Instructor Profile: Alexandra MacKay

Alexandra MacKay has taught courses in the Rotman Commerce BCom program and in several of the master’s programs of the Rotman School of Management. She also contributes to programs in the Executive Education offerings of the Rotman School. Professor MacKay has begun integrating generative AI into student deliverables, including asking students to create and later revise a personal framework for ethical AI use. One of her objectives is to support students to develop future-focused skills related to critical AI literacy. 

Q: In your courses, how have you implemented opportunities for students to develop critical AI literacy skills? What changes have you observed in student engagement or learning outcomes since introducing AI tools in your courses? 

For both my Y2 and Y4 courses in fall 2024, I asked students to complete an anonymous survey that included questions related to their AI knowledge and use. The results revealed that few knew about the UofT Microsoft Enterprise version of Copilot available to them, few were clear regarding how and when they were permitted to use AI in an academic context, and most had better than novice interaction with AI. I intend to use the survey again and shall be interested to see how the results shift over time. 

In summer 2024, the monthly Rotman Digital e-newsletter included a link to the article “Exploring the Impact of ChatGPT on Business School Education: Prospects, Boundaries and Paradoxes” by Valcea et al in the Journal of Management Education. Specifically, it included an appendix with a suggested exercise for students – that they complete a Personal Framework of Ethical AI Use. I modified the template from that paper and asked the students in my Y2 and my Y4 course to create this Personal Framework. They were asked to include 2-3 academic goals, 2-3 career-related goals and to specify how they might use AI and what potential benefits or risks they anticipated using AI to support these goals. They were also asked to identify how they intended to remain up to date on AI developments. The Frameworks were to be submitted in mid-September and a revised version submitted in early December. 

Students were both thoughtful and creative in the creation of their personal frameworks and the September submissions were fascinating to read. The December submissions were more revealing. Students had a deeper appreciation of where and when they really could make good use of AI, and where their early ideas and plans had required either modification or even abandonment. 

In my Y2 course, I had two writing assignments that required the use of AI. The first assignment required students to use AI to write a preliminary draft of a short paper. Students were then required to meet with a writing coach and solicit feedback on the preliminary draft. They were then to produce the final submission without the further use of AI. For the second writing assignment, students were to create the preliminary draft on their own and use AI to edit. Following the submission of the second writing assignment, students were asked to reflect on the experience. 

The questions from students ahead of each writing exercise – particularly the first one – revealed quite a bit of frustration. They quickly learned that they really had to know quite a lot about the topic and have a sense of what they wanted to write before they interacted with AI. The short reflection pieces submitted in December demonstrated that students had developed a clear sense for themselves of the ways in which AI would be helpful to them, what they needed to do to maximize the benefit of AI, and their own preferences regarding abdicating any creative license to the AI. 

Q: How do you balance teaching financial concepts with developing students’ AI literacy and prompt engineering skills?

I would not offer a lesson in how to use a calculator or a spreadsheet program unless it was an application of finance concepts. AI is a widely available tool. My objective is that students learn to work with that tool in the context of learning finance concepts. The two are not distinct. A game of tennis or chess is nicest if the players’ skills are not too diverse. If you consider AI a very smart study partner who is available 24/7, that interaction will be much more productive if you are reasonably well informed on the topic at hand before you begin. What students learned nearly immediately was that the interaction with AI was productive and sensible if they were informed before they began interacting with AI.  

Q: Looking ahead, how do you plan to address generative AI in future courses, assessments, and learning activities? 

I intend to continue to survey students at the start of the course on their use of and knowledge of AI. I intend to continue to ask students to complete a Personal Framework of Ethical AI Use. My colleague who also teaches RSM230H made some modifications to exercises involving writing and AI. Once the winter term is complete, his reflections will inform my next offering of the same course.