As students return to Canadian colleges and universities soon, many will enter classrooms where generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is already part of everyday academic life. Many might use tools such as ChatGPT and Gemini to brainstorm, summarize readings, revise writing and prepare job applications.

The pressing question is no longer whether students will use AI. It’s what universities will teach them about using it with judgment and accountability.

This question has gained urgency since Canada’s government launched its new national artificial intelligence strategy, AI for All. The strategy connects AI with public trust, economic opportunity and Canadian sovereignty. It also includes a National AI Literacy Initiative aimed at post-secondary students and educators.

However, learning to use an AI system is not the same as becoming AI literate. Students need more than the ability to write effective prompts or complete tasks faster. They need accountable AI literacy: the ability to explain why they used AI, assess what it produced and take responsibility for the resulting work.

I have taught professional communication and worked on curriculum innovation that connects classroom learning with changing professional practices. My recent research on prompt engineering has led me to a clear conclusion: teaching students how to communicate with AI can be valuable, but only when it develops rather than displaces human judgment.

Good prompts don’t guarantee good answers

Prompt engineering refers to how we devise and revise instructions to obtain a useful response from GenAI. A strong prompt may identify the task, audience, context, relevant evidence and desired format. These are familiar principles in communication education. Someone writing a........

© The Conversation