Live Defence
Layers Used: Layer 3 (Live Defence), Layer 4 (Contradiction Challenge)
What You Do
Present your analysis to a peer panel (3-4 students). They have 10 minutes to question you: Why did you ask this question and not that one? What would change your diagnosis? Where did AI help and where did it mislead you? You have no AI access during the defence.
Submit your analysis to AI with this prompt: "You are a tough but fair examiner. Ask me 5 challenging questions about my analysis, one at a time. Wait for my response before asking the next question. Challenge weak answers. Do not let me off easy." Conduct the full Q&A exchange in a single multi-turn conversation. Submit the complete transcript as your defence record. Then proceed with the AI counter-argument exercise as written.
After the defence, feed your analysis into AI with the prompt below to generate counter-arguments, then write a 200-word response to the strongest counter-argument.
Peer feedback form filled out by your panel (each panelist writes 2 strengths and 2 weaknesses they observed in your defence). Your written response (200 words) to the strongest AI-generated counter-argument to your analysis. A final reflection (150 words) on what you would change about your question formulation process based on everything you learned in this chapter.
Below is a student's analysis of a business scenario. Please:
(1) Generate the 3 strongest counter-arguments to this analysis -- attack
the weakest assumptions, the most questionable logic, and the most
unsupported claims.
(2) For each counter-argument, explain specifically what evidence or
reasoning would be needed to defeat it.
(3) Identify the single biggest blind spot in this analysis -- the most
important thing the student failed to consider.
(4) Rate the overall analytical rigor from
Beginner / Developing / Proficient / Advanced.
The student will need to defend against your strongest counter-argument
in writing.
Scenario: [paste scenario].
Student's analysis: [paste analysis].
Finally, complete the Thinking Score Card for this exercise:
Independent Thinking (1-10), Critical Evaluation (1-10),
Reasoning Depth (1-10), Originality (1-10), Self-Awareness (1-10).
For each score, give a one-sentence justification.
What This Teaches You
You learn that understanding your own work is completely different from producing it. The live defence exposes whether you truly thought through your analysis or outsourced it to AI. The AI counter-arguments then push you further — can you defend your position against systematic attack? The combination of human questioning (unpredictable) and AI counter-arguments (systematic) tests your thinking from every angle.
A Question Quality Portfolio containing: (1) the sealed prediction lock document, (2) the question tournament comparison table with rankings, (3) the final analysis with complete reasoning receipt and uniqueness statement, (4) peer defence feedback forms, (5) your written response to AI counter-arguments, and (6) your final reflection on your question formulation growth.
Grading Criteria
| Component | Weight | What Is Evaluated |
|---|---|---|
| Prediction quality (coherent initial hypothesis, well-ranked questions) | 15% | Exercise 1 |
| Question tournament (evaluation quality, ranking justifications) | 15% | Exercise 2 |
| Divergence and originality (AI-rated uniqueness score + reasoning receipt quality) | 25% | Exercise 3 |
| Live defence performance (peer feedback) | 20% | Exercise 4 |
| AI counter-argument response quality | 15% | Exercise 4 |
| Final reflection depth | 10% | Exercise 4 |
Note: the final answer to the business scenario is worth 0%. The thinking process is the entire grade.