Discerning Gen AI Use: The Help-Harm-Hope Framework

Move beyond allowed vs. forbidden with AI by practicing discernment and cultivating a practice of personal and professional integrity. 

DR. KELSEY HAMMOND
Lead Professional Development Advisor
​

AI can be helpful in one moment and harmful in another — it’s rarely all good or all bad. Ethical use comes from asking the right questions to discern Generative AI in context. Guide students (and yourself) to use the Help-Harm-Hope Framework: How might this tool help my process right now? How might this tool harm my process right now? What do I hope I can do now?

​​In Part I of this series, we explored writing: how it can help us to think, build individual identity and voice, foster human connection, and reflect on our own being through attention and astonishment. Now, as we transition into Part II of the series, we will explore how Generative AI might augment those processes. 

---

The Macro View: Acknowledging Global Realities

Any time we discuss Generative AI, I think we must first acknowledge that we are not operating in a vacuum. Every time we prompt an LLM (Large Language Model), we are participating in a global phenomenon with significant macro implications. Here are just a few examples (there are many more):

• The Environmental Cost: Massive electricity grids and millions of gallons of water are required to power and cool the data centers that support every interaction we have with AI.
• The Creative Commons: AI models are trained on the "global library" of human art, literature, and code, often without the consent of or compensation for the original creators. 
• Systemic Bias: Because these tools are trained on the vast landscape of the internet, they often inherit and amplify Western-centric viewpoints, often erasing the unique cultural and linguistic rhythms that make individual voices so vital.

While these systemic issues require policy and institutional action, they can leave individuals feeling disempowered. How do we navigate a technology this massive within our own individual sphere of influence as leaders, teachers, and students in education? And, can any good come of it? 

---

The Micro View: Focusing on the Individual

To explore that question, let’s shift our gaze toward the micro — the impacts that fall within our individual sphere of influence. Whether you are a student drafting an essay, a teacher designing a lesson, or a leader navigating a master schedule, the focus moves from global energy grids to the internal discernment process of the individual as they decide what “ethical use” means in contextualized moments — the moments when we sit down to write and ask ourselves, “Will I start with myself, or will I start with a Generative AI tool?” 

In this context, the work is centered on discernment. We are looking for the "sweet spot" where technology supports us without bypassing the messy process of creation. I suggest that this requires us to look at the trade-offs of AI through a specific lens: The Micro Harms and Helps. 

The table below serves as the roadmap for the remainder of this series. Each upcoming article will be a "deep dive" into one of these four pillars, exploring how teachers, leaders, and students can navigate tensions in real-time related to thinking, identity, connection, and being. 

---

The Micro Harms & Helps of Using Gen AI

---

AI Discernment Framework: Help-Harm-Hope

​Because we are focused on individual agency, we need a repeatable way to navigate these trade-offs. For this, I propose what I am calling the Help-Harm-Hope Framework, inspired by Anthropic’s red-teaming protocols, which assess the benefits and challenges posed by new Gen AI capabilities. 

The root of the word discernment comes from the Latin discerne, which means "to sift." When we discern, we are sifting through the possibilities — separating what is useful from what is harmful. This isn't about a macro-level policy; it is about the "sifting" that individual students, teachers, and leaders can do in a specific moment. 

1. Help: The Benefits

• The Inquiry: How might this tool help my process right now? 
• The Sifting: Use the Micro Helps column for inspiration. 

2. Harm: The Challenges

• The Inquiry: How might this tool harm my process right now? 
• The Sifting: Use the Micro Harms column for inspiration. 

3. Hope: The Ethically Discerned Choice

• The Inquiry: What do I hope I can do now?
• The Sifting: This is the intentional plan — the "why" behind the use. It requires exploring both help and harm to find a path of integrity. For example: "I hope to use AI to help me organize my classroom visitation schedule (Help), but I will write my teacher observations myself so I don't lose the human Connection (protecting against Harm)."

---

Moving Forward

​This framework is a tool for transparent discernment. A leader might use it to demonstrate their own reasoning to a staff; a teacher might use it to set boundaries for a project; a student might use it to decide if a prompt is helping them think or doing the thinking for them. It moves us away from the binary of "allowed vs. forbidden" and toward a professional and personal practice of integrity.

In the coming weeks, we will explore each of these pillars in depth. We will start with Thinking, examining how we can keep the "Discovery" in the writing process, even in partnership with Gen AI tools.