Asynchronous Academy

Exam Task: The Great AI Debate

Suggested Duration: 10 Hours

"Technology is a useful servant but a dangerous master."

Christian Lous Lange

Throughout this course, you have partnered with Artificial Intelligence (AI) to translate Shakespeare, draft scripts, analyze themes, and edit media. You have experienced firsthand what it is like to work alongside these tools.

For your final Exam Task, you will step into the role of two opposing debaters to address one of the most critical questions facing education today: Is AI a learning superpower, or is it leading to intellectual dependency?

You will prepare a structured debate script arguing both sides of this question, and then record a creative "Self-Debate" Video where you perform both roles.

The Debate Topic:

Resolved: That generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) serves as an intellectual multiplier that enhances student learning and creativity, rather than a cognitive crutch that fosters intellectual dependency and erodes critical thinking.

You must argue both sides of this resolution:

  • The Affirmative (AI is a Superpower): AI is a collaborative partner. It helps students break through writer's block, translates difficult language (like Shakespeare), provides instant feedback, and handles low-level drafting so students can focus on high-level analysis and polish.
  • The Negative (AI Fosters Dependency): AI is an intellectual shortcut. It bypasses the productive struggle of reading, writing, and thinking. Over-reliance makes students dependent, dilutes their unique voices, and results in superficial comprehension.

Step 1: Gathering Evidence from Your Coursework

To make your arguments convincing, you cannot just speak in generalities. You must use specific evidence from your actual experience in this course:

  1. Revisit Shakespeare (Reading the Play):
    • Did using AI for modern translations help you understand the play better, or did it tempt you to skip reading the original lines? Did creating multiple-choice questions with AI deepen your analysis or just automate it?
  2. Revisit the Novel Study (You're a Bookstagrammer!):
    • Did AI assist you in discovering themes and vocabulary? Or did it make it easier to read summaries instead of engaging deeply with the text?
  3. Revisit Your Writing/Media (Personal Improvement & Social Media Plan):
    • Did AI act as a helpful sounding board for structuring scripts? Or did it dilute your personal voice and make your writing feel generic?

Brainstorming Goal: Identify at least two concrete examples from your own coursework to support the Affirmative argument, and two concrete examples to support the Negative argument.

Step 2: Drafting the Debate Script

Write a formal script for a debate between two personas. Ensure each character speaks clearly and uses structured arguments (Point, Evidence, Explanation).

Script Structure & Timing:

  • Affirmative Opening Statement (Persona A): (1.5 minutes) Define why AI is an intellectual multiplier, citing specific course assignments where it expanded your capabilities.
  • Negative Opening Statement (Persona B): (1.5 minutes) Argue how AI functions as a cognitive crutch, referencing course assignments where AI usage risked replacing genuine skill development.
  • Affirmative Rebuttal & Conclusion (Persona A): (1 minute) Defend the superpower position, acknowledging the risks but proposing a model of responsible partnership.
  • Negative Rebuttal & Conclusion (Persona B): (1 minute) Defend the skeptic position, emphasizing that real learning requires productive struggle and human voice.

Deliverable:

📤

Debate Script

Submit your completed script as a Google Doc or Markdown file, with visual directions and clear markings separating Persona A and Persona B.

Step 3: Filming and Editing the "Self-Debate"

Now, bring your script to life by performing both roles on camera!

Creative Presentation Guidelines:

  • Visual Personas: Differentiate your two debaters visually. You can use simple props or costumes (e.g., a hat, glasses, a different shirt, or a blazer for one character and a casual hoodie for the other).
  • Vocal & Physical Contrast: Adjust your tone, speaking pace, and posture for each persona.
  • Camera Angles: Position your camera so that you are looking slightly to the left as Persona A (the Evangelist) and slightly to the right as Persona B (the Skeptic). When edited together, it should look like the two characters are looking at and debating each other.
  • Editing in Canva: Shoot the statements as separate clips, and then use Canva to stitch them together into a seamless debate. Ensure transitions are clean and audio levels are consistent.

Deliverable:

📤

"Self-Debate" Video

Upload your finished video (4 to 6 minutes) exported from Canva showing your creative performance of both sides of the AI debate.

Assessment

Pre-Submission

Before you submit, please complete the Pre-Submission Self-Assessment.

What to Turn In

  • 📤

    Debate Script (Google Doc or Markdown) featuring your structured arguments and course evidence for both sides.

  • 📤

    "Self-Debate" Video (Canva Video) of you performing both sides of the debate, utilizing distinct personas.

💡 A Different Way to Learn

Async Academy courses are inquiry-based. There are no rote answer keys or multiple-choice worksheets here. You learn by exploring, questioning, and building projects you care about.

Because your discovery path is completely unique, you need a human sounding board. Enroll to submit your projects and get personalized video feedback from an Ontario Certified Teacher to guide your work.

Learning Goals

We are learning to:

  • 🎯

    Formulate and structure persuasive oral arguments defending and counter-arguing a complex technology ethics topic

  • 🎯

    Present and communicate ideas dynamically on video, using distinct vocal strategies, body language, and visual cues (such as costumes or camera angles) to represent different perspectives

  • 🎯

    Synthesize personal coursework experience and empirical observations to evaluate the educational impact of Large Language Models (LLMs)

Success Criteria

I can:

  • ✅

    I can plan and write a detailed script that uses specific evidence from my course experience (e.g. Shakespeare translation, novel study, scripting, video editing) to argue both sides of the AI debate

    Expectations Covered: W1, W2
  • ✅

    I can perform two distinct personas clearly on video, using vocal variation, non-verbal cues, and visual cues (clothing, props, or setups) to distinguish the arguments

    Expectations Covered: OC2, OC3
  • ✅

    I can curate and edit a seamless video presenting the "self-debate" using tools like Canva

    Expectations Covered: MS3

Rubric

Category Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1
Knowledge / Understanding
How well does the student demonstrate understanding of both sides of the AI debate?
 Demonstrates a deep, nuanced understanding of both the benefits and risks of AI integration in education Demonstrates a clear and appropriate understanding of both sides of the AI debate Demonstrates a basic or general understanding of both sides of the AI debate Demonstrates a limited or vague understanding of the arguments
Thinking / Inquiry
How effectively does the student integrate specific evidence from their course experience to support each argument?
 Synthesizes highly specific, relevant evidence and personal insights from prior assignments Connects clear evidence and course experiences to support each position Mentions some general course experiences or evidence, though lacking in depth Provides minimal or vague references to course experiences
Application
How creatively and effectively does the student perform both roles and edit the final video?
 Creates an exceptionally creative performance with distinct personas, props/costumes, and smooth video editing Performs both roles clearly with distinct visual/vocal cues and clean video editing Attempts distinct roles with some success, though video presentation or editing is basic Shows limited effort in distinguishing roles or presenting a polished video
Communication
How clearly, persuasively, and logically do speaking and writing communicate ideas?
 Written script and oral delivery are exceptionally clear, persuasive, and highly engaging Written script and oral delivery are clear, engaging, and appropriate for the audience Written script and oral delivery are generally clear, with minor lapses in coherence or engagement Written script and oral delivery show limited clarity, coherence, or focus
Knowledge / Understanding
Criteria: How well does the student demonstrate understanding of both sides of the AI debate?
Level 4

Demonstrates a deep, nuanced understanding of both the benefits and risks of AI integration in education

Level 3

Demonstrates a clear and appropriate understanding of both sides of the AI debate

Level 2

Demonstrates a basic or general understanding of both sides of the AI debate

Level 1

Demonstrates a limited or vague understanding of the arguments

Thinking / Inquiry
Criteria: How effectively does the student integrate specific evidence from their course experience to support each argument?
Level 4

Synthesizes highly specific, relevant evidence and personal insights from prior assignments

Level 3

Connects clear evidence and course experiences to support each position

Level 2

Mentions some general course experiences or evidence, though lacking in depth

Level 1

Provides minimal or vague references to course experiences

Application
Criteria: How creatively and effectively does the student perform both roles and edit the final video?
Level 4

Creates an exceptionally creative performance with distinct personas, props/costumes, and smooth video editing

Level 3

Performs both roles clearly with distinct visual/vocal cues and clean video editing

Level 2

Attempts distinct roles with some success, though video presentation or editing is basic

Level 1

Shows limited effort in distinguishing roles or presenting a polished video

Communication
Criteria: How clearly, persuasively, and logically do speaking and writing communicate ideas?
Level 4

Written script and oral delivery are exceptionally clear, persuasive, and highly engaging

Level 3

Written script and oral delivery are clear, engaging, and appropriate for the audience

Level 2

Written script and oral delivery are generally clear, with minor lapses in coherence or engagement

Level 1

Written script and oral delivery show limited clarity, coherence, or focus