Over Summer 2025, the Career Center — in collaboration with the Center for Digital Innovation in Learning (CDIL) and the University Council on Teaching — launched the Integrative Learning Faculty Grant, a new initiative designed to recognize and support faculty members who are interested in fostering integrative learning in their classrooms. 

Why did you apply for this grant?

I applied for this grant to transform my existing Design for Impact (DFI) and my Design-Driven Advanced Topics (DDT) course structures into a pioneering model for true integrative learning. With the rapid rise of Generative AI, I saw a strategic opportunity to lead rather than merely react to rapidly shifting technology within and across higher education industry domains. My goal was to employ ethical GenAI as an “infinitely patient dialogue partner” to enhance design-driven innovative thinking, career discernment, interdisciplinary collaborations, and authentic student formation. By integrating ethical GenAI into the human-centric design course reflections and challenges, my aim is to help create bridge initiatives for students from across the BC schools, including the Carolyn A. and Peter S. Lynch School of Education and Human Development, the Robert J. Morrissey College of Arts and Sciences, the Woods College of Advancing Studies, the William F. Connell School of Nursing, and the Carroll School of Management (Lynch School, Morrissey College, Woods College, Connell School, and Carroll School), to better connect their academic work to Boston College’s “Three Questions” regarding joy, talent, and the world’s needs.

What were you hoping to gain from your collaboration with CDIL and the CC?

The success of this project relied on a “seamless bridge” between technological and digital innovation, career support, and potential future vocational and entrepreneurial endeavors. 

From the CDIL collaboration, we hoped to gain:

• Consultation on selecting and implementing ethical Generative AI tools.
• Technical support for integrating tools and GenAIBots into our existing DFI/DDT model.
• Assistance in creating multimedia platforms to document our BC students’ growth.

From the Career Center collaboration, we hoped to gain:

• Support in career development theory and frameworks for students, and to also inform AI partner dialogue prompts.
• Connections to industry and alumni so students could test insights with professionals in the field and expand networks
• Career and other assessment tools to measure the effectiveness of this new approach to career readiness.

What surprised you as part of this collaboration?

One of the most important surprises was the realization, alongside Career Center and CDIL colleagues, that AI can likely help facilitate “pure” inquiry without the social pressures often found in classroom settings. This allows for deep, private self-reflection that my students can then selectively share with faculty and peers, actually enriching their own human interactions. Having a CDIL team member speak directly to my course was a turning point, as it allowed students to move beyond their projects and develop individual working relationships with BC digital innovation professionals who could help further demystify the technology. Additionally, the collaboration highlighted how GenAI can genuinely bridge disparate “disciplinary silos.” I am impressed by how effectively ethical GenAI can synthesize insights across art, design, sculpture, health, nursing, business, entrepreneurship, and engineering, helping students see the powerful linkages between aesthetic theory, population health, technical feasibility, and on! 

What’s your biggest takeaway from this collaboration?

My biggest takeaway is that ethical Generative AI, when integrated thoughtfully, can amplify rather than replace human creativity, health and wellness, care, design, and innovation capacities. While GenAI may be a strong “thinking partner” for exploring alternatives and identifying untapped strengths, it ultimately highlights the irreplaceable value of genuine human connection in collaborative problem-solving. The contrast between GenAI interaction and real-world collaboration helps my students in UNAS 3307 Design for Impact and UNAS 4500 Design-Driven Advanced Topics recognize the unique value of both. We are demonstrating that technology can serve the deeper, formative, and positive purposes of a liberal arts education by helping students discover what genuinely matters to them and motivates them.

How will you continue to develop your project moving forward?

Moving forward, I would like to focus more on ethical GenAI sustainability and scalability in courses. My plans include: 

• Replication: Providing a usable template and pathway for other BC courses and external institutions to integrate GenAI into project-based and experiential learning.
• Refinement: Using the summative assessments from Spring 2026 to refine pedagogical models and reflection templates.
• Longitudinal Tracking: Following the students’ career outcomes and possible continued use of GenAI for professional development to measure long-term impacts.
• Institutional Integration Expansions: Working to embed GenAI-enhanced career discernment approaches permanently into more undergraduate course structures. 

Findings from the experience this semester:

Based on my pilot implementation this semester, in my UNAS 4500 Design-Driven Advanced Topics course, the following areas represent my most significant findings regarding the integration of GenAI in my design courses curriculum:

• Psychological Safety in AI-Mediated Inquiry: A primary finding for me was that many students often felt a lower “barrier to entry” when brainstorming with an AI than with a human peer or instructor. By using GenAI as a low-stakes “dialogue partner,” some students were better able to exhaust “obvious” ideas and overcome the fear of judgment. This private exploration led to more vulnerable and high-quality contributions during subsequent in-person group dialogue.
• Bridge Initiatives, Interdisciplinarity and Silo-Busting: The semester proved that GenAI excels at cross-pollinating concepts that students typically view as separate (e.g., intersections of design-thinking, business ethics, and population health). The tool acted as a linguistic and conceptual bridge builder, allowing students to find common ground in design thinking more rapidly than in previous semesters. Integrating the Career Center’s vocational exploration frameworks into our AI prompting changed our approach to vocational planning, as students realized they could use these digital tools to simulate networking scenarios and better prepare for future career opportunities in these newly bridged fields. This type of synthesis is a critical skill for 21st-century problem-solving.
• Re-centering Human Vocational “Joy”: Perhaps the most profound finding for me this term was that using AI didn’t automate the discernment process. Instead, it accelerated students’ arrival at the “Three Questions.” By offloading technical elements to the AI, students had more cognitive bandwidth to actually ‘reflect’ on which areas caused them joy and where their talents met the world’s needs. The AI helped map the ‘talents, but the ‘joy’ remained a strictly human metric that students felt even more protective of after noting AI’s limitations.