Research and Writing with/on Artificial Intelligence
Fall 2024 | Sec 001 | T/R 2:00-3:15 | T: Ross 2295; R: Ross 1240
Me: Dr. Marc C. Santos
Email: marc dot santos at unco dot edu
Office: Ross 1140B
Student Hours: Fridays 10am to 12:30pm in the Michener Library foyer. Thursday mornings by appointment.
Course Description
Douglas Adams:
I’ve come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
- Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
- Anything that’s invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
- Anything invented after you’re thirty-five is against the natural order of things. (pg. 95)
Last fall, Dr. Roger Austin and I were offered a grant to study artificial intelligence. Here’s what I wrote in that grant application:
As writing instructors, we find ourselves in a tricky place. Academically, we are highly suspicious of AI generated work because it poses the potential to lure less experienced writers with the promise of quicker, easier completion of writing projects while bypassing crucial, formative growth in their writing process. This is the very same growth that is necessary to adequately assess, revise, and direct the output of AI chatbots, which will for the foreseeable future fall short of the human standard of nuanced, responsive writing in many contexts.
Pragmatically, AI is likely to be unavoidable in both academic and professional contexts. Marc, as a professional writing instructor, and Roger, as a first-year writing expert and writing center director, expect that all instructors will need to develop a nuanced approach to integrating, accommodating, and critiquing AI’s place in the academic and professional writing processes.
We believe the English department needs to be a key resource in helping our University community as we learn what AI can and cannot do and what we should and should not expect from AI. We imagine interrelated projects we describe below could serve not only as a pilot for innovative adoption and integration of AI technologies into academic and professional writing classes, but also, via the proposed CETL training session, as a guide for instructors from all disciplines across the University.
In the spring of 2024, I delivered a conference paper that explored in more depth what I consider to be the threat of AI. After surveying some LLM marketing materials that promised to “free” us from the “burden” of writing, I wrote:
To “free” us from the burden of writing is to “free” us from the human condition: that queasy stake of uncertainty about everything including one’s self, being surrounded by unknowable others equally frail and struggling and desiring a solid footing upon which they might stand and build a world. A desire, I would argue, for a technological master “generally smarter than humans” that can eliminate uncertainty with certain, and final, answers.
Footnote: At the same time, I sit here, agonizing word by word. Sentence by sentence. Writing is a struggle. I have been doing it–somewhat professionally–for 21 years (I entered my PhD program in 2003 and published my first article that year). It has gotten easier for me, but it will never *not* be hard. The temptation to let the machine do it is real. No doubt. We desire freedom, and will purchase freedom at virtually any cost. Even techno-tyranny. Kenneth Burke: “The yearning for unity is so great that people are always willing to meet you halfway if you will give it to them by fiat, by flat statement, regardless of the facts” (“RoHB, 205-206).
When I first imagined this course, I thought of it as a theory course–exploring “affordance” or “apparatus theory”–the idea that our thought is shaped by the technologies that we use (I wrote a short piece on this in 2023). How we think and what we think are shaped by the material form and operation of our communicative technologies. We are a function of the tools we use (our tools use us to propagate as much as we use them). “The medium is the message,” as Marshall McLuhan once said. Less of that made its way into this final syllabus than I expected. But we will talk about what it means to be “literate” and discuss whether a tool like ChatGPT furthers or disrupts those meanings (my gut response is the latter, but I am open to exploration and discussion).
I spent this summer *reading* about AI. In addition to Mollock’s book, which we will read together, I read academic articles on AI’s place in our political culture, its affects on professional writing, and its affordances and dangers (more of the later) for first-year and academic writing. But I have not experimented much with it. That’s my goal this semester-to test many of the theories and perspectives on AI with you. I will no doubt be presenting the fruits of our labor this semester at a conference in the spring. I need you to help me have something smart to say, and–knowing the talent of the people in the room–I am confident that I will. Along the way, I hope you gain practical experience with AI technologies that can help you in academic, professional, and/or personal pursuits.
Learning Objectives
Course goals for this semester include:
- Survey of research on AI and professional/public/academic writing
- Develop proficiency composing with AI at several stages of the writing process
- Evaluate AI contributions to editing at different levels
- Practice writing in several genres and modes (academic, professional)
Course Materials
This semester you will need:
- A Google Drive account [all papers and materials will be submitted as Google Docs]
- A ChatGPT / OpenAI account
- Ethan Mollick, Co-Intelligence: Living and Working with AI (2024, Penguin)
Assignments
Here’s what we’ll be doing this semester:
Weekly Write Ups
I refer to these weekly reading responses as “write ups, ” which is indebted to Paul Kameen’s notion of the “ideological autobiography” (articulated in his 2000 collection Writing/Teaching: Essays Toward a Rhetoric of Pedagogy) which I discovered in Byron Hawk’s (2007) A Counter-History of Composition (see Hawk 226). That is to say that while the Write Up is itself just a boring one-page single-spaced reading response, the practice of including it in our pedagogical ecology can be significant.
Veterans of 319 will remember what these “write ups” do: they respond to our readings, offering a brief 2-5 sentence summary of a work’s purpose and content before analyzing a part of it. Analysis can be comparative to other readings or to life experiences–sharing with us whatever our reading sparked in you. I will ask you to share these responses with the class. The purpose is to share: to share perspectives, resonances, dissonances, and ideas. Such sharing develops a kairos that can lead to choric invention (social, situated, unexpected). Sparks fly.
While there isn’t a lot of theoretical readings in the course, we will be reading a few pretty difficult pieces: Ong’s “Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought,” Heidegger’s “The Question Concerning Technology” and Haraway’s “The Cyborg Manifesto” are *not* easy or accessible reads. I expect you to use AI to help you navigate these texts, and to keep a record of the prompts you use and their impact on your experience of these texts.
Generally, the reading load for this class will be about 100 pages a week. I will lighten the load when we are reading those more difficult texts, and add additional reading when we are plowing through more accessible material.
Project One: The Graham Project
For our first project, we will replicate the experiment conducted by Scott Graham and his Rhetoric and Algorithms class at University of Texas. Writing in 2022, Graham concludes that
After reviewing 22 AI essays I asked my students to create, I can tell you confidently that AI-generated essays are nothing to worry about. The technology just isn’t there, and I doubt it will be anytime soon.
So, our first task will be to test the reliability of Graham’s two intertwined claims: that the technology “isn’t there” and that it will not be there “anytime soon.” 2024 is relatively soon, and we have access to better and more diverse AI generators. Along the way, we’ll not only explore AI’s ability to compose, but also its own ability to assess. I am interested in exploring how useful AI might be as a tool to provide feedback.
Project Two: The Eyman Project
Our first project is academic in nature–our second is professional. As with our first, we will be testing an assignment developed by another researcher. This time, we will be working through Douglas Eyman’s assignment “Text Generators in Technical Communication Summarizing Technical Documents” published in the recent TextGenEd collection by the WAC Clearinghouse. That is, we will test a range of AI generators and services on their ability to summarize and edit complicated texts. This time, you will start the project with one of your own texts, running it through three different AI generators to solicit feedback and recommendations. Then you will collaborate with teammates to write a recommendation/feasibility report, in which you will explore the strengths and weaknesses of each generator and make a purchasing recommendation. Finally, we will attempt to use ChatGPT-4 to synthesize the 4 team reports into one mega-report. IT LIVES!
Project Three: The Experiment
You’ll spend week 10 of the semester developing a research proposal for a final capstone project. I have a few articles/ideas for such a project, but you have freedom to develop any project that uses AI to create something. I will ask you to spend 3 weeks creating and then 2 weeks writing about your process and interaction with ChatGPT. That reflection work will incorporate thinking your project and experience through our theoretical course readings.
The Final Paper
For finals week, I will ask you to deliver a short but awesome reflection paper to the class.
A few quick notes about writing and sharing:
- This is *not* an academic writing class. These aren’t “papers” that necessarily have theses and transitions. We’ll talk more about that later. But for now, let’s talk voice. You should use whatever voice feels right. Don’t try and be pretentious, and don’t feel compelled to “invent the University.” I am naturally pretentious, and that will often come through in my writing. But that is my voice, and it doesn’t have to be yours. The audience for these papers is our group. No one else. Write for the room. But really, write for yourself.
- Some people hate public speaking. Too bad. Some people cannot do public speaking. That’s a problem. If you are uncomfortable reading a paper to the class, then you are welcome to record a short video of you reading for Youtube or simply asking me or a friend to read the paper for you. Let me know if my proposed accommodation causes an issue for you or if you have another suggestion.
Assessment
This course uses a form of “ungrading” (Stommel) that I am calling “self-assessment.” Assignments will be assessed on a 0/1 point scale–you will receive a 1 if the assignment is submitted and at least relatively complete. My expectation is that any work you submit will earn a 1. If I believe the work is insufficient, I will provide feedback on what I would like you to address and you will have an opportunity to resubmit.
We are working with an emerging technology–I am less concerned about trying to evaluate whether you are working with it “excellently” and more concerned with providing you a space within which you can mess around, discover, and/or fail. I don’t want you worrying about your grade. This is a 400-level seminar, and I believe the workload for this course will feel every bit like a 400-level seminar. We’ll be reading about 100 pages a week, writing about 750-2000 words a week, spending at least two hours working with ChatGPT a week. If you are engaged and make it through 16 weeks of that, then you deserve an “A.”
During exam week I will distribute a Google Form that asks you to assess your work this semester according to the courses’ learning objectives. The final question will ask you to tell me the grade I should enter into Canvas. I reserve the right to question a grade and/or require revisions, but it is my intention to exercise this right only in the most egregious of situations. To qualify for an A, you must have:
- Completed all write-ups
- Completed all three major projects on time
- Maintained excellent attendance (see below)
Late Work
This class involves a lot of reading and writing. Completing assignments on time is important–it will help you have sufficient time to reflect, think, and invent. However, as with my attendance policy, I recognize that life happens and you might fall behind on an assignment. You can turn in any minor assignment up to 7 days late for full credit. You can turn in a minor assignment for up to 7 days after that for half credit. I will not accept minor assignments turned in more than 14 days late.
University Grading Standards
Weighted and averaged points for the course will be computed according to the following plus or minus grade scale:
97-100: A+, 93-96: A, 90-92: A-
87-89: B+, 83-86: B, 80-82: B-
77-79: C+, 73-76:C, 70-72:C-
67-69: D+, 63-66: D, 60-62: D-
59 or below: F
Attendance
Regular class attendance is important: much of the learning in this class comes from participating in class activities and conversations. That said, I understand that life happens and you might be unable to make it to class. As such, you can miss up to 3 classes without penalty. That’s a low number, but this is a seminar and a lot of the learning in this class will take place via spontaneous discussion and activity.
Given this is a self-assessed class, I have to be weirdly-specific about penalties. So here goes:
- If you miss four classes, then your highest possible grade is an A-
- If you miss five classes, then your highest possible grade is a B
- If you miss six classes, then your highest possible grade is a C
- If you miss seven classes, then you will fail the course
Consider these sick days: you do not have to email me in advance nor supply me with any documentation. I do not excuse absences. Every class you miss will impact your learning in the course. If you are absent, then be sure to check the course notes for assignment updates and notes.
If a significant development occurs that will require you to miss several class sessions, then please email me immediately and let me know. I will work with you to see if we can figure something out. Note that I am not always able to accommodate these situations, though I will do my best.
AI Policy
Many of the assignments on which you will be working on this semester call on you to use AI. We will discuss how to cite AI’s role in that work during those projects.
When it comes to the “write-ups,” you are free to use AI on any part of your writing so long as you document its use. What does this documentation look like? Here’s what I am requesting. If you use AI in your paper, then just write a brief paragraph that describes AI usage (grammatical correctness, style, thesis statement). If you are copy/pasting AI writing in your paper, then put an in-text citation with a reference at the end. Here is the current MLA Style Guidelines for citing AI:
Works-Cited-List Entry
“Describe the symbolism of the green light in the book The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald” prompt. ChatGPT, 13 Feb. version, OpenAI, 8 Mar. 2023, chat.openai.com/chat.
I know virtually everyone in this class. I know you are all smart and capable. I am not looking to police your work so much as to gain insight into how/whether AI technologies can help your writing process.
I do expect your writing to be, well, your writing. If I think that you have passed in a complete copy/paste AI generated reading response, we will have a conversation and I reserve the right to deduct a letter off your final grade. I sincerely hope there is no reason to ever revisit this final paragraph again this semester.
Student Code of Conduct and Academic Integrity
A few quick points:
- Do not plagiarize (representing someone else’s thought or work as your own). If you plagiarize, you will receive a failure on the project. I will report the incident to the Dean of Students. Penalties for plagiarism include failure of a project or the course. My choice.
- Do your best to attribute sources consulted during the research and composing process. This includes multimedia elements such as music, images, or design templates
- If you want to use material submitted to a previous class or “double dip” (turn in material composed in this class to another concurrent class), then you must meet with me to discuss it beforehand
And now some boilerplate that I copy/pasted from somewhere on the internet or maybe a colleague’s syllabus: All members of the University of Northern Colorado community are entrusted with the responsibility to uphold and promote five fundamental values: Honesty, Trust, Respect, Fairness, and Responsibility. These core elements foster an atmosphere, inside and outside of the classroom, which serves as a foundation and guides the UNC community’s academic, professional, and personal growth. Endorsement of these core elements by students, faculty, staff, administration, and trustees strengthens the integrity and value of our academic climate. For a thorough discussion of plagiarism, see the Dean of Students website.
Disability Accommodations
Any student requesting disability accommodation for this class must inform the instructor giving appropriate notice. Students are encouraged to contact Disability Support Services (www.unco.edu/dss ) at (970) 351-2289 to certify documentation of disability and to ensure appropriate accommodations are implemented in a timely manner.
Parental Accommodations
As a parent, I understand that life can come at you fast. If you would miss a class session due to babysitting issues, please don’t. Feel free to bring your child to class.
Equity and Inclusion
The University of Northern Colorado (UNC) embraces the diversity of students, faculty, and staff. UNC honors the inherent dignity of each individual, and welcomes their unique perspectives, behaviors, and world views. People of all races, religions, national origins, sexual orientations, ethnicities, genders and gender identities, cognitive, physical, and behavioral abilities, socioeconomic backgrounds, regions, immigrant statuses, military or veteran statuses, sizes and/or shapes are strongly encouraged to share their rich array of perspectives and experiences. Course content and campus discussions will heighten your awareness of others’ individual and intersecting identities. For information or resources, contact the Division of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, at 970-351-1944. If students want to report an incident related to identity-based discrimination/harassment, please visit www.unco.edu/institutional-equity- compliance.
Title IX
The University of Northern Colorado is committed to providing a safe learning environment for all students that is free of all forms of discrimination and sexual harassment, including sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking. Students who have experienced (or who know someone who has experienced) any of these incidents should know that they are not alone. UNC has staff members trained to support students to navigate campus life, to access health and counseling services, to provide academic and housing accommodations, to help with legal protective orders, and more.
Please be aware all UNC instructors and most staff members are required to report their awareness of sexual violence to the Office of Institutional Equity and Compliance (OIEC). This means that if students tell an instructor about a situation involving sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, or stalking, the instructor must share that information with the Title IX Coordinator, Larry Loften. Larry or a trained staff member in OIEC will contact the reporting students to let them know about accommodations and support services at UNC as well as their options to pursue a process to hold accountable the person who caused the harm to them. Students who have experienced these situations are not required to speak with OIEC staff regarding the incident. Students’ participation in OIEC processes are entirely voluntary.
If students do not want the Title IX Coordinator notified, instead of disclosing this information to the instructor, students can speak confidentially with the following people on campus and in the community. They can connect you with support services and help explore options now, or in the future.
- UNC’s Assault Survivors Advocacy Program (ASAP): 24 Hr. Hotline 970-351-4040 or http://www.unco.edu/asap
- UNC Counseling Center: 970-351-2496 or http://www.unco.edu/counseling
- Psychological Services: 970-351-1645 or http://www.unco.edu/cebs/
Students who are survivors, who are concerned about someone who is a survivor, or who would like to learn more about sexual misconduct or report an incident, can visit www.unco.edu/sexual-misconduct. Students may also contact OIEC at 970-351-4899 or email titleix@unco.edu.
Food Insecurity and Basic Needs
Knowing that food insecurity is experienced at higher rates among college students, UNC offers assistance to students facing food insecurity through an on-campus food pantry. Every UNC student, staff and faculty member is able to visit the pantry once per week and choose up to 10 items at no cost. Items available include non-perishables, perishables and personal hygiene products. There is no reservation required, simply stop by the pantry during open hours. Anyone with a current Bear ID Number is eligible. The Bear Pantry is located in University Center 2166A and is open for regular hours throughout the semester.
Please visit www.unco.edu/bear-pantry for more information. Students who face challenges (i.e., emotional distress, grief and loss, academic concerns, basic needs insecurity, navigating university processes) and believe this may affect their academic performance may contact Student Outreach and Support (SOS), which is part of the Dean of Students Office. SOS will help connect students with appropriate referrals based upon their needs. The Dean of Students Office can be reached at dos@unco.edu or via phone at 970-351-2001.
