Using AI as a Thought Partner, Not a Shortcut

“Bro used ChatGPT.”

I may have laughed out loud while reading this in a ninth-grade social studies discussion forum. The teacher tasked the class with writing a discussion post stating a position for or against reparations for the descendants of enslaved Black people in America. Students were instructed to support their stances with evidence and explanation, and then engage in discussion with their peers.

The students in this class read each other’s posts in discussion assignments like this on a weekly basis. This student clearly did not recognize the post as his peer’s voice—and so came the devastating assessment: “Bro used ChatGPT.”

Every day, teachers and administrators come to the same conclusion: Their students have been using artificial intelligence (AI). And students aren’t the only ones. Regardless of where you stand on the ethics or impact of AI, educators are using artificial intelligence every day: to write and respond to emails, to craft lesson plans and assessments, and the list goes on.

What matters most for the success of our students is how effectively we make use of the tools we have at our disposal to meet and exceed the many goals we face.

With regard to the use of AI in any capacity, you don’t want to be “bro.” Just because you use tools like ChatGPT does not mean you use these tools well. What matters most for the success of our students is how effectively we make use of the tools we have at our disposal. Here are some ways to shift your use of artificial intelligence from mere task delegation to thought partnering.

Treat AI like a thought partner

Generate accurate prompts. Whether you’re asking AI to generate a memo to your staff, to unpack English language arts (ELA) standards into high-quality measurable goals, or to design an engaging lesson, the goal is that the final product will be well designed. In terms of thought, this requires detailed attention to the prompt at the start and the product at the end.

Craft better prompts. In addition to the ACDQ method, there are a host of worthwhile prompt types to explore based on the task at hand. If your prompts are basic, your output will be basic. 

In working with both teachers and administrators, I’ve noticed that prompts tend to lack clarity and are often vague. More important, in my experience, I do not often see teachers and administrators providing generative AI with a draft of an idea. Most frequently, I see a mere request for a product. However, treating artificial intelligence like a thought partner requires the initial thought. In other words, draft the email you want to send or share the ideas you already have about an engaging lesson.

Believe it or not, you can prompt AI to refine your prompt. In the example below, I am asking ChatGPT to refine an already detailed prompt I created.

Me: I am a high school ELA teacher using AI to break standards down into measurable rigorous goals. Refine the following prompt to use for each goal. Ask me any questions. Prompt: Extract all of the necessary goals from this English Language Arts standard, necessary to fully teach the standard. Here is the standard: Determine one or more themes of a literary text, and analyze how it is developed and refined over the course of the text, including how it emerges and is shaped by specific details; provide an objective summary of the text.

Chat’s response: Here’s a refined version of your prompt for clarity and precision: “Break down the following English Language Arts standard into measurable and rigorous learning goals. Ensure that the goals comprehensively address all aspects of the standard, including knowledge and skills students must demonstrate. Here is the standard: [Insert Standard].”

Rather than your asking AI to come up with the idea itself, it can be a partner to make your idea better. My original prompt was not bad. My thought partner made my prompt better.

Work toward a solid product. It’s rare that the first iteration of any AI-generated instructional component is ready for the main stage without some level of tweaking by an experienced educator. In fact, by virtue of including the “Ask me any questions” command in your prompt, you are already embracing the editorial spirit of product refinement.

Below I am thought-partnering with Brisk (an AI platform designed specifically for educators) to create and refine a ninth-grade ELA lesson on argument and effective explanation of evidence. You can see the full lesson plans Brisk generated here. Here is my initial prompt.

Me: Create a lesson plan using the following standard: Introduce precise claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims, and create an organization that establishes clear relationships among claim(s), counterclaims, reasons, and evidence. Focus on the relationship between claims, reasons, and evidence, with a clear difference between evidence and explanation of evidence.

Brisk then generates a well-structured lesson—one I would still further revise—using a claim about the impact of social media on the mental health of teens.

Brisk: Using the social media example, demonstrate how to build an argument:

• Claim: “Social media has a negative impact on teenagers’ mental health.”

• Counterclaim: “Social media can have positive effects on teenagers’ social connections and self-expression.”

• Reason: “Excessive use of social media can lead to increased feelings of anxiety and depression.”

• Evidence: “A 2019 study found that teenagers who spend more than three hours per day on social media are twice as likely to report symptoms of depression compared to those who use it less frequently.”

At this point, I think about my class. This social media claim is not new to students and may fall flat. However, I can recall the class’s clamor on the Monday after the Super Bowl—we had to take a pause to unpack Kendrick Lamar’s performance. Thinking about this, I add the directive below to the same prompt and explore the next iteration of this lesson.

Me: Use the rap battle between Kendrick Lamar and Drake as context for argument to hook students.

Here is the second iteration of the same direct instruction revised to leverage student interest and boost engagement.

Brisk: Using the Kendrick vs. Drake example, demonstrate how to build an argument:

• Claim: “Kendrick Lamar is a better rapper than Drake.”

• Counterclaim: “Drake’s commercial success proves he’s the superior artist.”

• Reason: “Kendrick’s lyrics demonstrate more complex storytelling and social commentary.”

• Evidence: “In Kendrick’s song ‘DNA.,’ he uses wordplay and metaphors to discuss racial identity and societal expectations.”

Ultimately, Brisk will generate a lesson plan that any new and novice teacher can use effectively. However, experienced teachers who are always seeking to perfect their craft will inevitably want to make adjustments to these lessons.

For example, I like the second plan based on Kendrick Lamar and Drake. However, I would modify the introduction to hook the class. Perhaps, I might simply post a picture of the two rappers with a writing prompt, “Who won? Explain why. If you do not know what this question means, explain what you know about these two figures.”

I know I can use this writing prompt because I know my class. Brisk knows how to structure a lesson, but neither Brisk nor ChatGPT nor Gemini knows my class the way I know my class. Effectively iterate your AI use by owning what you bring to the partnership. Very often, these tweaks make the difference between compliant learning and active engagement.