AI for HSIE Teachers

Session plans

1. 1

   Where AI actually helps in HSIE — and where it fabricates

   ~45 min
   Session plan

   Open with the fabricated-source reveal — do it live: ask a general tool for 'a primary source with a quotation' on a topic the faculty teaches, project the confident, real-looking answer, then try (and fail) to verify it together. That single moment sets the tone for the whole course. Then crowd-source the high-value uses onto a board and sort each into 'structure/scaffold' (safe) vs 'content/source' (verify). Close with the Lessio scaffold activity so staff also see the upside, not just the warning.

   Discussion prompts

   • Where in our current History/Geography teaching would a fabricated source do the most damage — and would we have caught it?
   • Which of our recurring tasks are genuinely 'structure and scaffold' (low risk) versus 'content and source' (high risk)?
   • What does our faculty already use as authoritative reference points for sources and data — and is that list shared?
   Watch for

   Two reactions: the over-trusting ('the sources look perfect') and the dismissive ('so it's useless for History'). The reveal handles the first; the Lessio scaffold activity handles the second. Don't let it become an AI-bashing session — the message is 'powerful for structure, never trusted for sources'.

   Standards2.1 Content and teaching strategies of the teaching area2.6 Information and Communication Technology (ICT)7.1 Meet professional ethics and responsibilities
2. 2

   Prompt craft for HSIE — grounding, pitfalls & a subject prompt library

   ~50 min
   Session plan

   The hands-on hour. Live-build one HSIE prompt on a shared screen — take a vague 'make a source worksheet' and add the outcome anchor, the inquiry-process anchor, and the 'no AI-supplied sources, list the facts' constraint, projecting the improving output. Pair a History and a Geography teacher so they see the moves transfer. Spend a deliberate, unhurried block on the ICIP defence — this is where staff most need a clear, shared line.

   Discussion prompts

   • Which HSIE outcome or inquiry-process step do we most often forget to anchor a prompt to?
   • What's our shared, written rule for AI and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander content — and does everyone know it?
   • Let's draft one faculty prompt (e.g. a standard source-analysis scaffold) we can all reuse and trust.
   Watch for

   Staff may treat the ICIP point as a nicety to skim — slow down and make it explicit and non-negotiable. Others will under-use the 'list every fact for me to verify' self-check; insist on it, because it is the mechanism that makes the whole approach safe.

   Standards2.1 Content and teaching strategies of the teaching area2.4 Understand and respect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to promote reconciliation2.6 Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
3. 3

   Planning HSIE with Lessio — scope, programs and resources

   ~45 min
   Session plan

   A faculty make-and-take. Split into History and Geography pairs; each generates a real focus-area program for next term in Lessio, then runs the HSIE review-before-use checklist on it. Have each pair verify two of their own outcome codes live against the NESA site, and check the inquiry process / fieldwork is genuinely built in — not just named. Share back one program and critique it as a faculty.

   Discussion prompts

   • Where would a wrong outcome code or a missing fieldwork component actually bite us in a registration audit?
   • Are our History and Geography genuinely separate and equally resourced — or has one been quietly squeezed?
   • What authoritative source/data references should every HSIE program in this faculty draw from?
   Watch for

   The temptation to treat a polished Lessio draft as finished — stress that the verified source and the edits ARE the professional work. Watch for History and Geography being merged for convenience; protect the separate-and-equal mandate explicitly.

   Standards2.2 Content selection and organisation2.3 Curriculum, assessment and reporting3.4 Select and use resources
4. 4

   Assessment, feedback & integrity in HSIE

   ~45 min
   Session plan

   Two halves. First, an assessment build: each teacher generates a source-based task with marking guidelines in Lessio, then swaps in verified sources and checks band alignment. Second, an integrity workshop: map current HSIE assessment tasks against 'could a student pass this with AI?' and redesign one to make authorship visible (in-class source work, own-data fieldwork, viva). Keep the verified-source duty front and centre throughout.

   Discussion prompts

   • Which of our HSIE assessment tasks are most exposed to AI misuse — and how would own-data fieldwork or in-class source work close the gap?
   • Do our marking guidelines actually describe analytical quality, or could AI-generated bands slip in as filler?
   • What's our shared standard for 'this source is verified and ready for an assessment'?
   Watch for

   Integrity anxiety and over-reliance on detection — redirect to task design. Watch for teachers accepting AI-drafted marking bands without checking they describe genuine HSIE analysis. Reinforce that a beautiful task built on an unverified source is worthless.

   Standards2.3 Curriculum, assessment and reporting5.1 Assess student learning5.2 Provide feedback to students on their learning
5. 5

   Capstone — build, verify and critique a real HSIE resource

   ~45 min
   Session plan

   Run as a longer workshop or directed time. Each teacher builds their connected History or Geography set in Lessio, then does the verification pass — codes, sources, data, cultural safety — and self-assesses against the HSIE Ethical-Use Checklist. The most valuable share-back is 'one AI-supplied source or fact that failed verification', which cements the whole course. Collect the artefacts and reflections as your evidence of a Standards-relevant PD day and the teachers' eTAMS record.

   Discussion prompts

   • What's our faculty's shared standard for 'this resource is source-verified and ready to use'?
   • What one faculty protocol for AI source-verification and ICIP should we adopt from today?
   • How will we log this as PD and keep building a shared bank of verified HSIE resources?
   Watch for

   Some will want to skip the reflection or the verification pass — protect both; they're what make this real PD and what keep students safe from fabricated history. Capture the faculty source-verification/ICIP protocol the staff agree on — that's what leadership takes forward.

   Standards2.1 Content and teaching strategies of the teaching area5.1 Assess student learning6.2 Engage in professional learning

Standards-relevant professional learning, mapped to the APST · verified against national and NSW frameworks, June 2026.