Keep evidence visible
A useful AI-assisted draft should make it easy to trace interpretation back to the educator’s notes and identify where context is missing.
Practice guide
Responsible use starts with a clear boundary: educators observe, interpret, reflect, edit, and sign off. AI can help organise a draft, but it should not invent evidence, diagnose a child, or make professional decisions.
Reviewed 14 June 2026 · StoryLoop educator practice team
A useful AI-assisted draft should make it easy to trace interpretation back to the educator’s notes and identify where context is missing.
Use only the details needed to draft the story. Avoid unnecessary identifying, health, family, or support information, and follow your service’s privacy policy.
Before sharing, check quotes, cultural references, curriculum links, assumptions, and whether the suggested response fits the child and local curriculum.
Official references
These sources inform this guide. StoryLoop is independent and does not claim endorsement.
FAQ
Services should decide and document a transparent approach to AI use with educators and families, including what data is used and where professional responsibility remains.
StoryLoop is not a diagnostic or developmental assessment system. It supports drafting from educator-provided evidence and requires professional review.
No. StoryLoop supports drafting and structure, while educators remain responsible for observation, interpretation, reflection, final editing, and sign-off.
Yes. Stories are editable after generation and saved in history, so educators can add context, adjust wording, copy, export, or regenerate from the original observation.
StoryLoop is designed to avoid generic, poetic AI wording. It asks for real observations, keeps claims evidence-based, and links curriculum only when the observation supports it.
The free plan includes 3 learning stories per month. Upgrade prompts are dismissible, and existing history remains available even if the free limit is reached.