Lesson Overview
In this discussion lesson, students experience sycophancy firsthand by comparing two versions of Alia—one normal and one configured to be excessively flattering. Through direct experimentation and discussion, students discover how AI can be designed to validate users rather than provide honest feedback, and why this matters for their decision-making and critical thinking.
Key Skills Addressed:
- Comparing AI behaviors through systematic interaction
- Recognizing persuasive and manipulative design patterns
- Evaluating business incentives behind technology design
- Applying critical thinking to personal technology use
- Developing strategies for self-protection against manipulation
California
History-Social Science Standards
HSS.12.2.5
Evaluate the role of economic factors in shaping public policy and individual behavior.
Students evaluate how business incentives (engagement, retention) shape AI design choices like sycophancy.
HSS.12.7.6
Analyze the influence of the media on public opinion and elections.
Students analyze how AI media can influence user opinions through flattery and validation.
English Language Arts - Speaking and Listening
SL.11-12.3
Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric.
Students evaluate AI's "rhetoric"—recognizing flattery as a persuasive technique.
Florida
Florida B.E.S.T. Standards - Social Studies
SS.912.CG.2.11
Analyze the influence of technology on civic participation.
Students analyze how sycophantic AI could influence civic decision-making by reinforcing existing beliefs.
SS.912.E.1.14
Compare and contrast the role of incentives in economic decision-making.
Students compare user incentives (honest feedback) with company incentives (engagement) driving sycophantic design.
Florida B.E.S.T. Standards - English Language Arts
ELA.11.R.2.4
Analyze an author's use of rhetoric, including appeals and techniques used to convey a message.
Students analyze AI's use of flattery as a rhetorical technique to build user engagement.
Georgia
Georgia Standards of Excellence - Social Studies
SSCG22
Analyze the role of media in political systems, including its influence on public discourse.
Students analyze how AI media can shape public discourse through validation and opinion reinforcement.
SSEPF2
Explain how rational decision making involves examining costs and benefits.
Students examine the costs (manipulation, overconfidence) and benefits (engagement, confidence) of sycophantic AI.
Georgia Standards - Health Education
HE.HS.7.1
Analyze the influence of technology on personal and community health.
Students analyze how manipulative AI design can affect mental health and decision-making capacity.
Illinois
Illinois Social Science Standards
SS.IS.5.9-12
Develop claims and counterclaims while pointing to evidence.
Students develop claims about appropriate AI design, weighing evidence for encouragement vs. honesty.
SS.EC.2.9-12
Analyze the role of incentives in different economic systems.
Students analyze how profit incentives drive sycophantic AI design even when it harms users.
Illinois English Language Arts
SL.11-12.3
Evaluate a speaker's reasoning, evidence, and rhetoric.
Students evaluate AI's flattering rhetoric and recognize it as a design choice rather than genuine feedback.
Michigan
Michigan Merit Curriculum - Social Studies
P3.1
Identify and analyze public issues, evaluate possible resolutions, and take action.
Students identify sycophantic AI as a public issue and evaluate possible responses (regulation, user education, design standards).
E1.1.1
Explain how incentives affect economic decisions.
Students explain how engagement incentives drive AI companies toward sycophantic design.
Michigan Health Education
5.4.1
Analyze the influence of technology on personal health practices.
Students analyze how sycophantic AI can affect decision-making, self-perception, and critical thinking.
Mississippi
Mississippi College and Career Readiness Standards - Social Studies
US.8
Analyze the impact of technology on American society and culture.
Students analyze how manipulative AI design impacts individual thinking and broader social discourse.
Mississippi English Language Arts
SL.11.3
Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and use of rhetoric.
Students evaluate AI's flattering rhetoric as a persuasive design choice.
Mississippi Computer Science Standards
IC.9-12.1
Evaluate the impact of computing technologies on equity, access, and influence in society.
Students evaluate how sycophantic AI design influences users and affects equitable access to honest information.
New Jersey
NJ Student Learning Standards - Social Studies
6.1.12.EconNE.16.a
Analyze the impact of new technologies on business and consumer spending.
Students analyze how AI companies use sycophancy to drive consumer engagement and retention.
NJ Standards - Technology
8.1.12.IC.1
Evaluate the ways computing impacts personal, ethical, social, economic, and cultural practices.
Students evaluate sycophancy's impact on personal decision-making and ethical technology use.
8.1.12.IC.3
Predict the potential impacts and implications of emerging technologies on larger social, economic, and political structures.
Students predict how widespread sycophantic AI could affect social discourse and political decision-making.
New York
New York Social Studies Practices
A.5
Identify evidence and develop claims based on analysis of sources.
Students develop claims about AI design ethics based on evidence from their experimentation.
A.7
Identify ways to take informed action to address problems.
Students identify protection strategies as informed action against manipulative AI design.
New York English Language Arts
11-12SL3
Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and use of rhetoric, assessing the stance, premises, and style.
Students evaluate AI's flattering "stance" and recognize sycophancy as a rhetorical choice.
North Carolina
NC Essential Standards - Social Studies
CE.C&G.4.4
Analyze the role of media in informing citizens.
Students analyze how AI media can misinform through sycophancy rather than honest feedback.
CE.E.1.2
Analyze how incentives and profits influence business decisions.
Students analyze how profit incentives drive AI companies toward engagement-maximizing sycophantic design.
NC Essential Standards - English Language Arts
SL.11-12.3
Evaluate a speaker's reasoning, evidence, and rhetoric.
Students evaluate AI's use of flattery as manipulative rhetoric.
Ohio
Ohio Learning Standards - Social Studies
Theme: Science, Technology and Society
Analyze how technology influences human capacity to modify the environment and affects society.
Students analyze how AI technology can modify user thinking through manipulative design.
Theme: Production, Distribution and Consumption
Analyze how incentives influence economic decisions.
Students analyze how engagement incentives influence AI design decisions.
Ohio Learning Standards - English Language Arts
SL.11-12.3
Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and rhetoric.
Students evaluate AI's flattering rhetoric as a design choice with specific purposes.
Pennsylvania
PA Academic Standards - Social Studies
5.3.12.F
Analyze how media and technology influence public opinion and civic participation.
Students analyze how sycophantic AI can influence public opinion by reinforcing existing beliefs.
6.2.12.D
Evaluate the impact of advertising and media on consumer decisions.
Students evaluate AI flattery as a form of persuasive design affecting user decisions.
PA Academic Standards - Science and Technology
3.4.12.E1
Evaluate the impacts of technology on society.
Students evaluate sycophantic AI's impact on individual thinking and social discourse.
Texas
Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) - Social Studies
§113.44(c)(21)(A)
Analyze the effects of technological innovations on society.
Students analyze how sycophantic AI design affects individual decision-making and social trust.
§113.44(c)(10)(A)
Analyze the impact of economic factors on society.
Students analyze how economic incentives drive AI companies toward manipulative design.
TEKS - English Language Arts
§110.39(b)(13)(D)
Evaluate the effectiveness of rhetorical strategies used by a speaker.
Students evaluate AI's flattery as a rhetorical strategy and assess its effectiveness and ethics.
Virginia
Virginia Standards of Learning - Social Studies
VUS.1
Develop skills for historical thinking, geographical analysis, and responsible citizenship.
Recognizing manipulative AI design is part of responsible digital citizenship.
CE.9
Explain the role of media in a democratic society.
Students examine how AI as a new media form can undermine or support democratic discourse.
Virginia Computer Science Standards
CS.12.2
Evaluate the impact of computing technologies on society.
Students evaluate sycophantic AI's impact on users and society.
Washington
Washington Social Studies Learning Standards
SSS1.9-12
Use critical reasoning skills to analyze and evaluate claims.
Students use critical reasoning to evaluate claims that sycophantic AI is helpful vs. harmful.
E1.9-12.2
Analyze how incentives influence economic decisions and innovation.
Students analyze how engagement incentives influence AI innovation toward manipulative design.
Washington Computer Science Standards
3A-IC-24
Evaluate the ways computing impacts personal, ethical, social, economic, and cultural practices.
Students evaluate sycophancy's impact across personal, ethical, and social dimensions.
Common Core State Standards (ELA)
Speaking and Listening
SL.9-10.3
Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric, identifying any fallacious reasoning or exaggerated or distorted evidence.
Students evaluate AI's "reasoning" and identify flattery as distorted feedback designed to please rather than inform.
SL.11-12.3
Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric, assessing the stance, premises, links among ideas, word choice, points of emphasis, and tone.
Students assess AI's flattering "tone" and enthusiastic "word choice" as deliberate design rather than genuine response.
Reading Informational Text
RI.11-12.6
Determine an author's point of view or purpose in a text in which the rhetoric is particularly effective.
Students determine the "purpose" behind sycophantic AI design (engagement) through analysis of its rhetoric.
Writing
W.11-12.1
Write arguments to support claims using valid reasoning and relevant evidence.
Reflection questions require students to argue positions on AI design tradeoffs with reasoning and evidence.
C3 Framework for Social Studies
Dimension 1: Developing Questions
D1.1.9-12
Explain how a question reflects an enduring issue in the field.
"Should technology be designed to please users or help them?" connects to enduring questions about media, persuasion, and ethics.
Dimension 2: Applying Disciplinary Concepts - Economics
D2.Eco.1.9-12
Analyze how incentives influence choices.
Students analyze how engagement incentives influence AI design choices toward sycophancy.
D2.Eco.2.9-12
Evaluate the effectiveness of government, business, and individual decisions given the costs and benefits.
Students evaluate costs and benefits of sycophantic AI for companies, users, and society.
Dimension 4: Taking Informed Action
D4.7.9-12
Assess options for individual and collective action to address local, regional, and global problems.
Students assess protection strategies as individual action and discuss collective responses to manipulative AI.
ISTE Standards for Students
Digital Citizen
1.2.a
Cultivate and manage their digital identity and reputation and are aware of the permanence of their actions in the digital world.
Understanding sycophancy helps students manage their relationship with AI and protect their thinking from manipulation.
1.2.b
Engage in positive, safe, legal and ethical behavior when using technology.
Recognizing manipulative design is foundational to ethical, safe technology use.
Knowledge Constructor
1.3.b
Evaluate the accuracy, perspective, credibility and relevance of information, media, data or other resources.
Students evaluate AI feedback for credibility, recognizing that flattery undermines accuracy.
Empowered Learner
1.1.d
Understand the fundamental concepts of technology operations, demonstrate the ability to choose, use and troubleshoot current technologies.
Understanding system prompts and design choices helps students "troubleshoot" AI interactions for manipulation.
CSTA K-12 Computer Science Standards
Impacts of Computing
3A-IC-24
Evaluate the ways computing impacts personal, ethical, social, economic, and cultural practices.
Students evaluate sycophantic AI's impact on personal decision-making and broader social practices.
3A-IC-25
Test and refine computational artifacts to reduce bias and equity deficits.
Students consider how AI could be refined to reduce manipulative bias (sycophancy) while maintaining helpfulness.
3B-IC-25
Evaluate computational artifacts to maximize their beneficial effects and minimize harmful effects on society.
Students evaluate the tradeoffs between encouraging AI (beneficial) and sycophantic AI (potentially harmful).
3B-IC-26
Evaluate the impact of equity, access, and influence on the distribution of computing resources.
Students evaluate how sycophantic AI design affects who has access to honest, useful feedback.
Algorithms and Programming
3A-AP-21
Evaluate and refine computational artifacts to make them more usable and accessible.
Discussion of system prompts connects to how AI artifacts can be refined through different configurations.