COMM 4211

Very simply and fairly easy. Work was very manageable I didn't put too much effort in and overall I thought the class was interesting. A lot of class-wide discussion which I thought was always entertaining and since the class is technically an ethics class I thought Leidner did a very good job at discussing ethics in general without being overbearing in any one field or interest. The class was also very simple grading wise, at times it did feel like being graded was just random but random between 85 and 97 so everyone was doing well. The class consisted of 'modules' which were essentially a little recap of a unit where she had you use some prompts and ethics frameworks to answer questions and they were always not too hard to make. There were some very simple in class activities and also a final presentation where we got to choose our own company and discuss how they are dealing with ethics and AI and it was pretty light hearted. Overall had a great time.

Professor Leidner’s course did not meet my expectations. Throughout the semester she repeatedly called students of color by the wrong name, even when name tents were visible and she had access to the visual roster with headshots. Over time, this stopped feeling like an occasional mistake and instead felt careless. It made several students feel overlooked. Additionally, the course often drifted away from its focus on the ethics of artificial intelligence. A significant amount of class time was spent on discussions of stereotypes and race in debating the ethics of various fictional scenarios that were not handled with the level of care or sensitivity those topics require. The way these conversations were framed often felt dismissive and, at times, carried biased undertones, which at times made the classroom feel uncomfortable for students of color. Regardless of intent, the impact was that these discussions limited deeper engagement with AI ethics.

Subjectively, the class itself was relatively easy and consisted largely of in-class group work. However, grading often felt inconsistent and unpredictable. Scores in the 85–89 range appeared to be assigned arbitrarily and based on minor or unclear criteria, which made it difficult to understand how performance was truly being evaluated. Overall, the course would benefit from a clearer focus on AI ethics, more thoughtful facilitation of sensitive topics, greater engagement with students, and a more transparent grading structure.

A laid back and relaxed class. There are 4 assignments that you have to complete, some group activities, and occasional pre-class work. Probably spent 1 hour a week prepping or working on an assignment. Like others mention though, the grading is so random and she doesn't give specific rubrics, meaning you have to basically brain dump and hope that you hit what she was looking for.

However, Prof Leidner was a very controversial teacher... she tends to have internal biases on ethnicities and stereotypes, which is ironic given that it's an ethics course. For context, she is from Texas, lives in Germany part time, and has lot of European friends that are "dealing with immigration issues that have caused their communities to feel dangerous." She often made slightly odd comments about race, skin colors, politics, etc. that would make students uncomfortable, especially those of color. One in-class assignments had a scenario that directly correlated higher degrees of rape and danger in European communities to an influx of Middle Eastern and North African immigrants, which was absolutely disgusting to read. Prof Leidner is 100% biased in her own ethnic beliefs.

The actual ethical frameworks related to AI were insightful and interesting, but this course was often overshadowed by her bias comments and careless remarks. Would not recommend taking this course with her due to these aspects.