Q IND501 M7.3: AI Community Challenge: Mission Complete! Your task force's mission is almost complete! Now finalize and submit your plan. Final AI Community Challenge Lesson 1 of 1 Final AI Community Challenge This week, your AI Community Challenge Team must discuss the recommendations received from the ethical review team and decide which you will integrate into your individual and overarching AI plans. Once you have done this, you will nalize your AI Community Challenge full proposal together. You have developed a solid plan for meeting your deadline with a high-quality product. Well done! Timeline for submission Complete your document draft with all the revised individual proposals by Thursday night. Review the document by Saturday. Each team member needs to post any changes or that they approve the document as is and are comfortable submitting this finalized version to the fictional university. Designate someone to write a short memo to add to the front page of the document. Be sure that it has your request for consideration, the titles of all the proposals submitted with authors and discipline, and then sign it with your team's name and all participating team members. Make sure that someone is designated to polish up the document. This team member will ideally be someone who likes to work toward the end of the module. They should download the document from your collaborations space and then clean it up (spell, grammar check, address and remove any tracked changes, remove any comment bubbles or diering font colors, etc.). Submit the final version in the collaboration area. In Module 8, you will also attach the nal plan to the Module 8 discussion area for feedback. Title the document with your team's name and make sure that your team members’ names are prominently listed in the body of your discussion board post. (Only the team member responsible for polishing up the document should post the plan to this board!) Don't forget to submit your plan! Evaluation This assignment is worth 20% of your final grade and are assessed using the Final Project Rubric below. This activity is due Sunday by 11:59 pm ET. References Outcomes Rubric Return to Learning Pathway Rubric Final Project Rubric Final Project Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEthics 25 to >22.0 pts Exceeds Expectations You clearly describe and apply as appropriate to your portion of the final AI team challenge plan (your individual proposal), the necessary components and actions. Your contribution is clearly justified by ethical principles within your discipline and ensures that any issues are mitigated, including those identified in the ethical review. 22 to >20.0 pts Meets Expectations You describe, and apply as appropriate, the necessary components and actions related to your portion of final AI team challenge plan (your individual proposal). Your contribution is justified by ethical principles within your discipline and ensures any issues are mitigated, including those identified in ethical review. Minor points need developments. 20 to >17.0 pts Progressing toward Expectations You describe the components and actions related to your portion of the final AI team challenge plan (your individual proposal). You include ethical principles within your discipline in your contribution, but they are not clearly connected to the actions you outline. More information is necessary for the reader to understand how ethics support your mitigation of issues. 17 to >1.0 pts Needs Improvement You attempt to identify components and actions related to your portion of the final AI team challenge plan (individual proposal) but miss numerous key elements. Your contribution attempts to identify ethical principles within your discipline, but there is no clear connection between your actions and how they relate to ethics. 1 to >0 pts Unacceptable Ethics is not addressed. Assignment not submitted. Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy. 25 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCultural diversity and inclusion 20 to >18.0 pts Exceeds Expectations Your final AI proposal and/or your team’s suite of proposals is inclusive of all groups and stakeholders, including those from diverse cultural backgrounds, and provides solutions, where necessary, for vulnerable groups. Any issues identified in the ethical review have been addressed as appropriate. You have been purposeful and methodical as a team in ensuring that the team proposal will benefit as many people and groups as possible. 18 to >16.0 pts Meets Expectations Your final AI proposal and/or your team’s suite of proposals is inclusive of all groups and stakeholders, including those from diverse cultural backgrounds, and provides solutions, where necessary, for vulnerable groups. Any issues identified in the ethical review have been addressed as appropriate. You have been purposeful as a team in ensuring that the team proposal will benefit as many people and groups as possible. Minor points require further development. 16 to >13.0 pts Progressing toward Expectations Your final AI proposal and/or your team’s suite of proposals is inclusive of most groups and stakeholders and provides solutions, where necessary, for vulnerable groups. There may be an attempt to address issues identified in the ethical review as appropriate, but more work is needed. You have acknowledged the need and/or desire for the team proposal to benefit as many people and groups as possible. A few key stakeholder groups are not discussed, OR the solution may be too simplistic. 13 to >1.0 pts Needs Improvement Your final AI proposal and/or your team’s suite of proposals addresses several key groups, but many groups are not considered. Issues noted in the ethical team review have not been adequately addressed. The information is incomplete. Solutions for vulnerable groups, if provided, are oversimplified. 1 to >0 pts Unacceptable Cultural diversity and inclusion are not addressed. Assignment not submitted. Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall quality of team’s suite of proposals 25 to >22.0 pts Exceeds Expectations Your team’s full proposal, with all individual sections considered, is of professional quality, leverages the opportunities of AI while minimizing the potential challenges, and together places the community in an excellent position for growth and innovation. A wide range of disciplines, organization types, and groups are meaningfully included in the full set of proposals. 22 to >20.0 pts Meets Expectations Your team’s full proposal, with all individual sections considered, is overall good quality, describes the opportunities of AI while minimizing the potential challenges, and together places the community in a strong position for growth and innovation. A range of disciplines, organization types, and groups are included in the full set of proposals. 20 to >17.0 pts Progressing toward Expectations Your team’s full proposal, with all individual sections considered, is a good start. You have mentioned opportunities and challenges of AI, though more information is needed to connect how opportunities can be leveraged, and challenges minimized. Suite of proposals needs more cohesion in several areas to place community in a position for growth/innovation; it is missing one or more important groups. 17 to >1.0 pts Needs Improvement Your team’s full proposal, with all individual sections considered, is missing significant amounts of information needed to form a cohesive and overarching plan to integrate AI into the community and various organizations. Suite of proposals as written does not position community for growth and/or innovation and may put it at risk for stagnancy or harm from poor AI integration. The plan is missing important groups 1 to >0 pts Unacceptable Your portion of the plan is not included in the full suite of proposals. Assignment not submitted. Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy. 25 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidence-based information 10 to >9.0 pts Exceeds Expectations You clearly and consistently support your assertions with evidence-based sources from your team’s review of the literature. 9 to >8.0 pts Meets Expectations You support your assertions with evidence-based sources from your team’s review of the literature, though minor details are missing that would help support your assertions. 8 to >6.0 pts Progressing toward Expectations Support for your assertions with evidence-based sources from your team’s review of the literature is inconsistent. 6 to >1.0 pts Needs Improvement Your assertions are not clearly supported by evidence. Reader cannot discern whether information is evidence-based or not based on the assertions made. 1 to >0 pts Unacceptable Evidence-based sources not used. Assignment not submitted. Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSources 10 to >9.0 pts Exceeds Expectations Your sources are present and cited correctly, and you have acted ethically in crediting all your sources. 9 to >8.0 pts Meets Expectations Your sources are present and cited correctly with a few minor errors at most, and you have acted ethically in crediting all your sources. 8 to >1.0 pts Progressing toward Expectations Your sources are present, though often cited or used incorrectly; you have acted ethically in crediting your sources. 1 to >0 pts Unacceptable No submission. Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSyntax and Mechanics 10 to >9.0 pts Exceeds Expectations Clearly and consistently uses proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Sophisticated sentence structure (e.g., verb tense, passive vs. active) and variation are used (e.g., sentence lengths, subject & verb placement). 9 to >8.0 pts Meets Expectations Uses proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation. There are a few minor errors, which do not interfere with meaning. Appropriate sentence structure (e.g., verb tense, passive vs. active) and variation are used (e.g., sentence lengths, subject & verb placement). 8 to >6.0 pts Progressing toward Expectations Generally, uses proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation. There are a few errors that interfere with meaning. Limited sentence structure (e.g., verb tense, passive vs. active) and variation are used (e.g., sentence lengths, subject & verb placement). A few sentence structure errors interfere with meaning. 6 to >1.0 pts Needs Improvement There are many grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with meaning. Limited sentence structure (e.g., verb tense, passive vs. active) and variation are used (e.g., sentence lengths, subject & verb placement). Sentence structure errors interfere with meaning. 1 to >0 pts Unacceptable No submission. Does not adhere to Academic Honesty Policy. 10 pts Total Points: 100 PreviousNext