Since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, the world has been grappling with how to incorporate this new technology into our lives. With changes coming at us quicker than most mere humans can absorb, fuelling innovation and stoking fears, the world is doing its best to adjust. And this dichotomy of opportunity and fresh challenge couldn’t be more apparent than in the world of business education.
To explore this further we met with Natasha Katuta Mwila of Warwick Business School, Urs Mueller of SDA Bocconi School of Management, and Scott Andrews from Worcester Business School, to talk AI and its impact on case teaching.
There are some obvious benefits to AI in case teaching, as outlined in Scott’s technical note, If You Can’t Beat Them Join Them – Managing the Challenges of AI to Enhance Case Teaching. Not least saving time by constructing first drafts of teaching notes, developing visual cues and digital media to support cases.
Natasha is embracing AI in case teaching at Warwick Business School, by having it design lesson plans; provide personalised feedback to students supported by voice prompts; and compile supporting information to enhance cases. She has even used AI to rewrite older cases in a more current style*. For example, rewriting a case about the Enron accounting scandal, in the style of Donald Trump. Bringing an older case into the now with a public figure who most, if not all students will at least be familiar.
Both Natasha and Scott are also using AI for dynamic case discussions in the classroom, giving AI prompts around a particular case in a discussion that evolves according to students’ responses. While Urs is using AI to help prepare for teaching by asking it to predict the various responses a case might prompt in the class.
It's clear that AI can enhance case teaching, saving faculty significant time and allowing for the inclusion of additional resources that may not have been possible in the past.
However, for all its benefits, there is a worry that student over reliance on AI could be detrimental to learning. Natasha talked about the way that learning happens in the brain, “we learn by connecting blocks and building on what we’ve already learned, this process is essential to get to that higher level of critical thinking.” So, if a student has skipped the first stages by relying too much on AI, those foundations won’t be there to build on.
Faculty are having to take this into account when creating their lesson plans, and teaching students how to use AI effectively is fast becoming a key component of many MBA courses1.
Essentially, in this fast-changing landscape, business educators are not only being challenged with how they teach, but also with adjusting what they teach.
Scott highlighted that employers are becoming more interested in candidates who are able to use AI to enhance performance, rather than demonstrating knowledge in the traditional sense. So, students need to be prepared. And there’s a responsibility on business educators to ensure that students are entering the workforce confident in how they use AI.
The challenge of assessment
Deciding what to teach isn’t the only area where faculty are having to pivot. AI has also brought challenges in terms of how students’ work is assessed. As Urs pointed out, “traditional take home exams and write ups just don’t work anymore. Instead, we need to either embed the use of AI into them or move to other modes of assessment”.
There’s an argument that the case method is more relevant now than ever because of its emphasis on in-class participation. In the classroom students are asked to defend their hypotheses and critically analyse new information as it emerges. Simply downloading a case analysis from AI is unlikely to hold in a cold-call situation.
But there is a danger in relying too heavily on in-class participation for assessments. Indeed, this is just one of the many ethical concerns that AI has brought to the table.
Urs highlighted how relying too much on in-class participation as an assessment tool, could give an unfair advantage to students who lean toward extroversion. Urs also observed that there will be cases with content that is triggering to some students. Penalising those students for limited participation would be a serious ethical concern. So, while in-class participation remains a tool, it can’t be the only one.
Scott suggested a mixture of in class assessment, vivas, and presentations from students. Essentially, having a variety of ways to test students’ ability to surmise, critique, and argue the adequacy of the choices they make.
Paving the way forward
There are many things to consider and the pace is not slowing.
One thing is clear. We’re on a journey of discovery and there is a great responsibility on the shoulders of business educators. Faculty are working at the speed of light to bring AI into the classroom in effective and ethical ways.
Scott proposed embracing this by bringing AI into the classroom, using it to enhance teaching, and allowing students and teachers to embark on this ‘honest journey of discovery together’.
In many ways, the case method couldn’t be a more perfect medium for exploring and experimenting with this new technology. After all, a journey of discovery lies at the heart of what the case method is all about.
Embracing AI to support with many of the otherwise time-consuming teaching tasks, certainly seems to be opening up space for a focus on innovation and testing out new ways of doing things.
Indeed, the cases being written now about this very subject will be vital in helping students to navigate the ever-evolving landscape as we move forward.
* Due to copyright and intellectual property laws, AI may only be used to rewrite case studies that you have authored yourself. Rewriting cases authored by others typically requires explicit permission from the copyright holder.
1 Byrne, J. A. (30/10/2024) Poets&Quants’ MBA Program Of The Year: IMD’s Reimagining Of The MBA [online]. Available from: https://poetsandquants.com/2024/10/30/poetsquants-mba-program-of-the-year-imds-reimagining-of-the-mba/?utm_campaign=Fortuna&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8vSoSYbMTX2p1QSlBMcjPIevjv4-i_njYgLttfKLJnQmXHlNPQ1RX-lVetu_bPSB4YGkhXhlwD3CofpZc5pe3_69bzTw&_hsmi=333964189&utm_content=333405381&utm_source=hs_email [Accessed 10/12/2024].
This article was published in Connect, February 2025.
