FAST-15 Projects: AI Foundations for Every Employee
Provider: 7formations | Course: FAST-15 | Instructor: Wadood Chaudhary | One capstone and two mini projects
Projects turn the labs into something trainees use after the course. Mini projects are done between sessions; the capstone is finished during and within seven days after session 3. All material is fictional or described in general terms. Scoring uses Not yet, Meets, and Strong. Completion needs Meets on every capstone criterion; mini projects are formative unless the employer asks for them to be scored. One resubmission is allowed.
Suggested reading for the projects: Laurence Lars Svekis, AI Literacy for All Employees (2026), chapters 1 to 5.
Never include real customer, patient, or employee information (G.L. c. 93H, 201 CMR 17.00).
Capstone: My AI-at-a-Glance Kit
Brief. Build a short kit that would let a new coworker in your role understand where AI shows up in the job, what it can and cannot do, and who decides. It combines your Lab 1 explainer, your AI Spotter inventory, your myth-buster cards, and your final role and responsibility chart, and adds a one-paragraph "how I think about AI at work" statement.
Deliverables
- W1 How-AI-works explainer card, revised after feedback.
- W2 AI Spotter inventory with at least five of your own tools.
- Three of your W3 myth-buster cards: the three most common in your workplace.
- W4 AI role and responsibility chart (final), with at least three uses from your own role.
- W5 AI-at-a-glance card (one page), plus a 120 to 180 word statement: what AI is good for in your role, where it is risky, and who you would ask.
Step plan
| Step | When | What you do |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | After session 1 | Revise W1 using the partner and assistant comparison from Lab 1 |
| 2 | After session 2 | Complete W2 for your own tools; check one tool's settings page with your manager or IT |
| 3 | Session 3 | Build W4; peer check |
| 4 | Within 7 days of session 3 | Write the statement, fill in W5, and submit the kit |
Rubric
| Criterion | Not yet | Meets | Strong |
|---|---|---|---|
| Concepts in plain words | Jargon unexplained or rules and AI confused | A new coworker could follow the explainer | Uses one example from the trainee's own job for each family |
| AI spotting | Fewer than five own tools, or "what a person decides" missing | Five or more tools with data seen and person's decision | Notes one tool where AI use is unclear and how they found out |
| Myths | Myths restated without correction | Three accurate corrections with examples | Myth 6 explained with the trainee's actual tool settings |
| Decision authority | Rungs or deciders missing | All uses placed, each with a decider and a check | Limits and safeguards match the rung |
| Statement | Vague or overconfident | Plain, accurate, role-specific | Names a person or channel to ask and a red line |
Example of strong versus weak work (fictional dispatcher, Merrimack Freight & Logistics)
| Element | Weak | Strong |
|---|---|---|
| Spotter row | "Route planner: uses AI." | "Route planner: predicts traffic delays and suggests reroutes (decision support). Sees GPS position and traffic data. I decide whether to send the reroute to the driver." |
| Myth card | "AI can be wrong." | "Myth: confident means correct. Reality: AI sounds just as sure when it guesses. Example: recap said a rate increase was 'approved' when it was only discussed. What I'll do: check recaps before sharing." |
| Chart row | "Auto-reorder: AI does it." | "Auto-reorder of pallet wrap under $250: rung 5. If wrong, small overspend. Decider: warehouse lead. Check: weekly order log. Limit: approved vendor and spend cap." |
Mini project 1: AI in the Wild
Brief. Over one week, notice and log ten moments when AI touched your work or home life (suggested replies, recommendations, fraud alerts, photo search, navigation). For each, record what the AI did, which family it belongs to, and whether a person was in the loop.
Deliverables. A ten-row log and a three-sentence reflection: which one surprised you, and which one you would want a person to double-check.
Rubric
| Criterion | Not yet | Meets | Strong |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coverage | Fewer than 8 entries | 10 entries across at least 3 settings | Includes one rule-based item correctly identified as "not AI" |
| Classification | Families mostly wrong | Families mostly right with reasons | Notes the learning type where it can be inferred |
| Reflection | Missing | Names a surprise and a check | Connects the check to a myth from session 2 |
Mini project 2: Explain It to a Coworker
Brief. Prepare and give a three-minute explanation to a coworker or family member: "What AI is, why it can be wrong, and who decides." Use one example from your job. Ask them one question afterwards to check understanding.
Deliverables. A one-page outline, the question you asked, their answer, and one change you would make next time.
Rubric
| Criterion | Not yet | Meets | Strong |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | A myth repeated as fact | All statements accurate | Uses "probable, not certain" correctly with an example |
| Clarity | Jargon unexplained | Plain words throughout | Listener's answer shows they understood |
| Reflection | No change noted | One specific change | Change tied to the listener's answer |