Educators Urged to Rethink Writing Amid Rising AI Usage

As the new school year begins, educators face significant challenges posed by the rise of large language models (LLMs) in academic settings. These AI technologies complicate issues surrounding learning, thinking, plagiarism, and authorship. Institutions are now prompted to adopt innovative approaches to assignments and assessments, as student papers increasingly incorporate LLM-generated text.

Professors have voiced their frustrations and concerns regarding the implications of LLMs in the classroom. According to Taylor Morphett, an assistant professor of English with a focus on writing histories, the current discourse reveals a deeper issue: the tendency of educators to view students’ writing difficulties as a cognitive deficiency rather than acknowledging the inherent challenges writing presents as a technology for thought.

Writing serves as a crucial tool for articulating and developing ideas. As Morphett notes, it is vital to teach writing through this lens, emphasizing its role in enhancing understanding rather than merely producing a finished product.

Understanding AI and the Concept of Writing

The question arises: why do we classify AI-generated output as “writing”? LLMs produce content that mimics existing texts but lacks the genuine authorship and intention that characterize human writing. When students submit work created with LLM assistance, it often reflects the conventions of academic English, a style that has long been associated with truth and credibility in educational institutions.

Morphett points out that this reliance on LLMs reveals a flawed perception of academic writing as an absolute standard. The reality is that academic writing is a social construct, shaped by historical and cultural contexts that have often gone unacknowledged in academia. The traditional emphasis on correctness can lead to anger and frustration towards students who utilize AI-generated content, as it seems to undermine the integrity of academic work.

Historical Context and Its Impact

The issues surrounding LLM technology in academic writing are rooted in historical and social factors. Since the 19th century, writing instruction in the English-speaking academy has been divided into two primary streams: literary and technical communication. Both have thrived in the context of the British Empire and have contributed to maintaining existing power structures.

Morphett highlights how the veneration of canonical British literature and the promotion of a standardized, utilitarian language has created an understanding of writing that overly prioritizes the final product. This perspective leads to the perception that “good” writing equates to technical correctness, often implying that “bad” writing reflects a lack of intellect or suitability for higher education.

Scholars in writing studies have criticized this focus on correctness, asserting that it perpetuates inequities related to colonialism and racism. As Morphett explains, the notion of “correctness” in writing is subjective and contextual. For instance, informal language used in texting, such as “ill c u l8r,” may be acceptable in one context but deemed inappropriate in another.

Given this backdrop, it is not surprising that some students turn to LLMs to meet academic expectations. The technology’s ability to produce text that adheres to standard academic conventions presents a straightforward solution for students navigating the complexities of writing.

Embracing a New Paradigm in Writing Education

To effectively address the challenges presented by LLM technology, educators must reconsider their definitions of writing and the expectations placed on students. If the goal is to produce merely a “correct” piece of writing, it follows that a computer could fulfill that role. However, a more meaningful approach to teaching should focus on fostering inquiry and critical thinking, encouraging students to engage with the systems and structures around them.

Morphett advocates for a broader understanding of writing that extends beyond rigid standards of academic English. Educators should recognize that students’ writing is part of a social context that requires clarity, but also an openness to listening and understanding their perspectives.

Failure to adapt could lead to a generation of students alienated from their ability to think critically and generate new ideas. By overlooking the evolving nature of writing and the implications of LLMs, institutions risk stifling creativity and independent thought.

To facilitate this shift, educators should allow students to submit work-in-progress, provide feedback on ungraded drafts, and design assignments that illuminate the writing process. Additionally, there is a need to teach students about the power dynamics inherent in writing instruction and to embrace the concept of invention, which emphasizes audience awareness and the context of communication.

Morphett calls for writing experts to play a pivotal role in shaping AI policies within educational institutions. If LLMs are integrated into academia without input from these experts, the risk remains that the resulting writing will merely reinforce existing ideas and perspectives.

As the landscape of writing evolves with the rise of technology, it is crucial for universities to rethink their approach to writing education. Doing so will ensure that students retain access to their voices and the potential to explore their ideas fully. The study of writing holds a unique position to aid institutions in navigating these pressing questions, ultimately enriching the educational experience for all.