You are here:

Critical Analysis Essay

School of Business

About this use case

Students build on a group business report recommending a Southeast Asian country for market entry. They use Microsoft Copilot to generate a proposed mode of entry, independently evaluate that recommendation using research, theory and critical thinking, and then develop an original international strategy without generative AI assistance.

Learning outcomes:

Compare and contrast the entry modes firms use when making international expansion decisions

No content
1. Recognising that GenAI outputs contain a mix of useful and less useful information, students need to be able to identify what is actually relevant to the task.
2. Developing students’ ability to extract key information from GenAI outputs, rather than simply accepting or reproducing the entire response.
3. Encouraging students to question AI-generated recommendations by identifying strengths, gaps, inaccuracies and overlooked considerations.
4. Moving students from AI consumption to critical evaluation, where GenAI provides an initial recommendation but students must make their own judgement based on theory, research and evidence.
- Students compare and contrast different international market-entry modes.
- Students critically evaluate an AI-generated recommendation using research, theory and contextual evidence.
- Students identify strengths, weaknesses and omissions in AI-generated content.
- Students develop an original international strategy independently.

Try it out

This use case requires a medium level of effort to implement.

- Begin with an earlier group task in which students recommend a country for market entry. In the next phase, ask students to use Microsoft Copilot to suggest a mode of entry.
- Students then independently critique the AI-generated recommendation and propose an original international strategy.
- Clearly separate the component where AI is permitted from the components that students must complete without generative AI.
- Give students the prompt rather than asking them to develop their own, so that everyone starts from a consistent GenAI output.
- Stress-test the prompt before using it in the assessment to understand the types of responses students are likely to receive.
- Test the prompt several times, as GenAI may produce different responses even when the same prompt is used.
- Make sure the GenAI output creates a meaningful learning opportunity for students to identify, question and evaluate information.
- Be clear about where students can and cannot use GenAI within the assessment.
Seeing a developmental arc through sampling over time
This assessment builds on Assessment 2, requiring students to revisit their earlier country analysis and apply those findings to critically evaluate a GenAI recommendation before developing their own evidence-based strategic recommendation.

Supporting resources

Here are some additional resources that you can browse to help you from TeachHQ:

Learn about AI at your own pace? Enrol in online courses via myDevelopment. Alternatively, you can join ongoing chats about AI and webinars.

Sidebar

Unit: MGW2351	Condition: Individual
Class size: 400–480	Typology: Written
AI approach: Evaluating AI output	AI statement: Guided use
Visibility of Learning: Seeing a developmental arc through sampling over time

About the educator

Validated by

Melissa Wong, Senior Education Designer, Education Excellence