Are students who use AI at risk of losing some valuable writing habits for their thinking and creativity? They are aware that the new tools can change their style and they sometimes feel dispossessed of their texts. Investigation in the United States and Europe.

---

When OpenAI launched its new AI program, ChatGPT, in late 2022, education experts began to worry. ChatGPT could generate text that appeared to be written by a human. How could teachers detect if students were using an AI chatbot to cheat on their homework and essays?

As a linguist , studying the effects of technology on the way people read , write

and think , I believe there are other concerns that are just as pressing to consider than the risks of cheating. These include whether AI, more generally, threatens students’ writing skills, the value of the writing process, and its importance as a vehicle for thought.

As part of research for my new book on the effects of artificial intelligence on human writing , I interviewed young adults in the United States and Europe about a range of issues. They shared a litany of concerns about how AI tools might undermine their writing. But these concerns have been brewing for some time.

Automatic text generation, comfort or danger?

Tools like ChatGPT are just the latest in a series of AI programs designed for editing or generating text. The risk that AI will undermine both writing skills and the motivation to compose for oneself has actually been brewing for decades.

Spell checkers and, now, sophisticated grammar and style programs like Grammarly and Microsoft Editor are among the most well-known AI-powered editing tools. In addition to spelling and punctuation corrections, they identify grammatical issues and suggest alternative wording.

Developments in AI text generation include automated suggestions for online searches and predictive text. Type “Is Rome” into a Google search and you’ll get a list of choices like “Was Rome built in a day.” Type “if” into a text message and you’ll be offered “please” and “if it would be possible.” These tools are intruding uninvited into our writing, constantly asking us to follow their suggestions.

Young adults in my surveys appreciated the help AI provides with spelling and word completion, but they also reported negative effects. One survey respondent said, “If you rely too much on a predictive text program, you risk losing your spelling skills.” Another noted, “Spelling and AI software…can…be used by people who want to get by more easily.”

One respondent mentioned laziness as a reason for using text prediction: “It’s handy when I don’t particularly feel like making an effort.”

The zero degree of style?

AI tools can also affect a person’s writing style. One survey participant said that with predictive typing, he “didn’t feel like he was the author of the text.”

A British high school student echoed the same concern when describing Grammarly: “Rather than relying on their writing, Grammarly can rob students of their style by suggesting significant edits to their work.

Along similar lines, philosopher Evan Selinger has worried that text predictions reduce the power of writing as a mental activity and self-expression:

“By encouraging us not to think too much about the words we use, predictive technology can subtly change the way we interact with each other… We give others more of algorithms and less of ourselves… Automation… can stop us from thinking.”

In societies that rely on writing, writing has long been recognized as a way to help people think . Many have cited author Flannery O’Connor ‘s comment  :

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.”

A host of other accomplished writers, from William Faulkner to Joan Didion , have also expressed this sentiment. If AI-generated texts take on the task of writing for us, we reduce our ability to think for ourselves.

One strange consequence of using programs like ChatGPT to generate language is that the text is grammatically perfect. It comes across as a finished product. It turns out that the absence of errors is a sign that AI, not a human, probably wrote the words, because even accomplished writers and editors make mistakes.

Human writing is a process. We question what we originally wrote, we rewrite or, sometimes, we start our text from scratch.

The different stages of the writing process

The ideal is to establish an ongoing dialogue between the teacher and the student when it comes to writing a text at school. It is necessary to discuss the subject on which the student wants to write, share and comment on the first drafts. It is then time for the student to rethink and revise his text. But this step often does not take place. Most teachers no longer have the time to support this editorial work.

Conscientious students continue to work through these steps on their own, just as professional writers do. But the temptation to rely on editing and text-generating tools like Grammarly and ChatGPT is too great because it’s easy to substitute ready-made results for opportunities to think and learn.

Education experts are considering how to make good use of AI-powered writing technologies. Some point to their potential to stimulate thinking or initiate collaborative work. Before ChatGPT came along, an earlier version of the same underlying program, GPT-3, was licensed by commercial companies such as Sudowrite . Users can type a phrase or sentence into it and then have the software add more words, which can boost the human author’s creativity.

Who owns the text?

But the slope from collaboration to dispossession is slippery. Editor Jennifer Lepp admits that as she relied more on Sudowrite, the resulting text no longer felt like her own. “It was very uncomfortable to look back on what I had written and not really feel connected to the words or the ideas.”

Compared to seasoned writing professionals, students are much less able to draw the line between simple writing assistance and real content and style support from an AI-based text generator.

As the technology becomes more powerful and ubiquitous, schools will likely scramble to teach students the pros and cons of generative AI. But AI’s effectiveness fuels a pull that’s hard to resist, whether it’s polishing a piece of writing or delegating it entirely. Spelling, grammar, and autocomplete programs have already led the way.

Writing, a global human process

I asked ChatGPT if this was a threat to humans’ motivation to write. Here’s his answer:

“There will always be a demand for creativity and originality that requires the unique perspective and insight of a human writer.

Writing serves many purposes beyond simply creating content, such as self-expression, communication, and personal development, which can continue to motivate people to write even if some forms of writing can be automated.”

It was encouraging to me that the program seemed to recognize its own limitations.

I hope educators and students alike will be equally aware of this. The purpose of writing assignments should not be limited to submitting work for a grade. Writing should be a journey, not just a destination.

Author Bio: Naomi S. Baron is Professor Emerita of Linguistics at the American University