I ask my students to be honest about how they use AI in their work. They are entitled to the same honesty from me.
AI now shows up in research, drafting, and analysis across law, business, and technology, and it is also an aspect of digital transformation and systemic disruptions I study. In my classroom, everyone shares responsibility for whether the learning works, and everyone comes ready to challenge and be challenged. That principle doesn’t exempt the person facilitating the learning. So here is how AI figures in the materials on this site and the teaching and learning behind them. The short version: I direct the work. The pedagogy, the framing, and the academic judgments are mine. AI helps with parts of the process, but it is never responsible for the result. I am.
I use it in four ways. For research, it helps me find sources, follow recent developments, and get my bearings in a crowded field, whether a new line of cases, a shift in a market, or an emerging technology, faster than I could alone. For editing, I ask where a syllabus repeats itself or where an assignment stops hanging together. For argument, I treat it as a sparring partner, testing hypotheticals and hunting for the weak spots in a problem before you find them in class. And for connections, it helps me notice patterns across law, business, technology, and policy that are easy to miss when you work in one field at a time, including the moment a disruption in one starts reaching the others.
What it does not do matters just as much. It does not write my course content. It does not stand in for going to the source: the statute, the case, the regulation, the filing, the data. It does not decide academic integrity questions. A person checks every piece of material and every assessment, and that person answers for it.
Why so careful? Start with what these systems are. They predict language from patterns. They don’t understand what they produce, and they can’t be held responsible for it. They invent citations, flatten nuance, and carry assumptions nobody declared, and they can sound fluent with very little underneath. Anyone trained in law or business recognizes the problem: a polished argument is not the same as a sound one, and you will hear plenty of polished arguments over the course of your careers. So I treat whatever AI gives me as a draft. I check the claims, I pull the sources, and nothing goes on this site until I have done both. AI can show me more ground to cover. It can’t tell me what’s true.
How you use AI also says something about the professional you are becoming. That is as true for you in my courses as it is for me in my own work. Using it well takes restraint, verification, and some humility, including the discipline to notice when something reads beautifully and you still don’t understand it. The standard runs both ways, which is why this statement sits alongside the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI policy in the Course Policies section. Used carefully, AI sharpens thinking. Used carelessly, it lets responsibility quietly drain away. In law, in business, and in learning, that difference counts for a great deal.
Why put all of this in writing? Because AI-assisted work is about to become ordinary. The real question is whether it leaves people more accountable for their work or less. Adopting these tools means renegotiating authorship, authority, and responsibility in teaching and learning. Disclosure is part of accountability, and so is consistency: I can’t credibly ask you to declare your use while keeping mine to myself. As more of what we read passes through an algorithm on its way to us, saying plainly who is responsible becomes a matter of integrity. Throughout my courses, Integrity governs the FAIR Framework (Flexibility, Adaptability, Imagination, and Resilience): FAIR tells you what to do; Integrity tells you whether you should. AI keeps widening what we can do, which makes the second question harder to skip. If AI is going to reshape our institutions, it should make our work more disciplined, not less. That is the standard for this site. I hold myself to it, and I will hold you to it as well.