{"course":{"slug":"ai-for-teachers","title":"AI for Teachers","url":"https://addaly.com/learn/ai-for-teachers","level":"beginner","track":"work"},"lesson":{"slug":"writing-the-class-policy","title":"Writing the class policy","url":"https://addaly.com/learn/ai-for-teachers/writing-the-class-policy","position":37,"of":57,"minutes":9,"answer":"A class AI policy is one page, written with the students, that says what is permitted on each kind of task, what disclosure looks like, what happens on the first and second breach.","keyIdea":"A class AI policy is one page, written with the students, that says what is permitted on each kind of task, what disclosure looks like, what happens on the first and second breach, and how a student appeals, because a rule that lives in the teacher's mood is not a rule anyone can follow."},"body":{"format":"markdown","text":"## Why write it down\n\nThe earlier lesson set the idea: three levels, marked on every task, and a line of disclosure. That is the spine. This lesson is the document around it, because a spine without a document has two failures. Students cannot check a rule that exists only in what the teacher said in September. And when a case arises, a teacher without a written policy is improvising a punishment, and improvised punishments land unevenly.\n\nOne page. Written in plain language. Given out, put on the wall, and referred to every time a task is set.\n\n## What goes on the page\n\n**1. What \"AI\" means here.** Name the tools. \"Chatbots such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot and Meta AI; image generators; any tool that writes text or solves problems for you.\" Then the exemptions, because the check question is real: \"Spelling and grammar checking built into your word processor is allowed at every level. Translation of individual words is allowed at every level. A calculator is allowed where the task says so.\" Without the exemptions, every student is in breach every day, and the policy is unenforceable from the first week.\n\n> Figure: The one page, in six parts. Layers, top to bottom: What \"AI\" means here (The tools named, and the exemptions: spellcheck, single-word translation, the calculator where the task allows it.); The three levels, and which tasks are which (So a student can look at a task and know the level without asking.); What disclosure looks like (The exact format, with one worked example. A format that is shown is a format that gets used.); What happens (First time: redo under supervision, no mark penalty. Second: the same plus a note home. Beyond: the school's procedure.); How to appeal (One sentence. Its existence changes how the whole page is read.); What the teacher promises (No detectors. The level marked on every task. Told when AI made your materials.). Without the exemptions in the first part, every student is in breach from the first week and the policy is unenforceable. Without the fifth, students experience the page as a threat rather than a process. The sixth is the modelling written down, so it is a commitment and not a mood.\n\n**2. The levels, and which tasks are which.** The three levels from the earlier lesson, in one line each, and then the mapping: \"In-class writing, tests and the first draft of any assessed essay: Level 0. Homework practice and revision: Level 1. Research projects and redrafts: Level 2, with disclosure.\" Students should be able to look at a task and know the level without asking.\n\n**3. What disclosure looks like.** The exact format. \"At the end of the work, one or two lines: which tool, what you used it for, what you changed.\" Give an example: \"Used Gemini to suggest three counter-arguments; used one, rewrote it in my own words.\" A format that is shown is a format that gets used.\n\n**4. What happens.** The consequence ladder, and it should be about the learning, not the punishment:\n\n- **First time:** the work is redone under supervision, and the student and teacher talk about what the task was for. No mark penalty on the redone work.\n- **Second time:** the same, plus a note home.\n- **Beyond that:** the school's academic honesty procedure, which the class policy points to but does not replace.\n\nRedoing the work is the consequence that fits, because the harm of handing over the exercise is not having done it. A zero teaches that the teacher is angry; a redo teaches the thing.\n\n**5. How to appeal.** \"If you believe a decision is wrong, say so to me first; if we do not agree, either of us can ask the head of department to look at the work and the evidence.\" One sentence. Its existence changes how students experience the whole policy, from a threat to a process.\n\n**6. What the teacher promises.** \"I will not use AI detectors. I will mark the level on every task. I will tell you when I have used AI to make your materials.\" The last one is the modelling from the earlier lesson, written down so that it is a commitment and not a mood.\n\n## Write it with them\n\nA policy written with the class is followed more than one handed down, and not because of a vague idea about ownership: students who have argued about where the line falls know where it falls. Take one lesson. Put the six headings on the board. Ask, for each, what the rule should be and why. Students are stricter than teachers expect on tasks they see as \"the exercise\", and more precise than teachers expect about the tools they actually use. Write the page from the discussion, bring it back the next day for agreement, and have every student keep a copy.\n\n## Align it with the school\n\nIf the school has a policy, the class policy sits inside it and says so. If the school has none (common) the class policy is a draft the school can adopt, and a later block in this course covers the institutional version. What a teacher should not do is write a class rule that contradicts a school rule, because the first case that reaches a head teacher will be decided by the school's document, and the class policy will have promised something it could not deliver.\n\n## Keep it current\n\nProducts change, and the page should carry a date and a promise to revisit it each term. The exemption list in particular will need editing: a tool that was a grammar checker in September is a rewriting assistant by March, and the policy has to say which side of the line it now sits on.\n\n## The honest limit\n\nA written policy makes the rule clear. It does not make enforcement certain, and the detection lesson explained why it never will be. What the policy does is make the honest majority's position safe (they know what is allowed and can show they did it) and make the case that does arise a matter of process rather than accusation. That is the most any policy can do, and it is a great deal more than a ban."},"check":{"question":"A teacher's policy states: \"Any use of AI without permission will be treated as cheating.\" A student uses a grammar checker built into her word processor, which now uses a language model. Is she in breach, and what does the case reveal about the policy?","options":[{"text":"Yes, she is in breach, and the case shows that students need to read the terms of the tools they use far more carefully than they do.","correct":false,"tempting":"Shifts the burden to a student who used a standard feature; the policy, not the student, failed to say what \"AI\" covers."},{"text":"No, she is not in breach, because a grammar checker is not really AI in the sense that any reasonable policy is concerned with.","correct":false,"tempting":"Modern grammar tools are language models; the exemption has to be written into the policy, not assumed from a folk definition of AI."},{"text":"Unclear, and that is the failure: the policy names a category without defining it.","correct":true},{"text":"Yes, technically, but the teacher should let it go this once, which is exactly what the discretion built into any policy is for.","correct":false,"tempting":"Discretion applied silently makes the rule unpredictable; the fix is to define the category so no discretion is needed for a grammar checker."}]},"prev":{"slug":"teaching-honest-use","title":"Teaching students to use it honestly","url":"https://addaly.com/learn/ai-for-teachers/teaching-honest-use"},"next":{"slug":"process-evidence-that-holds-up","title":"Process evidence that holds up","url":"https://addaly.com/learn/ai-for-teachers/process-evidence-that-holds-up"},"authorship":"Founder and series editor: Dr Mustafa Mun. Written by AI models to a written standard. Exam keys checked blind by a second model: 3,665 of 3,666 agreed. Academic review invited.","review":{"status":"Draft, open for academic review"},"cite":"Addaly (2026) 'Writing the class policy', in AI for Teachers. Edited by M. Mun. Addaly. Available at: https://addaly.com/learn/ai-for-teachers/writing-the-class-policy (Accessed: 13 October 2026).","licence":{"name":"CC BY-NC-SA 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/"},"reader":{"schema":1,"title":"Writing the class policy","courseTitle":"AI for Teachers","module":{"index":5,"slug":"integrity-and-ai-written-work","title":"Integrity: AI-written work and what to do about it"},"answer":null,"keyIdea":"A class AI policy is one page, written with the students, that says what is permitted on each kind of task, what disclosure looks like, what happens on the first and second breach, and how a student appeals, because a rule that lives in the teacher’s mood is not a rule anyone can follow.","hero":{"kind":"figure","figure":{"t":"figure","label":"Figure","figure":{"type":"stack","title":"The one page, in six parts","layers":[{"label":"What “AI” means here","detail":"The tools named, and the exemptions: spellcheck, single-word translation, the calculator where the task allows it."},{"label":"The three levels, and which tasks are which","detail":"So a student can look at a task and know the level without asking."},{"label":"What disclosure looks like","detail":"The exact format, with one worked example. A format that is shown is a format that gets used."},{"label":"What happens","detail":"First time: redo under supervision, no mark penalty. Second: the same plus a note home. Beyond: the school’s procedure."},{"label":"How to appeal","detail":"One sentence. Its existence changes how the whole page is read."},{"label":"What the teacher promises","detail":"No detectors. The level marked on every task. Told when AI made your materials."}],"caption":"Without the exemptions in the first part, every student is in breach from the first week and the policy is unenforceable. Without the fifth, students experience the page as a threat rather than a process. The sixth is the modelling written down, so it is a commitment and not a mood."},"alt":"Figure: The one page, in six parts. Layers, top to bottom: What “AI” means here (The tools named, and the exemptions: spellcheck, single-word translation, the calculator where the task allows it.); The three levels, and which tasks are which (So a student can look at a task and know the level without asking.); What disclosure looks like (The exact format, with one worked example. A format that is shown is a format that gets used.); What happens (First time: redo under supervision, no mark penalty. Second: the same plus a note home. Beyond: the school’s procedure.); How to appeal (One sentence. Its existence changes how the whole page is read.); What the teacher promises (No detectors. The level marked on every task. Told when AI made your materials.). Without the exemptions in the first part, every student is in breach from the first week and the policy is unenforceable. Without the fifth, students experience the page as a threat rather than a process. The sixth is the modelling written down, so it is a commitment and not a mood."}},"blocks":[{"t":"h2","id":"why-write-it-down","runs":[{"text":"Why write it down"}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"The earlier lesson set the idea: three levels, marked on every task, and a line of disclosure. That is the spine. This lesson is the document around it, because a spine without a document has two failures. Students cannot check a rule that exists only in what the teacher said in September. And when a case arises, a teacher without a written policy is improvising a punishment, and improvised punishments land unevenly."}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"One page. Written in plain language. Given out, put on the wall, and referred to every time a task is set."}]},{"t":"h2","id":"what-goes-on-the-page","runs":[{"text":"What goes on the page"}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"1. What “AI” means here.","b":true},{"text":" Name the tools. “Chatbots such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot and Meta AI; image generators; any tool that writes text or solves problems for you.” Then the exemptions, because the check question is real: “Spelling and grammar checking built into your word processor is allowed at every level. Translation of individual words is allowed at every level. A calculator is allowed where the task says so.” Without the exemptions, every student is in breach every day, and the policy is unenforceable from the first week."}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"2. The levels, and which tasks are which.","b":true},{"text":" The three levels from the earlier lesson, in one line each, and then the mapping: “In-class writing, tests and the first draft of any assessed essay: Level 0. Homework practice and revision: Level 1. Research projects and redrafts: Level 2, with disclosure.” Students should be able to look at a task and know the level without asking."}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"3. What disclosure looks like.","b":true},{"text":" The exact format. “At the end of the work, one or two lines: which tool, what you used it for, what you changed.” Give an example: “Used Gemini to suggest three counter-arguments; used one, rewrote it in my own words.” A format that is shown is a format that gets used."}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"4. What happens.","b":true},{"text":" The consequence ladder, and it should be about the learning, not the punishment:"}]},{"t":"ul","items":[[{"text":"First time:","b":true},{"text":" the work is redone under supervision, and the student and teacher talk about what the task was for. No mark penalty on the redone work."}],[{"text":"Second time:","b":true},{"text":" the same, plus a note home."}],[{"text":"Beyond that:","b":true},{"text":" the school’s academic honesty procedure, which the class policy points to but does not replace."}]]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"Redoing the work is the consequence that fits, because the harm of handing over the exercise is not having done it. A zero teaches that the teacher is angry; a redo teaches the thing."}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"5. How to appeal.","b":true},{"text":" “If you believe a decision is wrong, say so to me first; if we do not agree, either of us can ask the head of department to look at the work and the evidence.” One sentence. Its existence changes how students experience the whole policy, from a threat to a process."}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"6. What the teacher promises.","b":true},{"text":" “I will not use AI detectors. I will mark the level on every task. I will tell you when I have used AI to make your materials.” The last one is the modelling from the earlier lesson, written down so that it is a commitment and not a mood."}]},{"t":"h2","id":"write-it-with-them","runs":[{"text":"Write it with them"}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"A policy written with the class is followed more than one handed down, and not because of a vague idea about ownership: students who have argued about where the line falls know where it falls. Take one lesson. Put the six headings on the board. Ask, for each, what the rule should be and why. Students are stricter than teachers expect on tasks they see as “the exercise”, and more precise than teachers expect about the tools they actually use. Write the page from the discussion, bring it back the next day for agreement, and have every student keep a copy."}]},{"t":"h2","id":"align-it-with-the-school","runs":[{"text":"Align it with the school"}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"If the school has a policy, the class policy sits inside it and says so. If the school has none (common) the class policy is a draft the school can adopt, and a later block in this course covers the institutional version. What a teacher should not do is write a class rule that contradicts a school rule, because the first case that reaches a head teacher will be decided by the school’s document, and the class policy will have promised something it could not deliver."}]},{"t":"h2","id":"keep-it-current","runs":[{"text":"Keep it current"}]},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"Products change, and the page should carry a date and a promise to revisit it each term. The exemption list in particular will need editing: a tool that was a grammar checker in September is a rewriting assistant by March, and the policy has to say which side of the line it now sits on."}]},{"t":"h2","id":"the-honest-limit","runs":[{"text":"The honest limit"}],"role":"limit"},{"t":"p","runs":[{"text":"A written policy makes the rule clear. It does not make enforcement certain, and the detection lesson explained why it never will be. What the policy does is make the honest majority’s position safe (they know what is allowed and can show they did it) and make the case that does arise a matter of process rather than accusation. That is the most any policy can do, and it is a great deal more than a ban."}]}],"check":{"question":[{"text":"A teacher’s policy states: “Any use of AI without permission will be treated as cheating.” A student uses a grammar checker built into her word processor, which now uses a language model. Is she in breach, and what does the case reveal about the policy?"}],"options":[{"text":[{"text":"Yes, she is in breach, and the case shows that students need to read the terms of the tools they use far more carefully than they do."}],"correct":false,"tempting":[{"text":"Shifts the burden to a student who used a standard feature; the policy, not the student, failed to say what “AI” covers."}]},{"text":[{"text":"No, she is not in breach, because a grammar checker is not really AI in the sense that any reasonable policy is concerned with."}],"correct":false,"tempting":[{"text":"Modern grammar tools are language models; the exemption has to be written into the policy, not assumed from a folk definition of AI."}]},{"text":[{"text":"Unclear, and that is the failure: the policy names a category without defining it."}],"correct":true,"tempting":null},{"text":[{"text":"Yes, technically, but the teacher should let it go this once, which is exactly what the discretion built into any policy is for."}],"correct":false,"tempting":[{"text":"Discretion applied silently makes the rule unpredictable; the fix is to define the category so no discretion is needed for a grammar checker."}]}],"order":[0,2,1,3],"why":null},"prev":{"slug":"teaching-honest-use","title":"Teaching students to use it honestly","minutes":9},"next":{"slug":"process-evidence-that-holds-up","title":"Process evidence that holds up","minutes":9}}}