Table of Contents
Directions
Your professor is teaching a class on Tech. Write a post responding to the professor’s question. In your response, you should:
- express and support your personal opinion
make a contribution to the discussion in your own words - An effective response will contain at least 100 words. You have ten minutes to write.
Class Discussion
Welcome to today’s discussion on a critical workplace technology issue. Companies increasingly consider tools that use artificial intelligence to monitor employee productivity in real-time. Apart from concerns about privacy laws, which vary by country, we must also consider the ethical and practical implications of such monitoring. Should companies be allowed to use AI to monitor employee productivity in real-time?
I think companies should be allowed to use AI because it can help managers understand which tasks need more attention and support. For example, if the AI shows some employees are struggling, the company can provide extra training or resources. Monitoring through AI can make work more efficient and help reach company goals faster.
I disagree. Using AI to watch employees every minute feels like a lack of trust. It can make employees stressed and less motivated. Instead of watching them all the time, companies should focus on clear communication and support. People work better when they feel respected, not controlled.
Sample Answers & Evaluation
🏆 Perfect Score – The Sniper Approach (30/30)
While James argues that real-time AI monitoring reflects a lack of trust and harms morale, he fails to address the fundamental advantage such technology offers: the facilitation of objective, data-driven management. The core issue lies in how productivity is measured and improved—AI provides precise statistical probability data on workflow interruptions and task completion speeds, enabling companies to identify bottlenecks in processes rather than simply surveilling employees indiscriminately.
Consider the case of Siemens AG’s implementation of AI tools during the pandemic. The company used AI to analyze employee work patterns remotely, which revealed inefficiencies caused by unclear communication channels rather than employee laziness. By addressing these inefficiencies, Siemens improved productivity while respecting employee autonomy by using aggregated data rather than targeting individuals. Therefore, forbidding AI oversight oversimplifies workplace dynamics and misses this paradigm shift toward smarter, fairer management strategies.
Teacher’s Feedback
Score: 30/30
Logic: This student effectively deconstructed the opposing view by highlighting its logical flaw and supported their argument with a specific real-world example from Siemens AG, showing clear depth and understanding. The vocabulary used enhanced the academic tone and precision of the argument.
Golden Vocabulary: facilitation, statistical probability, paradigm shift
🏆 High Score – The Standard Approach (25/30)
I believe companies should be allowed to use AI to monitor employee productivity because it helps improve work efficiency. Monitoring can show managers if some tasks take longer than expected or if workers need more help. For example, if an employee often faces delays, the company can give them more training or tools to do their job better.
However, it is important that companies use AI fairly and respect employees’ privacy. When used well, AI can make work processes smoother and help both employees and the company succeed. It should not be used to watch every moment but as a tool to support better work.
Teacher’s Feedback
Score: 25/30
Logic: This essay has clear, logical reasoning and good grammar but relies only on general statements and a hypothetical example, lacking the specificity and critical depth of the perfect score response.
Golden Vocabulary: efficiency, monitoring, privacy