This is really helpful. As a writing instructor, it's increasingly becoming expected that I'll have some kind of knowledge / wisdom to impart to first year writing students about these kinds of tools, but my knowledge and wisdom are somewhat limited, in part because there isn't really anything I use it for in my own writing process. I still tend to minimize the amount of my writing that I do in front of a computer screen and don't even use citation management software (when I'm taking notes on a work, I write down the bibliographic information at the top of the page, so then I have it for later when I'm writing the works cited entry). It's really helpful to read a description of how it can be used by someone who has found a number of good uses for it. I also really like the you conceptualize it - the question of whether you would trust a human assistant with the task.
Thanks, Rob. I'm not a digital native by any stretch, but I've found that when I can successfully wrap my head around the tools they can be great.
I do worry a lot about what these tools will do to developing writers. There's a difference between someone like me who has written many articles and two full-length academic books playing around with ChatGPT. I already know how to write and have a clear sense of my goals and voice. My 18 year old students have neither. I don't envy you the task of trying to navigate what's next for these students and writing faculty like yourself.
I appreciate your thoughtful account of your approach to this, Lauren. I myself don't use "A.I." at all. In my 25 years as a philosophy professor, I never used a TA or RA. Early in graduate school I worked as both and decided then that I would never outsource those valuable skills that take a lot of good judgment to anyone else for my own work. You'll certainly get a kick out of my unusual Facebook post this morning I made on this very topic! :o)
Just catching up here after vacation, etc. I really liked your thought-provoking FB post. I probably disagree on some of it in terms of what qualifies as your own words. I wonder how we fit conversations with other people, feedback from reviewers, and so on. I see writing as a deeply social process and there's a lot of social input along the way that's hard to categorize. I wouldn't go as far as Obama to say "you didn't write that" ;) but I might say that I see writing as a much more socially embedded process than you seem to. And that's totally fine.
As an aside, while correlation isn't causation, I lost more subscribers than I ever have before after this post. It could have just been a weird glitch in the algorithm, but I also wonder if many other writers and readers out there share your concerns about the use of AI in the writing space. I'm still mulling a lot of this over.
Thank you for this response, Lauren! I'm sorry to hear that you may have lost subscribers over this post.
What I find especially interesting about your response is that not only am I a philosopher, teacher, and writer, but I am also a professional editor. I thus offer guidance and feedback to others on their writing, all of which they are free to accept or reject--that is, unless they are corrections of spelling, grammar, and style that need to comport with the journal's or publisher's requirements.
I also love having others read and provide feedback on my work. I say, "Wield the red pen!" I never regarded that as a deeply social process, though, because it is not "essay by committee" or co-authorship (though I have co-authored a few pieces and do regard that as a social process that we each need to assent to individually). Ultimately, I am the person who reflects on and chooses whether to take into account any questions, thoughts, or suggestions from others. If I do, I always make sure to thank that person in a footnote for sparking me to think further about a point that I put into my own words. If I occasionally adopt a certain way of phrasing something that comes from someone else's feedback, I place that phrase in quotation marks and footnote that person.
Reflecting more deeply about this, I think that I see two differenecs between this process and the A.I. stuff:
(1) I first do all my brainstorming, outlining, and drafting by myself and then invite others to rake my work over the coals.
(2) Those who are providing feedback on my work are themselves real persons with their own unique, individuals minds at work on my writing. Those are people who I seek out because I know and trust them.
Thanks for the detailed response, Carrie! On point one toward the end, how do you categorize the research and previous reading you've done before you even start writing? That's partly what I think about when I think about how socially embedded writing is. I'm genuinely curious because I love hearing how other writers think about their craft, both in terms of process but also in terms of values.
This is really helpful. As a writing instructor, it's increasingly becoming expected that I'll have some kind of knowledge / wisdom to impart to first year writing students about these kinds of tools, but my knowledge and wisdom are somewhat limited, in part because there isn't really anything I use it for in my own writing process. I still tend to minimize the amount of my writing that I do in front of a computer screen and don't even use citation management software (when I'm taking notes on a work, I write down the bibliographic information at the top of the page, so then I have it for later when I'm writing the works cited entry). It's really helpful to read a description of how it can be used by someone who has found a number of good uses for it. I also really like the you conceptualize it - the question of whether you would trust a human assistant with the task.
Thanks, Rob. I'm not a digital native by any stretch, but I've found that when I can successfully wrap my head around the tools they can be great.
I do worry a lot about what these tools will do to developing writers. There's a difference between someone like me who has written many articles and two full-length academic books playing around with ChatGPT. I already know how to write and have a clear sense of my goals and voice. My 18 year old students have neither. I don't envy you the task of trying to navigate what's next for these students and writing faculty like yourself.
I appreciate your thoughtful account of your approach to this, Lauren. I myself don't use "A.I." at all. In my 25 years as a philosophy professor, I never used a TA or RA. Early in graduate school I worked as both and decided then that I would never outsource those valuable skills that take a lot of good judgment to anyone else for my own work. You'll certainly get a kick out of my unusual Facebook post this morning I made on this very topic! :o)
Just catching up here after vacation, etc. I really liked your thought-provoking FB post. I probably disagree on some of it in terms of what qualifies as your own words. I wonder how we fit conversations with other people, feedback from reviewers, and so on. I see writing as a deeply social process and there's a lot of social input along the way that's hard to categorize. I wouldn't go as far as Obama to say "you didn't write that" ;) but I might say that I see writing as a much more socially embedded process than you seem to. And that's totally fine.
As an aside, while correlation isn't causation, I lost more subscribers than I ever have before after this post. It could have just been a weird glitch in the algorithm, but I also wonder if many other writers and readers out there share your concerns about the use of AI in the writing space. I'm still mulling a lot of this over.
Thank you for this response, Lauren! I'm sorry to hear that you may have lost subscribers over this post.
What I find especially interesting about your response is that not only am I a philosopher, teacher, and writer, but I am also a professional editor. I thus offer guidance and feedback to others on their writing, all of which they are free to accept or reject--that is, unless they are corrections of spelling, grammar, and style that need to comport with the journal's or publisher's requirements.
I also love having others read and provide feedback on my work. I say, "Wield the red pen!" I never regarded that as a deeply social process, though, because it is not "essay by committee" or co-authorship (though I have co-authored a few pieces and do regard that as a social process that we each need to assent to individually). Ultimately, I am the person who reflects on and chooses whether to take into account any questions, thoughts, or suggestions from others. If I do, I always make sure to thank that person in a footnote for sparking me to think further about a point that I put into my own words. If I occasionally adopt a certain way of phrasing something that comes from someone else's feedback, I place that phrase in quotation marks and footnote that person.
Reflecting more deeply about this, I think that I see two differenecs between this process and the A.I. stuff:
(1) I first do all my brainstorming, outlining, and drafting by myself and then invite others to rake my work over the coals.
(2) Those who are providing feedback on my work are themselves real persons with their own unique, individuals minds at work on my writing. Those are people who I seek out because I know and trust them.
Thanks for the detailed response, Carrie! On point one toward the end, how do you categorize the research and previous reading you've done before you even start writing? That's partly what I think about when I think about how socially embedded writing is. I'm genuinely curious because I love hearing how other writers think about their craft, both in terms of process but also in terms of values.