More Than Words
How to Think About Writing in the Age of AI
-
- $17.99
Publisher Description
A veteran writing teacher makes a “moving” (Rick Wormeli) argument that writing is a form of thinking and feeling and shows why it can’t be replaced by AI
In the age of artificial intelligence, drafting an essay is as simple as typing a prompt and pressing enter. What does this mean for the art of writing? According to longtime writing teacher John Warner: not very much.
More Than Words argues that generative AI programs like ChatGPT not only can kill the student essay but should, since these assignments don’t challenge students to do the real work of writing. To Warner, writing is thinking—discovering your ideas while trying to capture them on a page—and feeling—grappling with what it fundamentally means to be human. The fact that we ask students to complete so many assignments that a machine could do is a sign that something has gone very wrong with writing instruction. More Than Words calls for us to use AI as an opportunity to reckon with how we work with words—and how all of us should rethink our relationship with writing.
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
"Only humans can write," according to this impassioned takedown of large language models. Chicago Tribune columnist Warner (The Writer's Practice) argues that because such AI programs as ChatGPT merely predict what word is most likely to follow the previous one, they don't have the intention required by actual writing. Articulating one's thoughts forces one to develop the ideas one aims to express, Warner contends, warning that attempting to off-load such cognition has insidious consequences. For instance, he discusses how Vanderbilt University staff used ChatGPT to compose a statement of condolence after a 2023 mass shooting at Michigan State University, suggesting that in doing so, the staffers were able to address the tragedy without having to grapple with it. Warner offers smart commentary on the downsides of AI, particularly its ability to bypass critical thinking, and the suggestions on adjusting to the software's increasing popularity are thought-provoking if broad. For example, he laments that ChatGPT's ability to write generic five-paragraph essays that receive good grades demonstrates how asking students to write to the rubrics of standardized tests has turned writing into "a box-checking exercise" that even a machine can complete, asserting that instructors should instead devise more reflective assignments. This provides plenty of food for thought.
