FAST-17 Projects: Responsible AI for All Staff
Provider: 7formations | Course: FAST-17 | Instructor: Wadood Chaudhary | One capstone and two mini projects
Projects extend the labs into commitments trainees keep at work. Mini projects run between sessions; the capstone is completed during and within seven days after session 3. All material is fictional or sanitized. Scoring uses Not yet, Meets, and Strong; completion needs Meets on every capstone criterion. One resubmission is allowed. This course is not legal advice.
Suggested reading for the projects: Laurence Lars Svekis, AI Literacy for All Employees (2026), chapters 8 to 12 and 14.
Never include real customer, patient, or employee information (G.L. c. 93H, 201 CMR 17.00).
Capstone: My Responsible-AI Pledge and Plan
Brief. Put together a short, practical package that shows how you will use AI responsibly in your role for the next 90 days: an ethical check on one real-type use, a data-safe prompt for a common task, your answers to your employer's policy questions, and your commitments and learning plan.
Deliverables
- W1 Ethical risk check for one AI use in your role (described in general terms).
- W2 Data-safe prompt for a task that normally involves personal or confidential information, before and after (the "before" written with fictional data).
- A one-page "know my policy" sheet: approved tools, data you must never paste, uses that need approval, how to document AI use, and where to report concerns. If your employer has no policy, write the five questions you would ask your manager.
- W4 Responsible-AI commitments and 90-day learning plan (final).
- W5 Responsible-AI pocket card.
Step plan
| Step | When | What you do |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | After session 1 | Run the five-step ethical check on one use in your role |
| 2 | After session 2 | Write the data-safe prompt; check your tool's memory and training settings |
| 3 | Session 3 | Draft the policy sheet and W4 |
| 4 | Within 7 days of session 3 | Review W4 with your reviewer; submit |
Rubric
| Criterion | Not yet | Meets | Strong |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ethical check | Steps missing or generic | Five steps with stakeholders and a principle named | Includes a bias type and how it would be detected |
| Data protection | Any identifier left in "after" | All identifiers removed; placeholders; approved tool named | Explains which items are personal, confidential, or regulated |
| Policy knowledge | Sheet incomplete | All five items answered or questions written | Includes the report channel and a documentation example |
| Plan | No date or reviewer | Commitments, two skills, date, reviewer | Plan reviewed with the reviewer before submission |
| Communication | Unclear | Plain language a coworker could follow | Includes a customer-facing AI-use sentence |
Example of strong versus weak work (fictional office coordinator, North Shore Builders)
| Element | Weak | Strong |
|---|---|---|
| Ethical check | "Scheduling AI: seems fine." | "Stakeholders: 14 crews. Risk: availability flags act as proxies for family status. Transparency: crews not told. Oversight: site manager reviews weekend roster. Compliance: c. 151B. Principle at stake: fairness." |
| Data-safe prompt | "Summarize this complaint from John Smith, 22 Elm St, card ending 4417." | "Summarize this homeowner complaint in three bullets for the warranty team. Customer: [HOMEOWNER]; address: [ADDRESS]. No payment details included." |
| Commitment | "Use AI responsibly." | "I will use only Copilot Chat with my work account, mask names and addresses before pasting, and report any unfair scheduling pattern to the operations manager the same week." |
Mini project 1: Spot the Scam
Brief. Collect three examples of AI-enabled scam patterns from public warnings (FBI IC3, FTC, or your bank). For each, write the red flags and the verification step you would use at work.
Rubric
| Criterion | Not yet | Meets | Strong |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sources | Unsourced | Three dated public sources | Includes one 2026 warning |
| Red flags | Generic | Specific red flags for each | Notes how AI makes the scam more convincing |
| Response | Missing | A known-channel verification step for each | Adds who to report to at work |
Mini project 2: Explain Our AI Use
Brief. Draft a plain-language note (under 120 words) for customers or coworkers explaining one way your team uses AI, what a person checks, and how to reach a person. Ask one colleague to read it and tell you what they understood.
Rubric
| Criterion | Not yet | Meets | Strong |
|---|---|---|---|
| Transparency | AI use hidden or vague | What AI does and what a person checks are clear | Includes how to question or appeal a result |
| Plain language | Jargon | A reader outside the team understands it | Colleague's summary matches the intent |