Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Greeley High English department urges ‘no AI’ baseline for classwork, teaches limited, supervised uses
Loading...
Summary
The Greeley High School English Department told the MSAD 51 school board it has adopted department-wide expectations that generative AI not be used for English assignments and described classroom strategies — in-class writing, revision-history checks and guided, limited AI exercises — intended to preserve students’ critical-thinking and writing skills.
Susan Inman, chair of the Greeley High School English Department, told the MSAD 51 Board of Directors on April 15 that the department has established clear expectations that "English class is not the place for artificial intelligence. It is the place for critical thinking ... It is not the place for artificiality." Inman said the department rolled out an instructional plan in fall after two years of research and iterative revisions and has continued to update lessons and expectations as tools evolved.
Inman said the department's baseline is that students should not use generative AI for English assignments, and teachers now prioritize in-class writing and require students to use school Google accounts so instructors can review revision histories as one method to check authorship and provide feedback. "We are not using AI to assess our students' work," Inman said, adding the department does sometimes experiment with supervised AI tasks — for example, using AI to study vocabulary or to transform short-answer prompts into alternate formats for students with IEP accommodations — but those activities are limited and intentional.
A fourth-grade student who spoke during the earlier recognition, Brynn, described how school social workers and classroom supports helped her manage anxiety; Inman framed the department's policy as part of broader student supports designed to promote authentic learning. Inman also told the board that the department has stopped relying on AI-detection tools because of evolving accuracy concerns. "AI detectors are problematic," she said, adding that faculty shifted to strategies that include revision-history checks and more in-class writing.
Superintendent Jeff and Carl Francis, the high school principal, praised the English teachers’ work. Francis said the district is relying on departments to lead on classroom-level decisions and described a cautious districtwide approach: "So instead of labeling each assignment as don't, sometimes, or do, we're just going with you don't until somebody tells you that it makes sense to do it," he told the board.
Board members and students asked practical questions about handwriting, assessment integrity and supports for students with special needs. Teachers said that for students who need alternate assessments, AI has sometimes been used to generate adapted materials, but staff are careful to use such tools in controlled, documented ways so that accommodations do not undermine academic honesty. Inman also raised environmental and commercial concerns about AI, saying students and teachers have discussed the technology's carbon footprint and the market incentives behind some commercial AI products.
The English department shared a research collection and its written expectations with the board and offered to post materials for parents and students. Inman invited continued dialogue with middle-school teachers and district staff so lessons and expectations can be coordinated across grades.
