Please keep in mind that new technology like Generative AI (Gen AI) shouldn’t simply make your thinking or work easier, much less take the place of the uniquely singular abilities of human beings to grow cognitively, think creatively, or evaluate critically. If you use Gen AI to simply avoid work, you are doing it wrong. Instead, using Gen AI in the spirit of Douglas Engelbart’s “augmenting human intelligence” and Donna Haraway’s configuration of the cyborg point the way to beneficial heightening of human possibility instead of harmful erasure of the cognitive distinctions of humanity. If you use Gen AI, use it wisely and use it well. This post is the fifth in this series.
Students can take a cyborg approach to writing by using Gen AI as a powerful tool for refining written work. By inputting a draft into an AI tool, students can receive feedback on grammatical errors and suggestions for improving sentence structure. While these suggestions may sometimes feel a bit generic, they are often free of the grammatical mistakes that can plague even the most attentive writers. This makes AI particularly useful for catching oversights that might otherwise go unnoticed.
Gen AI can assist in refining drafts by checking for grammatical errors, improving sentence clarity, and suggesting alternative phrasing. This process is akin to the cyborg’s ability to enhance physical or cognitive abilities through technology. For example, a student could input a draft into an AI tool and receive feedback on sentence-level improvements.
However, it’s important to approach AI-generated feedback critically. While AI excels at identifying technical errors, it may lack the nuance to fully capture a writer’s unique voice or stylistic choices. Students should compare their original drafts with AI-edited versions, reflecting on what changes improve clarity and which ones compromise their tone.
However, it’s important to recognize that AI is not a substitute for human judgment. The decisions to accept or reject its suggestions should remain firmly in the hands of the writer. After all, writing is a deeply personal act, shaped by individual perspectives and styles. AI can offer valuable insights, but it cannot replicate the unique voice and intent that a human brings to their work. And for any substantive learning to take place on the part of the student, they need to reflect, revise, and incorporate what they learn in future writing.
One of the most promising aspects of using Gen AI is the opportunity it provides for reflection and growth. After using an AI tool to edit a piece of writing, students can compare their original draft with the AI’s version. They can also query the Gen AI system about what edits were made and why. This exercise can reveal patterns in the changes made by the AI, such as a tendency to simplify complex sentences or standardize certain phrasings. By examining these patterns, students can gain insights into their own writing habits and consider whether these changes enhance or detract from their intended message.
For instance, a student might notice that the AI consistently alters their use of passive voice to active voice. This could prompt them to think about the impact of voice choice on their writing’s clarity and tone. Similarly, if the AI frequently suggests synonyms for certain words, the student might reflect on whether these alternatives better convey their intended meaning or if they lose some nuance in the process.
This process of comparison and reflection encourages students to think critically about their writing choices and to develop a more nuanced understanding of style and syntax. It also underscores the idea that writing is a series of deliberate decisions, and that even when AI offers a suggestion, the writer retains the final say.
The integration of Gen AI into the writing process represents a significant shift in how we approach composition and revision. It challenges us to rethink our assumptions about creativity, originality, and the role of technology in education. While some may worry that AI could diminish the uniqueness of human writing, I believe that it has the potential to enhance it—if used thoughtfully.
By embracing the cyborg model, where human and machine collaborate to produce something greater than either could alone, students can harness the strengths of both worlds. AI can provide technical precision and objective feedback, while the human writer contributes creativity, empathy, and depth. This partnership can lead to writing that is not only more polished but also more expressive and impactful. But most importantly for learning to take place, the student must reflect on their workflow and the suggestions from their Gen AI model–don’t just accept revisions blindly, but ask why this instead of that; consider the revision and if accepted; and practice observed changes in future writing.
In this new era of writing, the cyborg writer—part human, part machine—stands as a testament to the adaptability and resilience of the craft. By embracing this hybrid approach, students can navigate the evolving landscape of writing with confidence by leveraging the best of both worlds to produce unique work that communicates their ideas clearly to their intended audiences.
