AI versus the writer's craft

AI versus the writer’s craft: Why AI can’t replace teacher modelling in the creative process of writing 
 
Artificial Intelligence text generation tools like ChatGPT have sparked fierce debate in the world of education recently surrounding their potential benefits and drawbacks in school contexts.  While initial discussions centred around its use by secondary and FE pupils and the associated difficulties around plagiarism, talk has more recently turned to how sites like ChatGPT can be used to support teachers.  There are now countless blogs and forums listing the ways in which AI can be used to lighten teacher workload, be it through the writing of reports, letters to parents, generation of retrieval practice questions or even the creation of lesson plans. 
 
Alongside this, there has been intense backlash amongst authors and illustrators surrounding the ways that AI could jeopardise the work of creatives.  Concerns that the technology poses a threat to writers and artists are rife - not only because of the potential pirating of intellectual property, but also due to the devaluation of the creative process, and the undermining of the skill and craft it takes to create high-quality text and illustrations. Author and illustrator Rob Biddulph put the point across clearly in an interview with The Guardian recently when he said that AI art “is the exact opposite of what I believe art to be. Fundamentally, I have always felt that art is all about translating something that you feel internally into something that exists externally. Whatever form it takes, be it a sculpture, a piece of music, a piece of writing, a performance, or an image, true art is about the creative process much more than it’s about the final piece. And simply pressing a button to generate an image (or language) is not a creative process.” So how does this tie in with our Teach Through a Text approach?
 
The limitations of AI-generated writing models
As teachers, we are all fully aware that the craft of writing is a complex one, and one which takes a great deal more than a tick list of generated success criteria.  It is why, in the days of APP, a child could secure a Level 4 at the end of KS2 through ticking off every element of a Level 4 APP sheet, without demonstrating any real sense of cohesion, creativity, excitement or flow within their writing.  It cannot be disputed that the sophistication of AI today is impressive, and today’s tools are capable of creating grammatically accurate, relatively coherent pieces of writing.  With specific prompts, for example, you can create an opening to a gothic horror narrative incorporating specific sentence structures and grammatical features.  Here, for instance, the prompt was to include short sentences for impact, semi-colons and figurative language:
 
The night crept in like a thick black cloak, smothering the last remnants of daylight; the moon, like a pale and sickly face, peered through the clouds like a wraith.  The old mansion loomed over the hill, its walls caked with moss and vines; a spectre of a building, haunting the landscape like a ghost.  I shivered, feeling as though a thousand eyes were watching me from the shadows; a foreboding presence that seemed to permeate the very air.  I took a step forward, my heart pounding like a drum; I knew there was no turning back now, for I was about to enter a world of darkness and terror.
 
What is clear here is that AI-generated extracts of writing like this one often seem reminiscent of the child who, once taught a specific skill, litters that skill throughout an entire piece of writing without consideration for overall cohesion and flow.   In fact, in this example the skill of short sentences for impact seems to have been completely ignored while similes have been used to excess.  And why is that?  Because as sophisticated a technology it may be, it isn’t human.  It hasn’t gone through the creative process of trial, error and improvement.  It doesn’t possess the writerly craft, nor could it ever pretend to.  

AI can’t… live model
Live modelling of the writing process is vital in the quality teaching of English.  Children cannot learn how to be effective writers without observing and experiencing their teachers modelling the process of writing to them.  They need to see the ‘blank page process’ and be taught how to approach that blank page.  They need to see us making mistakes, trying out different options, reading aloud as we go to get the sense of flow, editing as we go.  They need to hear the metacognitive process of embedding a skill we have taught into a longer piece of writing.  They need constant reminders of audience and purpose and the effect the writing is having on the reader.  They need to see us applying spelling rules and discussing vocabulary choices.  They need to see how to explore and experiment with literary language and to see us enjoying the creative process of writing. Put simply, none of this can be achieved by showing a model created by an AI tool.  
 
AI can’t…teach grammar and spelling in context
Some supporters of the use of programmes like Chat GPT in education cite the creation of knowledge-based questions and quizzes for grammar and spelling as a benefit of the technology.  At Literacy Tree, we are firm believers in the importance of teaching grammar and spelling in context – children need to be taught the right grammar, at the right time.  They need to see grammar as a tool for effective writing, rather than a separate entity.  The same applies to the teaching of spelling.  How often have you come across children who get full marks in spelling tests, but none of it transfers when it comes to application into writing?  It's another reason why the introduction of the SPAG paper was so controversial – there is little evidence to suggest that scoring highly in a SPAG paper translates to effective writing.  Just because you can underline a relative clause in a sentence doesn’t mean you are able to use and apply this skill purposefully to good effect in your writing.  Grammar and spelling skills are most likely to be transferred into writing when they are taught in the context of a rich, high-quality text so that children can use and apply these skills purposefully in the world of the book they are immersed in.  An AI generated quiz on fronted adverbials is quite simply not going to address that need.  
 
AI could… provide a starting point to teachers’ planning of modelling
Despite this, it would be remiss of us here not to acknowledge that these AI tools could play a part in the creative process of the planning of live modelling.  For example, if you need to model the use of the subjunctive mood in a persuasive piece but are lacking in inspiration, an AI tool could be used to generate some sentence stems which you could incorporate into your model.  If, at the end of a long day, you’re looking for ideas for figurative language to describe a particular aspect of a setting, it could help provide you with some inspiration.   While we are clear about the need for live modelling as often as possible, this doesn’t mean that this modelling can’t be mapped out and planned in advance.  Modelling live does not have to mean making it up on the spot – in fact it’s important to plan ahead and think carefully about the skills and grammar you want to showcase and the particular writing style you want to emulate.  AI-generated content could therefore be a starting point in the thought process.  In reality though, if you’ve been teaching through a quality text, you will have all the inspiration you need to create these effective models.  
 
Creativity and craft
The definition of ‘creativity’ is the ability to produce or use original ideas.  AI generated writing can be (at times) accurate and consistent, but it cannot be creative or original.  When we think about the aims of the National Curriculum, but more importantly what we want for our children as writers, engaging with and enjoying the creative process and craft of writing is key.  How can we teach this if we aren’t actively engaged in and modelling this process ourselves?  AI-generated content may well be able to support teachers and reduce workload in a number of ways, and there are undoubtedly streams of so-called ‘red-tape’, time-consuming teacher tasks which could be expedited and facilitated through the use of AI, but we firmly believe that when it comes to the teaching of writing, there is truly no replacement for teacher modelling of the writing process and unpicking the work of authors who have spent years honing their craft.  Teachers are highly-skilled experts in the pedagogies of effective teaching and learning – just as we have discussed the craft of authors and illustrators, the craft of teaching itself cannot be underestimated.  And when it comes to the craft of teaching writing, it is a skill that no amount of AI can replicate.