Finding Common Ground on Homework and AI
'Brainwriting' and psychological safety
Discussions about education and generative AI arouse a great deal of passion, partly because we are still coming to grips with what the implications are. Tech-enthusiasts passionately advocate for embracing AI tools, while there are concerns raised about academic integrity. How can we ensure that multiple voices are heard in such crucial discussions?
Traditional Head of Department (HoD) meetings typically gather one person per subject area. They can often fall into predictable patterns: the most vocal participants dominate, while others remain silent, with particular voices carrying more weight simply due to their position or longevity in an organisation, or a tech-savvy teacher's voice might dominate because of their perceived expertise. But when dealing with the challenge to homework that AI presents, we need a true exchange of ideas. To help, the technique of 'Brainwriting' was used to create a more equitable and psychologically safe space so that all participants feel that they belong and have something to contribute to the discussion. It helps capture diverse perspectives and ensures that everyone, even those uncomfortable speaking up in meetings, can participate fully.
1. Building Understanding
To help us think deeply about the issues, the HoDs were asked to watch these excellent videos on AI and assessment from TEQSA:
2. Small Group Exploration
They then met in small groups to consider the following areas:
The specific learning objectives behind our current homework assignments
Ways to design tasks that demonstrate genuine understanding rather than mere completion
Methods to shift focus from final products to the learning process itself
Strategies to make student thinking and problem-solving approaches visible
Approaches to emphasise skills that AI cannot replicate
3. Focused Discussion, Silent Ideation and Democratic Evaluation
In the meeting two days after, the focus was narrowed to three critical questions:
1. What specific outcomes do we want our students to achieve through homework that align with our learning objectives, and how can we ensure these outcomes are distinct from what AI can produce?
2. How can we redesign homework assignments to prioritise the learning process and critical skills over the final product?
3. In what ways can we effectively communicate with parents and involve them in our efforts to adapt homework practices in an AI-rich environment, ensuring they understand both the challenges and opportunities?
Colleagues were asked to write down their responses to these questions in silence on separate numbered pieces of paper. After a few minutes, all the responses were grouped on tables and the team were asked to rank the ideas with sticky dots:
Black – Strongly agree with
Blue – Support
Red - Avoid
In the space of around 20 minutes, over sixty distinct ideas were generated by the team. They were all shared, given consideration and collaborative decisions were made about the next steps. The ideas that were strongly agreed with have been collated and will form the basis for working with the rest of the stakeholders in the community as we shape the school's policy collectively.
Brainwriting is not a panacea for all meetings, but it showcases how a structured, inclusive approach can help address complex decisions within a limited time frame.