Interactive faculty worksheet

Assignment Redesign for the AI Era

Use this interactive worksheet to redesign assignments and activities for academic integrity, meaningful learning, and clear expectations in the AI era. Clarify what students are learning, what they should do, what successful work looks like, where AI belongs, and what evidence makes learning visible.

Clarify purpose, tasks, and success criteria. Make learning visible. Clarify AI use. Verify what matters.

This page has no analytics or server-side storage. Worksheet entries remain in this browser unless you explicitly save or download them.

Draft

A useful redesign pattern

Keep the important learning goal. Improve the clarity of the assignment and change the evidence you collect about how the student learned, decided, checked, revised, and can explain the work.

Independent attempt or prediction
Allowed resources or AI support
Visible revision or reasoning
Brief verification

Design principle: collect enough evidence to make the learning claim defensible, but not so much documentation that students experience every assignment as surveillance.

Step 1

Describe the course and assignment

Step 2

Protect the learning claim

Before deciding whether AI is allowed, identify what the grade is supposed to tell you about the student.

Which capabilities does this assignment assess?
Step 3

Make the assignment transparent to students

Organize the student-facing assignment around Purpose, Tasks, and Criteria for Success.

PURPOSE — why students are doing this work
TASKS — what students should do and in what sequence
CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS — what good work looks like
Technical guidance to include for students

Select only the procedures students will actually need. The built assignment will include concise student directions and tutorial links.

Transparent-assignment self-check

Step 4

Set a task-specific AI-use boundary

Choose the AI-use level
If AI is permitted, what may it help with?
What should students disclose?

Student-facing policy preview

Step 5

Choose redesign strategies

Keep it proportionate. Process evidence should support the learning claim, not become surveillance or documentation busywork.

Step 6

Browse redesign examples

Examples change with the assignment type. Use them as patterns rather than requirements.

Step 7

Choose process evidence and verification

Useful process evidence
Suggested grading emphasis

Step 8

Run an equity, accessibility, and proportionality check

Check each item you have addressed

Step 9

Build the redesigned assignment

The generated description combines Purpose, Tasks, Criteria for Success, exemplars, AI policy, process evidence, verification, grading, accessibility language, and any selected technical tutorials.

Your redesigned assignment

Why redesign this way?

The central question is not simply whether AI was involved. It is whether the assessment provides defensible evidence of what the student knows, can do, can explain, and can transfer.

“Any AI use is cheating.”

AI can support very different activities: brainstorming, proofreading, critique, debugging, generating complete answers, or practicing with hints. Set boundaries according to the learning purpose of the task.

Academic Integrity

“A finished product proves learning.”

Assisted performance and independent capability are not the same. Process evidence and brief transfer or explanation can strengthen the interpretation of a grade.

Assessment Validity

Cognitive offloading and over-reliance

Offloading is not automatically harmful. The concern is when AI replaces cognitive work students need to practice or when students stop evaluating the output.

Think first → use AI second → reflect and verify.

Cognitive Offloading

“Confident AI is probably right.”

Fluent output can still be inaccurate. Teach students to calibrate trust to evidence, stakes, and verifiability.

AI proposes; the learner verifies.

Trust Calibration

“AI detectors prove authorship.”

Detector output should not be treated as proof. Use assignment rules, process evidence, source checking, student explanation, and ordinary institutional procedures.

Proctoring is a narrow tool

Honorlock may be appropriate when secure individual performance is necessary to the construct. It should not substitute for clear expectations, thoughtful assessment design, accessible alternatives, or instructional support.

Resources

Assignment design

Transparent Assignment Design

Organize assignments around Purpose, Tasks, and Criteria for Success, and use exemplars to make quality visible.

TILT Higher Ed resources

Student technology

Honorlock HonorPrep

Honorlock's student practice environment for becoming familiar with the secured assessment experience.

Open HonorPrep

Design reference

Accessibility Checklist

Use alongside institutional accessibility guidance when implementing these activities.

Accessibility checklist

If a submission raises concern
  1. Re-read the exact assignment-level AI and collaboration rule.
  2. Review evidence already required of all students.
  3. Check sources, calculations, methods, or reasoning where relevant.
  4. Give the student an opportunity to explain consequential decisions.
  5. Treat detector output, if used at all, as corroborating information rather than proof.
  6. Follow institutional procedures and due-process requirements.