Lesson Report:
Title
– Stress-Testing AI-and-Democracy Policy Memos: Preparing for Shark Tank Pitches
– Synopsis: The session pivoted from immediate presentations to a structured “stress testâ€� workshop using anonymized executive summaries of students’ policy memos on AI and democracy. Students practiced four critique lenses—innovation impacts, fiscal/bureaucratic feasibility, civil liberties risks, and implementation logic—to sharpen peer feedback and refine their own proposals ahead of Thursday’s two-minute Shark Tank pitches.
Attendance
– Absent mentioned: 0
– Notable attendance notes: 1 late arrival due to Daylight Saving Time confusion
– Live headcount noted by instructor: 15 present
Topics Covered (chronological, with activity/topic labels)
– Course logistics and assessment reminders
– Policy memo submissions: Several students still missing; late-credit deadline set for Saturday; confirm upload to eCourse.
– Presentation schedule update: With ~19–20 memos submitted, all Shark Tank pitches can be completed in one class on Thursday.
– Activity setup: “Stress testâ€� peer-review of executive summaries
– Materials: Instructor compiled all submitted executive summaries into a single, anonymized Google Doc (names removed); students to reference assigned memo numbers only.
– Grouping: With 15 students present, class split into 3 breakout rooms; memo assignments:
– Group 1: Memos 1–4
– Group 2: Memos 5–9
– Group 3: Memos 10–14
– Note: ~5 additional memos remained unassigned for this activity window.
– Task design and workflow:
– Goal: Identify weaknesses visible from the executive summaries; “stress testâ€� the proposals.
– Roles: Groups of ~4–5; assign each member one critique lens and apply that lens consistently across all assigned memos.
– Four critique lenses (summarized for reference):
1) Stifles innovation: Overregulation deters entrepreneurship, new products/services; risks to economic dynamism.
2) Too expensive/too bureaucratic: Fiscal irresponsibility; administrative bloat; private sector might address more efficiently.
3) Civil liberties concerns: Potential violations of free speech, privacy, due process, and press autonomy.
4) Logically impossible/implementation gaps: Looks good on paper but lacks realistic pathways, governance, funding, or enforceability.
– Deliverable: For each assigned memo—briefly state the policy problem and proposed solution, then present the four critiques. Aim to “steelmanâ€� the assigned critique (argue it convincingly, even if you disagree).
– Timing: 20-minute breakout work period; instructor check-ins; reconvene for whole-class debrief.
– Whole-class debrief: Group 1 (Room 1) presentations
– Memo 1 (Kyrgyzstan—deepfakes in elections)
– Proposal summary: National framework to counter AI-generated political deepfakes—mandatory labels on AI political media; public register of verified campaign materials; rapid deepfake response unit under the Ministry of Digital Development and the Central Election Commission; aims to preserve electoral transparency/trust and align with international standards.
– Critique (Stifles innovation): Risk of overextended regulation and red tape that could slow AI and digital communications innovation.
– Instructor note: Students should fully embrace the assigned critique lens (i.e., argue the “too much regulation harms innovationâ€� case strongly) before offering defenses.
– Memo 2 (Kyrgyzstan—national AI transparency system for elections)
– Proposal summary: Central Election Commission to lead a national AI transparency system—label AI-generated political content; partner with local fact-checkers/tech firms; voter education; safeguard 2026 parliamentary elections; project Kyrgyzstan as an ethical tech leader.
– Critique (Too expensive/bureaucratic): Assigned lens was cost/administrative burden vs. market alternative; student initially rebutted the critique (argued benefits/partnerships could control costs). Instructor pressed to “make the caseâ€� that public administration here could be too costly, duplicative, and less efficient than private solutions.
– Memo 3 (Central Asia—C5+1 youth cyber/AI literacy)
– Proposal summary: Regional C5+1 program to bolster youth digital literacy and resilience with education and peer-to-peer monitoring against AI-driven disinformation.
– Critique (Logically impossible/implementation gaps): Coordination across five governments and youth orgs is complex and costly; unclear funder, manager, and evaluator; assumes consistent regional digital access; risks remaining aspirational without concrete operational and financial planning.
– Instructor affirmation: Strong identification of governance/funding specifics as essential for feasibility.
– Memo 4 (United Kingdom—mandatory AI labeling/watermarking)
– Proposal summary: National AI transparency framework requiring labeling/watermarking of all AI-generated or modified content to rebuild trust and prevent voter manipulation.
– Critique (Civil liberties): Mandatory labeling could infringe free speech, privacy, and press autonomy.
– Additional angle (Stifles innovation and enforcement clarity): Unclear sanction regime (fines vs. criminal penalties) complicates compliance calculus and could chill innovation; enforcement details needed to assess workability and rights impacts.
– Whole-class debrief: Group 2 (Room 2) compressed share
– Memo 5 (AI content disclosure/register/reporting—jurisdiction unspecified in summary)
– Critique (Implementation logic): Suggest adding verification infrastructure to audit “non-AIâ€� claims—an Internet-scale “Turnitinâ€� for AI to detect generated text; without verification, labels can be gamed. Instructor flagged as constructive but noted feasibility and governance would need attention.
– Additional points (connection lost mid-share):
– AI content disclosure/verification policy: Administrative burden could be heavy; potential chilling effect on innovation and expression.
– Federal AI transparency framework for elections: Risk of sliding into excessive government control over political communications if not carefully scoped and safeguarded.
– Closing guidance for Shark Tank presentations (Thursday)
– Format: 2-minute pitch per memo (hard stop); Q&A follows the pitch.
– Visuals: PowerPoint/Canva optional but encouraged.
– Camera: Must be on during the presentation unless pre-approved via email for exceptional circumstances.
– Strategy: Lead with a compelling hook; crisply define the problem and solution; anticipate critiques (especially innovation, cost/bureaucracy, rights, and implementation).
Actionable Items
– Urgent (before Thursday)
– Late memo submissions: Remind non-submitters of Saturday late-credit deadline; verify eCourse uploads.
– Presentation logistics: Email class the final pitch order and time expectations; reiterate 2-minute hard limit, Q&A after, camera-on requirement, slides optional.
– Daylight Saving Time: Send a clear time-change reminder with adjusted start times across relevant time zones; update calendar invites.
– Prep guidance: Encourage students to “steelmanâ€� likely critiques and specify enforcement, governance, funding, and rights safeguards in their slides and pitches.
– High priority (this week)
– Materials access: Ensure the anonymized executive summary doc remains accessible for final revisions; consider sharing a brief rubric/checklist aligned to the four critique lenses.
– Coverage planning: With ~19–20 memos, verify total time needed (2 min pitch + Q&A each) and manage pacing and transitions to fit one session.
– Follow-up/ongoing
– Targeted feedback: Reach out to groups that struggled to argue the assigned critique to reinforce the exercise’s purpose (practice making the opposing case).
– Feasibility focus: Encourage proposals to include concrete implementation roadmaps (responsible agencies, budget lines, timeline, enforcement/sanctions, oversight).
– Risk/rights balance: Prompt students to include civil liberties impact assessments and mitigation strategies (e.g., narrow tailoring, due process, appeals).
Homework Instructions:
” ASSIGNMENT #1: Submit Your Policy Memo (Late Credit Window)
You will finalize and submit your policy memo for grading; this is an important part of your grade, and you have until this Saturday to submit for late credit if you have not already done so. Use the critiques and examples from today’s stress-testing activity (innovation, cost/bureaucracy, civil liberties, and feasibility) to strengthen your memo before you upload it.
Instructions:
1) Confirm your status:
– If you have already submitted your policy memo, verify that your file is visible and accessible on eCourse.
– If you have not submitted, proceed with the steps below and submit by this Saturday to receive late credit.
2) Revisit your executive summary:
– Ensure the problem and proposed solution are stated clearly and concisely at the top (as we used executive summaries in class).
– Make it easy for a reader to grasp the “AI and democracyâ€� problem and your proposed fix in a few sentences.
3) Stress-test your memo using the four lenses from class:
– Innovation: Could your policy “stifle innovationâ€� or create too much red tape? If so, refine.
– Cost/Bureaucracy: Could it be “too expensiveâ€� or overly bureaucratic? Identify funding, scale, and ways to minimize overhead.
– Rights and Liberties: Could it “violate civil libertiesâ€� (e.g., free speech, privacy)? Note safeguards and legal grounding.
– Feasibility: Is it “logically implementableâ€�? Clarify who funds, who administers, enforcement mechanisms, and realistic rollout steps.
4) Tighten implementation details:
– Specify responsible agencies/partners, enforcement or accountability mechanisms, and how success will be evaluated.
– If your policy includes labelling, verification, or penalties, be explicit about how these will work in practice.
5) Polish and finalize:
– Proofread for clarity and coherence.
– Ensure citations or references (if required by prior course guidelines) are complete.
6) Upload your memo:
– Submit your final file to eCourse by this Saturday for late credit.
– After uploading, double-check that the correct file appears and opens.
7) Keep a local copy:
– Save the final version you submitted—you will reference it in your upcoming presentation.
ASSIGNMENT #2: Prepare Your 2-Minute Shark Tank Pitch
You will deliver a 2-minute Shark Tank–style pitch of your policy memo in Thursday’s class to earn “investments� and get targeted feedback. This builds on today’s critical exercise by asking you to present the problem and solution compellingly while anticipating the four common critiques.
Instructions:
1) Know the constraints:
– Time limit: exactly 2 minutes for the pitch (no questions during those 2 minutes; Q&A follows).
– Camera: you must have your camera on during your presentation.
– Slides: PowerPoint/Canva is optional—not required. If you cannot use your camera due to an extreme circumstance, email the professor before class.
2) Outline your pitch (suggested flow):
– Hook (5–10 seconds): Lead with a striking fact, example, or consequence that captures attention.
– Problem (20–30 seconds): State the specific “AI and democracyâ€� problem succinctly (what’s at stake and for whom).
– Solution (45–60 seconds): Present your policy proposal clearly—who does what, when, and how.
– Why it works (20–30 seconds): Note expected impact and one or two concrete implementation details that make it realistic.
3) Preempt the four common criticisms in one line each:
– Innovation: Explain why your policy will not stifle innovation (or how you’ve minimized that risk).
– Cost/Bureaucracy: Indicate feasibility and cost controls (partners, phased rollout, leveraging existing capacity).
– Rights and Liberties: Identify safeguards protecting free speech/privacy or how your design respects civil liberties.
– Feasibility: Clarify the “howâ€� (funding, responsible agency, enforcement/penalties if relevant, and timeline).
4) Build optional slides strategically (if you choose to use them):
– Limit to 1–3 slides focused on a clean structure (Problem → Solution → Impact).
– Avoid dense text; ensure slides don’t push you over time.
5) Practice out loud:
– Time yourself to finish within 2 minutes. The sharks will cut you off if you exceed time.
– Rehearse with a classmate or record yourself to refine clarity and pace.
6) Prepare for Q&A:
– After the 2-minute pitch, be ready to address the four lenses directly and respond to challenges about enforcement, cost, and rights.
7) Technical and day-of readiness:
– Test your camera, mic, and slides (if any) before class.
– Join class on time, have your materials queued, and be ready when called.
8) Aim for persuasion:
– As advised in class: find the “hook,â€� get to the most interesting parts fast, and make the case for why your idea merits investment now. “