By Demian Hommel, CTL AI in Teaching and Learning Fellow in partnership with the AI Literacy Center
As part of the ongoing Intentional AI at OSU series, I sat down with Rachael Cate, a senior instructor II in the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) at Oregon State University. With a Ph.D. in higher education leadership and an M.A. in composition and rhetoric, Rachael occupies a unique intersection: she teaches engineering communication to senior capstone students in a high-tech environment while maintaining a deep grounding in the humanities and social justice pedagogies.
Our conversation explored the vulnerability of being a “novice” in a high-tech field and the transition from technological anxiety to a values-based, intentional practice.
The challenge: Moving beyond the “novice” anxiety
For Rachael, the initial rise of generative AI felt less like an opportunity and more like an overwhelming demand. Working in EECS, she often felt surrounded by technical innovators who adopted every new tool with ease.
“I felt really overwhelmed,” Rachael admits. “I was like, there’s no way I’m going to be the person who adopts all the new programs. I’ve had to resituate my relationship with technology to ground it in larger values, rather than just running around trying to keep up.”
This pivot, from a race for technical proficiency to a focus on intentionality, became the foundation of her approach. She decided that if a tool didn’t explicitly improve her teaching or her students’ ability to relate to one another, it wasn’t worth the expenditure of energy.
The practice: Scaffolding and optionality
In her teaching and her collaborative research in engineering education, Rachael is exploring how students navigate their own agency when faced with AI. In a sophomore-level EECS course, she and her collaborators developed a framework to scaffold AI use through strategic assignments and peer discussions.
A core tenet of Rachael’s practice is optionality. She doesn’t mandate AI use; instead, she offers it as a path that requires critical reflection.
- Professional storytelling: In assignments like resume building or job search preparation, students can use AI, but they are met with critical thinking prompts.
- The learner’s relationship: The goal is to help students move from seeing AI as a “shortcut” to seeing it as a tool that they must manage and critique.
The innovation: Documenting the student spectrum
Through her research, Rachael has observed a wide spectrum of student reactions to AI, which she describes as “polarized in a strong way.”
- The resistant group: Students who view AI as detrimental to the “real” learning process, often labeling its use as “lazy.”
- The pragmatists: Those who will use any tool to “get through,” sometimes at the expense of conscientious engagement.
- The middle ground: Students (where Rachael places herself) who recognize the tool’s utility but maintain a healthy skepticism about its impact on the quality of thought.
I want to be really mindful of how I focus my energy. Sometimes that means being more present in my physical body and focusing on interactions and conversations rather than the tools themselves. — Rachael Cate
Reflection: High-touch over high-tech
Rachael’s advice to fellow instructors is to center the human-to-human interaction. By making AI use optional and highly reflective, she ensures that the “expert-in-the-loop” isn’t just the instructor—it’s the student.
For a rhetorician in an engineering world, the ultimate goal isn’t just “engineering communication.” It’s ensuring that students retain their voice and agency in a world increasingly mediated by algorithms.
About the Author: Demian Hommel is a professor of geography and environmental science in the College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences and is an AI in Teaching and Learning Fellow with the OSU Center for Teaching and Learning. When he isn’t exploring the societal and environmental impacts of AI, you can find him DJing under the alias Dr. Gonzo or trying to graft citrus trees in his greenhouse.
Top image generated with Microsoft Copilot.
Leave a Reply