Lane 2: Transparency and documentation

Lecturers need to understand how students used AI tools in order to evaluate the student’s reasoning, judgement, and disciplinary understanding. Transparency about AI use is easier to achieve when lecturers adopt an open and constructive stance toward AI in the course. If students feel that AI use is implicitly discouraged or associated with misconduct, they may hesitate to disclose how they used these tools. Encouraging open discussion of AI-supported workflows helps make the learning process visible and supports more meaningful reflection on how AI affects research and writing practices.

Transparency therefore helps clarify the student’s intellectual contribution and ensures that the final work reflects their own thinking and decision-making.

Making the learning process visible

The purpose of documentation is not to police students but to make the learning process visible. In most cases, transparency is best understood as a shared academic practice, similar to citing sources or documenting research methods.

The level of documentation should remain proportionate to the learning objectives and complexity of the assignment. For smaller assignments, a short statement may be sufficient. For larger projects or research assignments, more detailed documentation of the workflow may be appropriate. The aim is clarity, not exhaustive reporting. Documentation should support understanding of the student’s reasoning rather than create unnecessary administrative work.

What students should make transparent

When AI use is allowed or required, students should normally indicate:

This allows lecturers to focus assessment on students’ reasoning and judgement, rather than on the raw output produced by AI systems.