We use design thinking in the context of accounting pedagogy to exploit recent advances in cybernetics in the form of generative artificial intelligence technology. Relying on the intuition that supplementing or augmenting human argumentation (natural intelligence or NI) with parallel AI output can produce better student written assignments, we posit the "augmentation premise," that is, ((NI + AI) > AI > NI). To test the augmentation premise, we compare student written submissions in an Accounting Information Systems (AIS) course with and without the benefit of parallel generative AI output. We then evaluate how the generative AI output enhances student-crafted revisions to their initial submissions. Using a summative quality improvement index (QII) consisting of quantitative and qualitative assessments, we present preliminary evidence supporting the augmentation premise. The augmentation premise likely extends to other accounting subdisciplines and merits generalization for enriching accounting pedagogy. [For the complete volume, "Advances in Accounting Education: Teaching and Curriculum Innovations. Volume 27," see ED674637.]