicit task chunking with mini-goals; movement breaks (gallery walk, card sorting) | Reducing cognitive load through segmentation; collaboration provides external regulation |
| Unfamiliar with AI Tools | 3-minute visual walkthrough at start of class; "AI Buddy" pairing; AI Troubleshooting Station for in-task support | Peer scaffolding in ZPD β more skilled navigator supports less confident peer |
| Student Need | AI Accommodation | Instructor Oversight |
|---|---|---|
| Simplified Language | Students prompt AI: "Explain this in simpler terms using an analogy." | Students document AI use in Transparency Statement |
| Advanced Learners | Prompt AI for ethical dilemma scenarios in operant conditioning; evaluate AI's resolution | Extension assignment |
| Dyslexia | Text-to-speech tools (NaturalReader); AI-generated audio summaries; AI skeleton outlines (instructor-approved) | Instructor reviews AI outlines for accuracy before release |
| Non-English Speakers | DeepL or AI translation tools for concepts; bilingual glossaries (e.g., η»ε Έζ‘δ»Άδ½η¨ for classical conditioning) | Instructor provides bilingual vocabulary list; students check AI translation against course definitions |
| Indicator | Data Source | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Peer discourse quality | Instructor observation + audio recording of 2 groups; peer evaluation rubric data | Evidence of: disagreement, negotiation, elaboration, co-construction of ideas |
| Group collaboration efficacy | Peer evaluation scores; instructor observation; synthesis poster quality | Average peer evaluation score β₯ 3.5 / 4 |
| Collaborative product quality | Synthesis poster; portfolio case study | Evidence of integrated, synthesized ideas (not just assembled parts) |
| Emergent shared understanding | Post-test scores vs. pre-test; exit ticket take-aways | Measurable learning gains from pre to post-test |
Data source: Exit ticket Q3; AI Reflection discussion; AI Transparency Statements.
Instructor prompt: "What percentage of students found AI helpful? Where did AI create confusion or frustration? What does this suggest about the optimal level of AI integration?"
Data source: AI Transparency Statements; group discussion observations.
Instructor prompt: "Did AI use replace critical thinking, or scaffold it? Did students demonstrate effective human override? What patterns in student decision-making emerged?"
Data source: AI critique worksheets; AI journal entries.
Instructor prompt: "Which aspects of AI evaluation were most difficult? Did students get trapped by 'authority bias'? What scaffolding could be added next time?"
Data source: AI-supported differentiation observations; ELL student performance vs. prior cohorts.
Instructor prompt: "Did AI accommodations effectively support ELL/bilingual learners? Where might AI have created additional equity concerns?"
| Level | Description | Action Plan |
|---|---|---|
| Excellent | AI tasks consistently provoke critical thinking; students demonstrate sophisticated human override; integration is natural | Maintain current approach |
| Good | AI tasks useful but some students defer to AI without critique; instructor facilitates significant judgment prompting | Increase explicit guidance on independent reasoning; add optional AI-focused extensions |
| Developing | AI integration superficial; students treat AI as authoritative; tasks don't meaningfully enhance learning | Revise AI prompts; model explicit human judgment; reduce AI usage where unclear |
| Task | Checkpoint |
|---|---|
| Set up room ahead of time (projector, seating arrangement, materials at stations) | Before class |
| Circulate during group activities; document student interactions with AI tools | During all AI segments |
| Operate the "AI Troubleshooting Station" | Throughout Development phase |
| Support the gallery walk (direct students to groups; facilitate movement) | Segment 4 |
| Collect exit tickets and summarise key themes for instructor | End of class |
Use these prompts while circulating during AI group tasks:
The TA Responsibilities section above is visible to instructors/teachers. Switch to Teacher view (role button in nav) to see full TA facilitation materials.
Classical Conditioning Example Critique β for use during Segment 1 (25β35 min)
For use in the summative Learning Theory Portfolio β due 3 weeks after lesson.