Using AI to Promote Learning

Many instructors are worried - for good reason - that the widespread adoption of generative AI tools (GAITs) in the classroom will impede learning and short-circuit their students' cognitive development. However, they also accept that AI is here to stay (at least until the internet crashes in some apocalyptic future) and are trying to figure out if they can incorporate them ethically and effectively into their teaching in ways that enhance rather than sabotage their students writing and critical thinking skills. 

Here at the Writing Center we believe the following: 

  • There is no such thing as an AI-proof assignment. There is only the fact that tech-savvy students with reasonably good writing skills can and do use AI invisibly while less skilled students are more likely to get caught.
  • The only way to deal with the easy availability of GAITs is to flip the classroom and include a lot of in-class writing.
  • Any use of GAITs to teach writing (or anything else) should be firmly embedded in evidence-based pedagogical practices.
  • The end goal should always be to scaffold students to a place where they can deploy the desired skills themselves.

It is (in our opinion) a violation of a student's rights to input their writing into any GAIT - for assessment OR feedback purposes - without their permission. 
It is a violation of ethics and a form of plagiarism for an instructor to present AI-generated feedback as if it is their own. 

Using generative AI tools (GAITs) in teaching: We believe that students should be the ones to decide whether or not to use GAITs to learn, including our WriteStrong CoPilot agent. If instructors are interested in incorporating GAITs into their teaching, they should use them transparently in the classroom with the student controlling the process and with the right to opt out. Here's an example of what this might look like in the classroom: 

Instructor: STEP 1: "Spend 15 minutes drafting an introduction to your paper. Then ask your partner to read it and answer the following questions: Do I describe the problem clearly? Do I provide evidence that there really is a problem? Do I have a clear argument? Is it specific?" 
STEP 2: "Now spend 15 minutes revising your introduction using the feedback from your partner." 
STEP 3: "Now - if you feel comfortable (you are allowed to opt out) - you can copy and paste your revised introduction into the Writing Center's WriteStrong bot (which I have previously shown you how to access) and ask it the same questions. Working with your partner, compare the feedback from the machine with the feedback you gave each other. Is the bot/machine feedback useful? Why or why not? Make notes about what was helpful and what you might want to remember the next time you are asked to provide feedback on a classmate's paper. Note anything problematic, misleading, or left out." 
STEP 4: "Now close the computer and, using your notes only, revise your introduction a second time. Submit all documents at the end of class."

The table below provides other examples of classroom activities that incorporate AI while centering evidence-based pedagogy. The end goal is always to scaffold students through a process of learning to read, writing, and think independently, so that they become strong readers, writers, and thinkers who do not have to rely on AI assistance.

Activity

Pedagogical principles

Instructions to Students

Skills Gained

Understanding and explaining concepts.

Using writing to learn.

Prior knowledge activation: Students learn new ideas better when they first connect them to what they already know. 

Learning by teaching: Explaining a concept in their own words encourages deeper processing and clearer understanding.

  • Try writing your own definition of the concept. Explain where you got your ideas about what it means or might mean.
  • Ask CoPilot to explain the concept in multiple ways (to a child, to an expert, with examples).
  • Close CoPilot and rewrite your definition. Provide your own examples.
Better grasp of key concepts; improved ability to explain in their own words.
Testing an argument

Deliberate practice: Focused repetition of one skill with feedback drives improvement. 

Argument scaffolding: Breaking claims into claim / evidence / counterargument helps students build more defensible positions.

  • Draft a working thesis statement, a rough argument that captures your main point.
  • Ask CoPilot to point out weaknesses and counterarguments.
  • Close CoPilot and rewrite your thesis statement based on this feedback.
Better understanding of elements of stronger, more defensible thesis statements.
Using questions to expand ideas

Socratic questioning: Targeted questions reveal assumptions and gaps. 

Metacognition: Attention to how you think write improves control over the process.

  • Write a short paragraph making an argument about X.
  • Ask CoPilot for probing questions about what you have said (without providing answers).
  • Pick 2–3 questions and answer them in your own words.
Deeper analysis; stronger critical thinking.
Audience awareness

Rhetorical awareness: Effective writing is targeted to specific audiences and purposes. 

Transfer of learning: Articulating the same idea for different readers helps the skill carry over to new contexts.

  • Draft a paragraph.
  • Ask CoPilot to adapt it for different audiences (e.g., high school, professional).
  • Close CoPilot down and rewrite the paragraph for one new audience yourself.
Better control of tone, diction, and framing for specific readers.
Creating a reverse outline

Self-explanation: Creating a list of points helps illustrate leaps in logic and off-topic sections. 

Retrieval practice: Revising outline and each paragraph’s main claim strengthens awareness of organization and topic sentences

  • Draft your essay.
  • Ask CoPIlot to list the main point of each paragraph.
  • Compare to your intentions and revise your topic sentences and organization.
Improved structure, coherence, and logical flow.
Sentence-level and style features.

Focused style feedback: Focused practice on clarity, concision, and tone builds fluency.

Contrastive examples:  Side-by-side comparisons makes rhetorical choices visible.

  • Write 3–4 sentences in response to a prompt.
  • Ask CoPilot for alternate versions (simpler, more formal, more concise).
  • Study the differences, close down the AI, and then revise your own sentences.
Sharper clarity and concision; better understand of stylistic choices.
Reflection & transfer

Reflection: Articulating what changed and why turns feedback into growth. 

Transfer: Students don’t automatically transfer skills to new areas. Asking them to identify where else to use them makes them portable.

After each activity, write a short paragraph on the following:

  • What did CoPilot reveal that I missed?
  • How did I revise my writing? What choices did I make?
  • Where will this be useful in the future?
Durable strategies; independence from AI tools.

Notes: 

  1. ChatGPT was used to help brainstorm examples. All examples were rewritten for clarity and specificity.
  2. CoPilot is the UI-approved GAIT and is therefore used in the examples below.
  3. ChatGPT and CoPilot as well as other GAITs will often rewrite, revise, or generate text for the user, even when not asked to do so. Students using AI to learn may need to add explicit instructions to their prompts that tell the GAIT not to revise their writing or generate text for them.
  4. WriteStrong, a CoPilot agent (bot) created by the Writing Center, is designed to answer writing-related questions and provide students with feedback on their writing without generating text for them. We have no doubt that some savvy students will figure a way around the constraints we have set, but we hope that it is a bit more resistant than other tools. We encourage interested instructors to use it in their classrooms (transparently and with students controlling the input, as described above) and to let us know how well it works.