Complicate the Obvious
“Eat the Basic Seven Every Day,” U.S. government poster, 1941–45. National Archives.
“Eat the Basic Seven Every Day,” U.S. government poster, 1941–45. National Archives.
Ask AI what a healthy diet is and the answer will probably sound familiar: vegetables, whole grains, less sugar, moderation. At the end of my history of diet and health course, I asked students to explain how advice like this acquired its authority. They used course readings to examine assumptions that an ordinary request for dietary advice leaves largely unspoken.
This is part of a remote, asynchronous course on the history of diet and health.
Use this after students have studied historical dietary advice and arguments about expertise. Prepare examples of questions tied to particular course readings. The submission is the 600-word essay described below, including the follow-up prompts and comparison with a classmate.
The object of analysis is the authority claimed by the advice; students don’t need to adopt it as personal dietary guidance.
Before opening an AI tool, students note three course themes they expect to matter. Regimen, moderation, quantification, moral discipline, and official guidance are possibilities. These notes give them questions to bring to the response.
Two required prompts establish the advice and its justification. Students then write at least three follow-ups drawing on the course. A question about the moral history of moderation asks something different from a request for more meal suggestions.
first required prompt
What is a healthy diet? Give me practical advice for an ordinary adult.
second required prompt
Why is this diet healthy? What evidence, assumptions, or expert knowledge supports this advice?
Students’ follow-ups might ask which ideas about bodies and responsibility the advice assumes, whether it reflects modern American expectations, or which eating practices and economic constraints it overlooks. Have them explain which reading led them to each question.
The response is about 600 words. Students briefly describe the initial advice, include their three follow-up prompts, and analyze at least one revealing part of the exchange. They use several course readings to make an argument about the kind of expertise the answer claims. A short comparison with classmates’ posts draws attention to differences between responses.
The historical question needs to remain clear. Students can assess the advice’s factual accuracy, but that alone won’t explain why particular ideas about health, evidence, or responsibility sound persuasive now. The same source criticism they applied to humoral regimens or wartime food charts can be brought to a contemporary answer.
An AI explanation of its reasoning is itself another text to analyze. It may name evidence or assumptions worth following up, but students still need to check them against sources.
Constructed example — invented AI advice, not student work. The response recommends “moderation” without defining it. A student uses an assigned historical source to ask whether moderation is being presented as a measurable intake, a moral virtue, or both.
The essay quotes the relevant advice and the course passage, explains the comparison, and examines the follow-up. Merely noticing that the word occurs in both texts doesn’t establish that its meaning or authority stayed the same.
Show examples of a request for elaboration and a question that draws on the course before students begin. Require named readings and keep quotations short enough to leave room for analysis.
If students find different advice or different assumptions, have them document the variation. The assignment can accommodate those differences; it doesn’t require one model answer that everyone learns to criticize.
This sketch is licensed under Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0. You're welcome to share and adapt it for noncommercial purposes, with credit, as long as you share your adaptation under the same license.
Image “Eat the Basic Seven Every Day,” U.S. government poster, 1941–45. National Archives. The image's own license applies to it, separately from the sketch.
Suggested citation
Fred Gibbs. "Complicate the Obvious." AI Sketchbook, Amaranth, University of New Mexico, August 21, 2026. https://amaranth.unm.edu/ai-sketchbook/teaching/complicate-the-obvious.html. Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.