Workshop
AI & Emerging Tech in Design: BRDS Workshop, Karnavati University (13 Aug 2026)
I ran a two-hour, discussion-first AI workshop for about 50 BRDS design aspirants at Karnavati University, without slides, using their everyday examples to translate terms like LLMs, LoRA, vision models, and agentic systems into design-relevant questions.
Facilitator · AI Arena, Karnavati University
Presented
13 August 2026, 3:00 to 5:00 pm, I walked into AI Arena at Karnavati University with no slides and no deck to hide behind. I had about two hours and roughly 50 students, mostly in 12th standard, preparing for design study.
The constraint was the point. If the room stayed engaged without visuals, it would be because the ideas felt close enough to their lives to argue about.
They came in as BRDS aspirants, but not from one lane. Their interests stretched across different design domains and their questions came from what they actually notice day to day, not from definitions they had memorised.
That energy shaped the session. Instead of waiting for permission to speak, they kept testing every concept against lived experience and they pushed for clarity when something sounded like jargon.
I introduced core ideas in AI and emerging tech, including LLMs, LoRA, vision models, and agentic systems. I kept circling back to a simpler question underneath all of it: what do we mean by intelligence, and what does it mean to simulate it on a machine.
From there, we moved into algorithmic control and the quieter ways technology shapes behaviour. The most useful moments were when the room treated “digital reality” and physical experience as one continuous design space, then asked what that does to a designer’s responsibility.
I ran it as dialogue first. I would offer a short explainer, then open the room for Q and A, debate, and scenario discussion.
The prompts did not come from me. Students brought their own examples from everyday tech use and we used those as the starting point to make abstract terms tangible. Even without any visual aids, the participation stayed high because the conversation kept returning to questions they already cared about.
By the end, it was clear they could already sense AI’s impact on their lives. They also had concrete doubts about agency and control, and they were willing to challenge each other’s assumptions in public.
The engagement held for the full two hours, with follow-up questions stacking on top of earlier threads instead of resetting the discussion each time. Afterward, several students shared appreciation, and a small group came up with chocolates as a thank you.
What I took away was practical: conversation-led teaching can make technical language accessible to aspirant designers, especially when the room is allowed to start from its own experience.
Young design aspirants are not starting from zero on AI. They already carry working intuitions shaped by constant interaction with systems that recommend, rank, predict, and respond.
Leading with discussion helped me translate terms like LLMs or agentic systems into design questions that can guide a future role: where is the user’s agency, where is it being nudged, and what should be made visible.
Next time, I want to capture student quotes and secure photo permissions early so the learning can be documented responsibly. I also want to send a short resource list or reading pack afterward, so the curiosity in the room has somewhere to go once the session ends.