By Demian Hommel, CTL AI in Teaching and Learning Fellow in partnership with the AI Literacy Center
As part of the Intentional AI at OSU series, I interviewed Todd Kesterson, a veteran instructor of digital media and new media communications with nearly 25 years of experience. Todd’s work sits at the intersection of 3D modeling, virtual reality, and photogrammetry—fields currently facing a massive disruption from generative AI.
Todd’s approach is one of critical experimentation: moving beyond the hype to determine where AI genuinely augments the creative process and where human technical skill remains indispensable.
The challenge: Distinguishing hype from utility
With a career that spans the evolution of digital art and animation, Todd faced a sudden existential question: Are the technical skills of 3D modeling becoming obsolete? While AI tools can now generate 3D models that look impressive at first glance, they often lack the precision required for specific design concepts.
“One thing that’s common is you don’t necessarily get what you want all the time,” Todd notes. The challenge is not just producing a ‘high-quality’ output, but maintaining the designer’s intent—an area where AI still struggles.
The innovation: “Break it to understand it.”
Instead of replacing traditional assignments, Todd integrates AI as a subject for metacognitive analysis. In his courses, students use AI to develop concept art and then step back to evaluate the results critically:
- Prompt analysis: Students run multiple prompts to identify patterns and limitations, such as why the AI consistently defaults to specific camera angles or stereotypes.
- Verification skills: Students learn to treat AI as a “black box” that requires human verification. Todd emphasizes that a project can fail not because it used AI, but because the output was factually or structurally wrong.
- Production scaffolding: AI is used as a base—similar to how a concept artist might use a rough 3D mockup to establish perspective before hand-drawing a scene.
Reflection: The human craving for discipline
Todd draws a powerful parallel between AI and the history of animation. Just as digital waves replaced hand-drawn water, AI may replace the labor-intensive “calculation” parts of art. However, he believes the human element remains the ultimate differentiator.
We crave the human emotional connection in education… If what we’re doing can be easily replaced by AI, then maybe we should be doing it differently. It’s a push to be more innovative and ask what differentiates us from this thing? — Todd Kesterson
Key advice for faculty
- Embrace the pioneering spirit: Don’t use AI’s current limitations as an excuse to avoid it. Recognize that it is a “moving target” and jump into the experimentation phase alongside your students.
- Be honest about the “black box”: You don’t have to be a guru. Acknowledge to your students that you are figuring this out together, which humanizes the learning process.
- Prioritize human resilience: Help students develop the emotional and intellectual flexibility to adapt as their future careers evolve in ways we can’t yet predict.
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