Using and Critically Evaluating Generative AI in Communication and Graphic Design Courses

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are rapidly influencing communication, business communication, design, and educational practices, creating both opportunities and challenges for instructors teaching communication and visual media courses. As generative AI becomes more integrated into higher education and industry workflows, instructors must help students use these technologies critically and ethically while preserving human creativity, disciplinary expertise, and the author’s voice or design vision. Students entering careers in Extension, agricultural communication, graphic design, and media industries will increasingly encounter AI-assisted brainstorming, editing, content creation, and visual design tools. Therefore, instructors must design learning experiences that encourage students to critically evaluate AI-generated outputs rather than passively accept them.

To help students critically and ethically engage with generative AI, I integrated structured AI learning activities into two courses taught in different modalities: the graduate-level asynchronous online course Communication Tools in Extension and the undergraduate in-person course Graphic Design in Agriculture and Media Industries. The following projects demonstrate how students used generative AI for communication planning and visual design while reflecting on creativity, ethics, revision, and the role of human judgment in the learning process.

In the graduate-level asynchronous online course, students used generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, or Gemini to brainstorm communication challenges, target audiences, and SWOT analyses for a communication plan. Students then used the brainstormed information to write their own 2–3 key messages for the communication plan. Students selected an organization, Extension program, career and technical education (CTE) program, or business, and critically evaluated the AI-generated outputs before revising the content to better reflect their organization, communication goals, and authorial voice. Students also completed reflection questions about the usefulness, limitations, ethical considerations, and responsible use of generative AI in communication settings. The assignment emphasized critical evaluation, ethical prompting, and the need for human oversight when using AI-generated content.

A thematic analysis of 11 graduate students’ reflections revealed that students viewed generative AI as a useful brainstorming and organizational tool that helped generate ideas, refine thinking, and overcome writer’s block. Many students emphasized the importance of critically evaluating and revising AI-generated outputs to ensure the information was realistic, accurate, relevant to their organization, and reflective of their own voice. Students also identified limitations, including redundancy, inaccurate information and citations, and the need for precise prompting. In addition, reflections demonstrated students’ awareness of ethical considerations, including disclosure, academic integrity, and the importance of using AI as a support tool rather than a replacement for human judgment and expertise.

In the undergraduate in-person course, students participated in hands-on activities using Adobe Firefly and Adobe Illustrator generative AI tools to create and edit images and vector artwork. Over three class periods, students practiced prompt writing, image generation, generative fill, recoloring, and vector creation while learning how AI tools can support visual communication workflows. Students also responded to open-ended reflection questions about creativity, efficiency, realism, ethics, and the limitations of AI-generated artwork. In addition, students participated in role-playing discussions examining stakeholder perspectives on generative AI in design industries, including concerns about creativity, bias, realism, and authorship. The activities emphasized prompt refinement, critical evaluation of AI-generated visuals, and balancing AI assistance with human creativity and design judgment.

Analysis of 35 undergraduate students’ reflections revealed that students perceived generative AI tools as beneficial for increasing creativity, efficiency, and flexibility in the design process. Students valued the ability to quickly generate multiple design options, add or remove visual elements, and create customized images or vector artwork without relying on stock vector images or the more time-consuming drawing in Adobe Illustrator. However, students also identified limitations, including graphics that appeared fake or unrealistic due to filters, colors, or lighting; limited editing of generated content in Adobe Firefly; and the need to use precise prompts to achieve desired results. Reflections also demonstrated that students viewed prompt writing and revision as important creative skills and recognized the continued need for human creativity, design judgment, and ethical decision-making when using AI-generated artwork.

These projects demonstrated that generative AI could support brainstorming, creativity, and efficiency while still requiring human oversight, critical evaluation, and disciplinary expertise. AI can only be as effective as the professional or student utilizing it (Mollick & Mollick, 2023). It is our duty as educators to stay abreast of best practices and ethical implementation techniques, so I will continue to update the activities and use generative AI tools in the courses.

Presenters