The use of generative AI tools in the reading-into-writing process: gains, losses and recommendations

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi32.1464

Keywords:

generative artificial intelligence, assessment, technology, student support

Abstract

Using generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools has recently been deemed acceptable in some university policies, but how does this impact on students’ writing processes? How can we ensure that using GenAI in the writing process does not detract from learning outcomes? In our conference session, we reported on a collaborative project between the Academic Communication Centre at University College London (UCL) and 3 students (studying BSc Bioscience, BSc Linguistics, and MSc International Planning), which explored what was gained and what was lost when incorporating GenAI-driven tools in the reading-into-writing process. We asked students to complete a written assignment from their course using GenAI tools. The project consisted of 3 stages: 1) a pre-task reflection on writing processes and learning outcomes; 2) completion of an assignment using GenAI tools and ongoing diary entries; 3) interviews exploring the students' feelings towards GenAI tools, and their gains and losses experienced during the writing process.

Author Biographies

Peter Puxon, University College London

Peter Puxon is an associate lecturer and member of the teaching team at the UCL Academic Communication Centre. He works primarily with the Faculty of Mathematical and Physical Sciences to develop the academic communication of students and embed academic literacy development in course programmes. He is particularly interested in exploring ways of collaborating with subject lecturers to improve students’ academic reading practices and scientific writing skills.

Jessica Brook, University College London

Jessica Brook is an associate lecturer and member of the teaching team at the UCL Academic Communication Centre. Jessica works with subject lecturers and course leads to design and deliver a range of provision to support students’ academic communication, predominantly within the Faculty of Population Health Sciences. She has a particular interest in inclusive practice and supporting neurodivergent students in higher education.

Ayanna Prevatt-Goldstein, University College London

Ayanna Prevatt-Goldstein is Head of the UCL Academic Communication Centre at the Centre for Languages & International Education. Her research focus is how academic writing intersects with higher education policy and relates to standardisation, power and difference. She also runs a public seminar series on academic writing and contributes to UCL developments in areas such as academic integrity, widening participation, language and assessment, as well as guidance and resources on the use of generative AI in higher education.

References

Curry, Mary Jane and Hewings, Ann (2003) ‘Approaches to teaching writing’ pp.19-44, in C. Coffin, M. J. Curry, S. Goodman, A. Hewings, T. M. Lillis and J. Swann (eds.) Teaching Academic Writing: A Toolkit for Higher Education. London: Routledge.

Downloads

Published

31-10-2024

How to Cite

Puxon, P., Brook, J. and Prevatt-Goldstein, A. (2024) “The use of generative AI tools in the reading-into-writing process: gains, losses and recommendations”, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (32). doi: 10.47408/jldhe.vi32.1464.

Issue

No. 32 (2024): Special Edition, ALDinHE Conference Proceedings and Reflections

Section

Conference Proceedings

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).