You want to use AI as a brainstorming tool for writing assignments. Great idea.
Then you realize: not all students have the same access.
Some have phones with ChatGPT at home. Some don't have home internet. Some are ESOL learners who might find the AI output confusing without support. Some have IEPs that require specific scaffolding tools.
If you bring AI into the classroom without thinking through access, you're creating an equity problem, not solving one.
Who's at a disadvantage
Students without home internet can only use AI tools at school, during the time you allow. If the assignment is "use AI to brainstorm this weekend," you've just told some kids: "Not you."
ESOL and multilingual learners might be using AI in a language that isn't native to them. ChatGPT in English can feel opaque. A first-generation immigrant kid who's still building English proficiency needs more support.
Students with executive function challenges (ADHD, autism, etc.) might find AI paralyzing. Too many options = paralysis. They need scaffolding: "Choose between these 2 AI prompts, not unlimited options."
Students who can't afford a device are using what the school provides. If you require specific software, they need access to it at school, not as homework.
Students with language disorders (dyslexia, apraxia, etc.) might use AI to *check* their writing or generate alternatives. That's accessibility, not cheating. But you have to design for it.
The design that actually works
For all students to use AI fairly:
1. Offer it at school first. All students get to try it during class time. The homework version is optional.
2. Offer alternatives. "You can use AI to brainstorm, or you can brainstorm with a partner, or you can use this outline template I made." Everyone gets to generate ideas. Some use AI. Some don't. That's fine.
3. Teach the tool explicitly. Don't assume kids know how to use ChatGPT. Show them. Model it. Let them watch what a good prompt looks like. This especially matters for ESOL and students with language processing challenges.
4. Scaffold for ELL and SpEd. If a student uses an AI tool as an assistive technology (to check their work, generate sentence starters, break down prompts), that's accessibility, not cheating. Make it official in their IEP or 504 plan, not a secret.
5. Provide device access. If you require students to use AI, the school provides the device and the access. They don't buy it at home.
What I actually did
I was assigning "use AI to generate 3 essay outlines and pick the best one." Equity nightmare.
Here's what I changed:
In class (everyone):
- I showed how to write an AI prompt
- Students saw me generate bad output, good output, mediocre output
- We discussed why some outputs were better
For homework:
- Option 1: Use ChatGPT to generate outline + pick the best
- Option 2: Use the outline template I made
- Option 3: Brainstorm with a study buddy, write your own outline
Everyone generated an outline. Different tools. Same assignment.
For students with IEPs:
- ESOL student: I provided sentence starters in simple English before she generated output
- ADHD student: I gave him 2 pre-written AI prompts to try (no blank page paralysis)
- Dyslexic student: He used AI to check his draft for grammar, then rewrote in his own voice
Same assignment. Different paths to the same skill.
The one conversation you need to have
Talk to your special education teacher and your ELL coordinator before you design the AI assignment.
"I want to use AI for this task. What does equity look like for your students?"
They'll tell you. They always know.
The policy I wish I'd had earlier
Before you assign AI, ask:
1. Access: Can every student access this tool? If not, offer alternatives.
2. Support: Which students need scaffolding to use this tool? Build it in from the start.
3. Choice: Is this required, or can students choose their method? (Choice matters.)
4. Home use: Am I assuming access to tech outside school? If yes, is that fair for all families?
Answer those four things, and your AI lesson won't accidentally exclude anyone.
The goal
You're not using AI to replace thinking. You're using AI as one tool, and some students use it and some don't.
The thinking is what matters. The tool is interchangeable.
Design for that, and you design for everyone.
