AI Disclosure Statements for Students: Examples for Writing Clear, Accurate Reports

“I used AI” leaves out the details that matter: what the tool did, how its output shaped the work, and what the student contributed. A chatbot used to explain a concept played a different role from one that rewrote paragraphs or generated code. A useful disclosure makes those distinctions visible.

For students, that means describing the actual process in plain terms. For instructors, it means setting expectations before an assignment is due. The examples below are teaching aids, not official institutional templates. Use them only when they accurately describe the work, and follow the assignment instructions. A disclosure does not make a prohibited use permissible.

Start with the contribution

A clear statement usually identifies the AI tool, the task it helped with, and the parts of the submission it affected. It should also explain what the student did with the output: for example, whether they reviewed suggestions, revised generated material, or checked a claim against course readings.

The level of detail depends on the assignment. An instructor may ask for dates, the tool’s web address, a model or version name, or records of prompts and responses. Include those details when requested; don’t guess at a version that the tool doesn’t show. Monash University, for example, asks students to identify the type of AI used and its contribution, with acknowledgement requirements determined for each assessment. Student Academic Success

Examples by type of use

Brainstorming and planning

I used [tool name] to suggest possible approaches to an essay about [topic]. I chose to focus on [angle] and developed the argument through my own reading. The tool helped me select a direction; I didn’t include text it generated in the submitted essay.

This wording separates idea generation from drafting. If the tool also shaped the argument or influenced which evidence the student pursued, say so. Planning can affect the work even when no AI-generated sentences appear in the final version.

I asked [tool name] to propose a structure for my report on [topic]. I used its suggested order for [sections], then changed [specific part] to suit my argument. I wrote the report using the sources cited in it.

Concept explanations and proofreading

While preparing this assignment, I used [tool name] to explain [concept] and give an example. I compared the explanation with [course material or source], then completed [task or section] in my own words.

Keep the checking claim only if the student actually made that comparison. If an AI-generated example was adapted into the submission, identify it rather than describing the interaction as explanation alone.

I used [tool name] to flag possible spelling, punctuation, and grammar issues in my draft. I reviewed the suggestions and kept changes to [brief description]. I did not use its features to rewrite paragraphs or create new content.

Describe the feature that was used. Some writing tools offer simple corrections alongside paragraph-level rewriting, and those uses are not interchangeable. Assignment rules also vary: the University of Sydney distinguishes basic spelling and grammar corrections from uses that require acknowledgement. sydney.edu.au

Rewriting and research discovery

I used [tool name] to revise the first draft of [section or paragraphs] for clarity and organization. I edited the response, and some AI-generated wording remains in those sections. The ideas and sources I provided were [brief description]; I checked the revised text against them.

This description is appropriate only when that assistance is allowed. If a tool rewrote paragraphs, calling its role proofreading would leave out a significant part of the process.

I used [tool name] to develop search terms and identify possible sources about [topic]. I looked up the suggestions and used the sources cited in this assignment. I left out [suggestion or source] because [reason, if relevant].

Disclose any additional work the tool did, such as summarizing papers or extracting information. Say that a source was read or verified only if that happened, and cite the original material consulted in the required style.

Translation, code, and presentation materials

I used [tool name] to translate my draft from [language] into English. I reviewed and edited the result, including [terminology or changes]. The submitted English text includes wording produced with AI translation.

If the tool translated a source to help the student understand it, describe that purpose instead. Translating a student’s own draft and translating background material are separate uses.

I used [tool name] to produce an initial version of [function or component] and suggest a fix for [error]. The submitted code includes an adapted version in [file or lines]. I changed [specific features] and tested it using [tests actually run].

Be specific about which files or sections contain AI-assisted code. A check that the code runs doesn’t by itself show that it handles the cases relevant to the assignment. Follow any instructions about comments, citations, or keeping interaction records.

I used [tool name] to generate the illustration on slide [number] from a prompt about [subject]. I selected the image and changed [details]. I created the rest of the slide content using [materials or process].

If AI also produced slide text, an outline, or speaker notes, include that work in the statement. For several images, an acknowledgement beside each figure or a short accompanying table may be easier to follow, subject to the assignment’s directions.

Reporting no use and adapting the template

I did not use generative AI to plan, draft, revise, translate, or create material for this assignment.

Use this declaration only if it accurately covers the work and matches the requested scope. If an AI feature was used in a limited way, describe that use instead. Some assignments ask every student to make a declaration, including those who did not use AI. Student Academic Success

AI use disclosure: I used [tool name, plus any required version or date details] for [specific task]. Its contribution affected [sections or components]. I retained [contribution], changed [details], and checked [material] against [source or test]. I’ve provided [prompts, outputs, or other records] at [location], as required.

Remove any wording that doesn’t apply. A concise account of what happened is more informative than a broad claim that every output was independently checked.

Where to place the disclosure

Use the location specified by the instructor. It might be a cover sheet, an acknowledgement section, an appendix, or a field in the submission system. The University of Melbourne, for instance, advises placing its declaration after the reference list; that placement isn’t universal. my.unimelb

Disclosure and citation serve different purposes. Disclosure describes AI’s role in producing the work; citation follows the required style for material used in the submission. An assignment may call for both. AI Student Hub

For instructors, the practical move is to explain the expected format when assigning the work. Show what students should record as they go, and provide an example with enough detail to be useful. Then students can describe their decisions from their notes instead of reconstructing the process at submission time.

Related: Gemini Notebook Review: A Practical Guide for Researchers