← Home / AI acknowledgement
A framework I use · and a worked example
AI Acknowledgement Statements
On every major assignment, I ask students to tell me how they used AI, or why they didn’t. Not to catch anyone. To make them think about it. The statement takes two minutes to write and changes what students notice about their own work.
The sentence frames
Give students the words.
Most students have never been asked to reflect on a tool before, so I hand them a frame to fill in. There are two: one for students who used AI, one for students who chose not to. Both count. Both get credit.
If you used AI
I used name of AI tool to help me explain how you used it. It did explain what it did well well. I had to change explain what you changed because tell me why. I would / would not use it again because tell me why.
If you chose not to
I chose not to use AI because explain your reason. I would / would not choose not to use it again because tell me why.
The simpler, the better.
Why it works
Reflection, not surveillance.
It makes use visible without policing it
Students tell me what they did because there’s no penalty for honesty. That’s information detection software will never give me, and it’s more accurate.
It builds critical evaluation
“What did I have to change?” is the question that turns a passive user into a critical one. Naming the edit is where the learning happens.
It honors the students who opt out
Choosing not to use AI is a legitimate position, but it should be a decision, not a default. The second frame asks for a real rationale.
It teaches transparency by practice
Disclosing AI use is becoming a professional norm. Students who’ve done it a dozen times in my course will do it without being asked later.
It gives us shared data
Across a semester, these statements show us together where AI genuinely helped and where it got in the way, which neither of us knew at the start.
It keeps the human in the loop
You can’t write “what I had to change” unless you evaluated the output. The statement quietly requires the judgment I most want students to exercise.
A worked example
My statement for this website.
I built this site with AI, so I owe you the same statement I ask my students for. Here it is in the frame.
I used Claude to help me design, write, and code this entire website. It did structure, layout, and clean code well. I had to change the tone, the tool recommendations, and nearly everything it assumed about my beliefs because it was guessing at what I think until I told it: the first draft sounded sharper than I am and emphasized things I don’t actually hold. I would use it again because a year ago I could barely get my WordPress blog to work, and now I have a site that accurately represents me and my ideas.
I didn’t know less at the end of building this site. I knew more: about my own work, and about what these tools can and can’t do. That’s the difference between AI that enhances your thinking and AI that shortcuts it.
Notice what the frame forced me to do: name the tool, name what it was good at, and (the part that matters) name what I had to fix and why. That last sentence is where I had to actually evaluate the thing instead of just accepting it.
AI Stoplights
The companion framework: red, yellow, or green on every assignment, so students know what’s permitted before they start.
See the frameworks →My full course AI policy
The syllabus policy these templates live inside: permitted uses, privacy, citation, and integrity. Free to adapt.
Read the policy →Policy work with schools
I bring both frameworks to course, department, and program‑level policy design.
See consulting services →