Human+AI Practice Pathway

Building AI Competency Through Practice

Move beyond AI literacy toward disciplinary competency through deliberate practice, feedback, rehearsal, fading support, equitable access, and defensible judgment.

Six guided Studios · Designed for institution-supported cohorts of up to 25 named participants

From exposure to transferable capability

Students do not become competent with AI because they have seen a tool, completed one prompted task, or produced a polished result. Competency grows when learners can see the progression, rehearse meaningful work, receive feedback, repeat the work with less support, and exercise judgment in a new context.

  • Six sequenced, interactive Practice Studios
  • Facilitator-supported discussion and application
  • A competency-development blueprint as the cohort project
  • Private responses stored in each participant's browser

Free foundation: From Prompting to Partnership is available before this pathway, but it is not one of the six required Studios. Facilitators may waive it when participants already demonstrate the foundational capabilities.

Discuss institutional access

The central question

How do students progress from AI literacy to disciplinary competency?

Duration
8 weeks
Weekly rhythm
45-minute Studio + 30-minute cohort conversation
Studios
Six connected sessions
Primary artifact
A competency-development blueprint
Credentials
Six badges + Practice Credential

Who this pathway is designed for

Best fit

Faculty, instructional designers, academic support professionals, and teaching teams building repeated practice, feedback, fading support, equitable access, and evidence of judgment.

How it differs

Choose this pathway when the unit of change is an individual learner’s development through practice. Choose the 5E pathway when a program team needs to map competency across courses and tiers.

How the cohort works

Participants bring a real course, assignment, or learning sequence. Each Studio adds one layer to a blueprint for helping students move from awareness toward capable, independent performance.

Design the conditions for competency

Faculty examine the progression students can see, the practice they actually receive, the role of feedback, where support should fade, who has access to consequential experience, and what counts as evidence of discernment.

Instructional designers, faculty developers, librarians, and academic support professionals can participate when they work directly with faculty on learning design.

A convener and design-review partner

The institutional facilitator keeps the cohort on schedule, hosts short discussions, monitors completion, and helps participants connect each Studio to their own learning design.

The competency package includes facilitator onboarding, discussion guides, a project-review framework, and completion reporting. Facilitators see completion evidence, not private Studio responses.

A sample eight-week schedule

Six self-paced Studios lead into a pilot, revision, and review of the participant's competency-development blueprint.

  1. Before launch

    Prepare the cohort

    Identify the facilitator, complete onboarding, enroll up to 25 participants, and select the courses or learning sequences participants will examine.

  2. Week 1

    What Students Want Is Not What We Are Offering

    Locate the gap between the experiences students seek and the developmental opportunities current courses provide.

  3. Week 2

    The Ladder Students Can See

    Make the progression from literacy to competency visible through concrete stages, expectations, and evidence.

  4. Week 3

    The Practice Gap

    Replace one-shot performance with a deliberate cycle of rehearsal, feedback, pressure testing, and revision.

  5. Week 4

    The Guide That Fades

    Design support that helps learners begin and then recedes as their independence and judgment grow.

  6. Week 5

    A Foot in the Door, for Everyone

    Create an equitable route to consequential practice, professional feedback, and participation.

  7. Week 6

    Judgment and Discernment

    Define the observable evidence that distinguishes developed judgment from fluent output or task completion.

  8. Week 7

    Pilot and gather feedback

    Pilot one practice cycle or review the blueprint with students, colleagues, or an instructional-design partner.

  9. Week 8

    Revise, submit, and review

    Submit the revised blueprint for facilitator review and the assessed Human+AI Competency credential.

Estimated time: 75 minutes per week for Weeks 1–6. This includes approximately 45 minutes for the self-paced Studio plus a 30-minute cohort conversation. The pathway can stretch to 10–12 weeks when a cohort wants more time between Studios or for project development.

The six-session pathway

Coordinated practice, not six isolated links

The pathway packages individual practice into a facilitated, reviewable cohort experience with a shared competency-development goal.

  • Six sequenced Practice Studios
  • Up to 25 named participants
  • Facilitator onboarding and guides
  • Six cohort conversations
  • Competency-development project brief
  • Project review framework
  • Participant progress dashboard
  • Cohort completion report
  • Six Human+AI Skill Badges
  • Practice and assessed Competency review

Institutional pathway pricing

Badge & Practice Credential Pathway

$4,500

One cohort of up to 25 participants.

  • Six Human+AI Skill Badges
  • Human+AI Practice Credential
  • Dashboard and cohort report

Institutional Portfolio

$25,000/year

Up to three pathways, four cohorts, and 100 pathway enrollments, with annual reporting.

Workshop continuation: A discount is available when an institutional pathway continues from an in-person workshop. View complete institutional pricing and bundles.

Your pathway progress

Sign in with your institution-enrolled account to open eligible Studios, view recorded completions, and see earned credentials.

Completion tracking stores activity counts, dates, and credential IDs—not your Practice Studio answers, reflections, or AI conversations.