In response to increased usage of Artificial Intelligence (AI) across educational institutions, many teachers across Andover’s humanities departments have elected to implement more in-class writing assessments. These assessments have replaced take-home assignments and essays in an effort to encourage individual thought and prevent academic misconduct.
Some students are tempted by the convenience of AI platforms, which, after being fed a prompt, can generate a complete written work in a matter of seconds. In-class writing assignments potentially minimize the usage of AI and gauge the true voices and knowledge of students. Christopher Jones, Chair of the Department of History and Social Science, discussed the merits of in-class writing within and beyond the context of AI.
“[In-class writing] allows students to grapple with problems or with their own thoughts and ideas and represent them without worrying too much about formality or the polish of an out-of-class paper. There can be an authenticity and honesty to that kind of writing…[AI is] essentially a mechanism for regurgitation of other people’s thoughts. It will never replace the fact that our central pedagogical mission is to get students to think for themselves, to express themselves clearly, to feel confident in their own voice, to have their own ideas, to challenge prevailing ideas,” said Jones.
Jones continued, “What we, individually as teachers, and what we’ve talked about as a department, [was] the ways in which we can ensure getting good, authentic student work [without] the kind of muddle that artificial intelligence websites like ChatGPT and others present in terms of doing out-of-class work. Because those websites and those chatbots are so readily available, and so many students, from the data we have, are using them… Teachers are turning towards doing things in-class when they know that they can get an accurate sample of a student’s real voice, what they’re doing, what they’re thinking, and how they interact with a historical question.”
Though many students have reported an increase of in-class writings, the Andover faculty’s exploration of the role of AI in the classroom is not new. Caroline Odden, Dean of Studies and Instructor in Physics, outlined some of the steps faculty members have taken to better adapt their curriculums to the presence of Artificial Intelligence.
“Our faculty has been discussing the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning regularly since ChatGPT was introduced in November 2022. Instructors have engaged in departmental conversations, participated in faculty led workshops, joined sessions with outside facilitators, and attended off-campus conferences on this topic. Instructors of subjects that focus on reading and writing have been particularly engaged in conversations about the impact of A.I.,” wrote Odden in an email to The Phillipian.
Kiran Bhardwaj, Chair of the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, voiced her thoughts on how in-class writings may impact a student’s workload. Bhardwaj noted that though in-class writings may take away time from in-class instruction, they also allow her to view her students’ working processes and reduce the pressure on them to do outside work.
“To be honest, I do feel the tension between opening up time for class discussion that is now going to be taken up by in-class assessments. But there are some reasonable goods. … I’m hoping that my students are going to have a bit of ease for out-of-class work if we’re doing a lot of in-class assessments, which would be a good as well as more genuinely being able to see what my students are doing as they work, because that will more effectively allow me to support them,” said Bhardwaj.
Subsequently, the increase of in-class writings has prompted many students to adjust their expectations and writing methods. For Satabhisha Sarkar ’27, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Sarkar noted that the relative inexperience of many students with in-class writings may be contributing to worry. However, she added that there is reason to be optimistic.
“I’m not opposed to in-class writing, because it’s a way for me to challenge myself as a writer and get my ideas expressed well. I don’t have to stress about [my piece] after the class period’s over, [and] I don’t have to keep worrying about editing it and making it the best version it can be, because at some point, you just have to stop editing…Some of the resistance that students are voicing towards in-class writing comes from the fact that we’re so used to having out-of-class writing. We’re very familiar with being able to work on things for a longer time,” said Sarkar.
Leon Calleja, Chair of the English Department, noted that frequent AI usage can hinder students from absorbing material from class and demonstrating their thinking, but also has an impact on their ability to process information.
“Some studies that are showing you how [AI] impacts the cognitive abilities of students and even just using it and then coming back to writing, even if you don’t want to use it, you’re slower at writing. If you’re slower in writing you’re a slower thinker. That’s not always a bad thing… I encourage the English class to be slow readers as well, but they need to be the ones doing the reading. There’s one thing when you’re doing things slowly because you’re deliberating. There’s another thing where you just can’t process,” said Calleja.
