Here’s a clear outline of how a school can enforce differentiated AI policies across classes or assignments without chaos —focusing on consistency in expectations, communication, and accountability while still allowing subject-specific flexibility: π§ 1. Create a Schoolwide AI Policy Framework Instead of one rigid rule, develop a policy framework with these elements: Core Principles (e.g., “AI should support—not replace—learning”) Acceptable Use Categories : Prohibited : Tasks where AI use undermines learning (e.g., generating entire essays). Permitted with Attribution : Brainstorming, outlining, or revision support. Encouraged : Coding help, data visualization, or simulations. Require teacher discretion within this framework to define expectations per assignment. Refer to established frameworks, like this one from Michigan Virtual. π§Ύ 2. Require Assignment-Level Disclosure Teachers include an AI Use Policy section on each major assignment: What...
In education, consistency is often championed—but when it comes to setting due dates and AI usage policies, the "one size fits all" approach is more harmful than helpful. It’s time we acknowledge a simple truth: not all subjects (or students) are the same. So why are we still enforcing blanket rules? π Different Subjects, Different Cognitive Demands Subjects vary not just in content, but in the kind of thinking they require. Consider these examples: Math and Science often rely on sequential problem-solving. Timely practice and feedback are essential. Late work in these subjects may mean missed opportunities to correct misunderstandings before moving forward. English Language Arts requires deeper reflection, drafting, and revision. Rigid due dates can discourage the iterative process that leads to strong writing. Electives like Art, Music, and CTE often assess creativity, iteration, and production over time. Artificial urgency can hinder authentic learning. ...