It's Tuesday, and Tuesdays are for slicing. Anyone is welcome to join us through Two Writing Teachers, slicing, sharing, and commenting on other slices!
I resisted the urge to make plans on Friday night, and instead, Garth and I had a peaceful dinner and watched some sports at home. All was calm, all was bright until I pulled out my computer, and, like a moth to a flame, started heading into articles and ideas around the controversies surrounding reading instruction.
One good reference led to another. Before I could engage in the athletic competition on the bigger screen, my head was spinning with claims and statistics, predictions and demands. I read and started wondering about when attacks would begin to focus on writing, as opposed to reading. Sure enough, there was plenty to read about the science of writing, although I'm not sure what research the ideas came from. And then... one particular article caught my attention. The End of High-School English in the Atlantic. (Has anyone read it yet?)
I read parts of it out loud to my husband, and he may or may not have paid more attention to the announcers than to me.
"Garth," I said. "Listen to this: they're comparing this new program to be like the printing press and the light bulb having a baby."
He responded, maybe a little.
"I'll be obsolete before I'm vested," I said.
He responded, maybe a little more. Soccer's a big deal in our house, and the World Cup was in full gear. I closed the computer. I needed my Friday night to calm back down!
In the morning, I woke up to a colleague's text, with the Atlantic article linked.
"Life-changing," my colleague wrote. "I'm using it all the time for my dissertation."
What?
I don't have a great ending for this slice since I'm fascinated to watch where all this is heading, but in the meantime, maybe I should brush up on other skills as my career heads into the realm of the demise of factory workers.
Wondering out loud: when the students use AI to write their texts, will they be able to read and understand them?
ReplyDeleteMelanie, it’s Trish from NCTE and the bloggers dinner. This has given me so much to think about. I had read an opinion piece somewhere by John Warner debunking the nuanced writing claim of this latest AI offering. Now this to make any reassurance I felt disappear! Okay, so we’re going to have to wrangle with this, too, in our classrooms. What Terje said about the ability to even recognize as good writing what is produced is yet another layer…I wonder, will there be any pushback from students who actually care about having their voices co-opted? (I, as one of those who actually cares about being able to craft my own thoughts, would be bristling in my classes—and perhaps despondent.) So much to think about.
ReplyDeleteMelanie, this intrigues me so much! I'm going to read the article. I think my friend Andy posted about this last week, and I meant to go back and look at it and haven't done so yet. Thank you for sharing the article link and prompting me to read and ponder these ideas.
ReplyDeleteI read part of the article and set it aside to finish later. My immediate response to what I read is AI focuses on the utilitarian and not the internal joy a writer experiences from making writing. Certainly, I have been thinking about AI and writing since seeing the article. But if writing is reduced to a tool and not an aesthetic act, we all lose.
ReplyDelete"I'll be obsolete before I'm vested." OMG, I read that and laughed since I've now read it. (I also listend to the pod you sent me.)
ReplyDeleteI have this article to read later. It’s hard for me not to get upset at eh claims like this. . . Not sure if I should read it or not!
ReplyDelete