Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Public health programs must prepare students to communicate effectively and use artificial intelligence (AI) responsibly. This case study describes the redesign of a communication course that advanced undergraduates take in a 2-year public health program. The redesign centered on 3 instructional priorities: maintain process approaches to writing, integrate explicit training in AI literacy, and expand oral assessments. While studying prompt engineering as part of AI literacy, students created their own AI writing tutor that provided feedback on clarity, organization, and tone. The AI writing tutors were restricted from completing the assignments on the students' behalf. Oral assessments included a "difficult conversation" about AI in health care and an interview with a health professional. The participants were 12 undergraduates who enrolled in the redesigned course in fall 2025. After completing their final assignments, the students answered a questionnaire with Likert-scale items and open-ended responses. The students perceived increases in their understanding of AI, confidence to use AI responsibly, and levels of preparation to use AI in future courses or professional settings. They indicated that AI tools in the redesigned course were advantageous for both writing and speaking assignments. For writing assignments, AI tools helped them brainstorm, organize, and revise. For speaking assignments, AI tools helped them prepare talking points and anticipate questions. Additionally, students identified challenges that they experienced in the redesigned course and provided recommendations for improvement. The findings suggest that the 3 instructional priorities can support student learning while strengthening assessment validity in AI-enhanced learning environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Madson et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: