Open letter to faculty who need to get their heads out of their asses

[branchandroot]

No, you do not have to change anything about your writing assignments because of Chat GPT or other AI writers, UNLESS, OF COURSE, you are:

A) not scaffolding your assignments at all (outlines, drafts, annotated bibliographies)

B) not giving your students feedback, yes on every single piece of writing, yes I mean it, those one pagers are without value if you don’t let them know what they got or didn’t get, learning does not magically happen without your input just because you asked for their understanding in essay form.

If you are scaffolding and responding? You’re good to go, bon voyage, don’t touch those assignments. You will spot every instance of someone trying to half-ass it with AI, just like you spot when it’s a boughten paper or by a “tutor”.

As for the rest of you assholes, shape up and start doing your goddamn jobs; I am so fucking tired of this song and dance, yes there is a REASON I’ve been telling you all this shit! If you teach a large-enrollment course, get with your TAs for a norming session at the start of term, too.

Comments

[recessional]

What, you mean you want them to TEACH?

[branchandroot]

*snorts* I know, it’s clearly an unreasonable expectation.

[edenfalling]

*headdesk*

[edenfalling]

I mean, I utterly LOATHED scaffolded assignments as a student, but that was mostly because the scaffolding was too one-size-fits-all and didn't allow for stuff like, "Here are the seven sources I've found and am reading/watching/interviewing, here's a two page summary of my current impressions, and right now I think my thesis will be X but that might change depending on what else I learn from my sources," rather than, "My thesis is absolutely 100% going to be X and here are my five index cards of bullet-point notes for each of my seven sources supporting my thesis, handwritten in blue ballpoint pen."

The general idea of process and checkpoints, however, is perfectly sound!

[branchandroot]

Exactly, it’s just like group work. Being in groups doesn’t magically make active learning happen! You have to put some thought into what they’re supposed to be doing and why, and how to structure the groups. I have a whole rant on tape about how the original study that sent everyone down this track was of medical graduate students and it was essentially a norming session they already had advanced knowledge for, of course it generated good results! Throwing undergrads with no knowledge (yet) of the subject into groups and expecting the same is just… *dissolves into vigorous flailing and argh sounds*

[edenfalling]

THIS.

[recessional]

I have a whole rant on tape about how the original study that sent everyone down this track was of medical graduate students and it was essentially a norming session they already had advanced knowledge for, of course it generated good results!

Oh my god.

[branchandroot]

I was a shiny new PhD student sitting in my comp teacher training class, going "...one of these things is really, really not like the other, wtf people" when I composed the first draft of this rant. It's very polished, by now.

[mekare]

*headdesk*

[branchandroot]

Right?! I just can't with this whole panic any longer. I'm this close to actually telling people, if you give assignments that can be cheated on that easily, you deserve to have them cheated on.

[swingandswirl]

I'm reminded of a fellow professor who wailed about students using Google Translate (I teach languages.) When pressed, she admitted to never explaining why this was a dumbass idea. I could only shake my head.

[branchandroot]

*headdesks* Augh, augh, augh, yes. It's just like the people who want a technological solution to students cheating on tests instead of, you know, actually talking to them about why it's harming them in the long run.