Home

All assignments in this class are routinely checked for
plagiarism AND are run through a variety of AI detection programs. Plagiarized
essays and those generated in full or part by ANY AI writing programs (such as
ChatGPT, Textero, Quillbot, Jasper, Ryter, Essaybot, Contentbot, or any others
including essay extender programs or synonym, summarizers, and paraphraser
programs) will receive 0 credit.
Research Paper
In the articles below, you will see arguments both for and
against using Generative AI in education.  In most cases, the articles
suggest a careful adaptation of A.I.–working WITH A.I. in particular
circumstances to enhance but
not  replace student learning.  
See articles below:
“ChatGPT:
Do We Adapt or Resist?”Links to an external site.
“Ethical
Questions about Generative AI”Links to an external site.
“Is
ChatGPT a Threat to Education?”Links to an external site.
If we allow A.I. use to help “enhance” student
learning, how do we do that without compromising higher education, without replacing
the quality and rigor and critical thinking required of college-level
classes?  
To help us figure that out, consider this following scenario:
The CCC English Department is considering whether or not to
allow students use of A.I. in some of classes and college writing
assignments.  Some members of the department argue that the technology
already exists, some students already use A.I. (albeit without explicit
instructor permission), that A.I. might help
certain student populations in different scenarios, and, if implemented
strategically, A.I. might allow students more freedom to work on higher-level,
more meaningful assignments. 
Other professors believe the purpose of college is to teach
students how to think–to read critically, ask questions, collect and analyze
data, develop cogent arguments with persuasive lines of reasoning, which are
supported by facts, research, and evidence from high quality sources.  If
A.I. programs produce assignments, summaries, and essays without students doing
any of the research or thinking or writing for themselves, then they will not
truly learn the critical skills necessary for future education and
employment.  
Using all of what you have learned about
essay writing, and logos, pathos, ethos, write a persuasive argument to the CCC
English Department arguing whether or not A.I. programs should be allowed and
integrated into the department’s assignments and curriculum.  This paper
will be 7-8 pages and requires a counter-argument and a Works Cited page. 
You will need to include at least 5 sources integrated in the text of the
essay.  (You are encouraged to include as many sources from our modules as
you’d like!)
In writing this essay, please make sure to address the
following:
·        
Consider your audience!  They are college-educated professors with Masters and
Doctorate degrees.  What tone and kinds of appeals will work best to
persuade them?  Will hard data/statistics win them over?  Will pathos
and appeals to pity work?  Keep in mind they are college-educated, but
they are also teachers who WANT their students to succeed!  However, they
want their students to LEARN and grow and develop the skills they will need for
future employment and long-term success.  How can you present your
argument convincingly to someone who may oppose your stance?
·        
Within
your essay, how will you, as writer, build ethos for your audience–those key elements of trust, credibility,
experience, expertise?  Where in the essay will you do that?  How
will you do that?  
·        
What
sources, and data, statistics, logical reasoning will you use to help build your
argument?  What information do you need to know about A.I. and college
requirements and college students to support your point?
·        
What
can you use as pathos (emotion) to enhance your argument?  What tone, language, kinds of examples
will help you achieve emotional persuasion for your audience?  If you
intend to use personal experience, will that  persuade your audience, or
might you need to limit how often you can do that? 
·        
If
CCC allows A.I. in college level English courses, how will professors be able
to determine that students have satisfactorily met the different objectives,
learning outcomes, assignment requirements of the course?  If the solution
is for more “hands-on,” “in-class,” “group work”
type of activities, how would that work in an online course?  
·        
If you argue that AI
should be allowed on SOME types of assignments, which ones and why?  How
would you differentiate between positive/productive/allowable use of A.I.
versus assignments where A.I. shouldn’t be used at all?  How would current
assignments and key class objectives and outcomes need to shift in order to
accommodate this change?  Would this require a specific code of conduct, a
college-wide pact?  Does the educational system as a whole need to
change?  If so, how?  How can these changes be implemented without
compromising the integrity of a college degree?
·        
Your paper may also
argue that A.I. use should not be allowed at all in higher
education.  
·        
When contemplating
this question, it’s also useful to think about what YOU can do that A.I. cannot
do–what you bring to your education that no computer can.  What is
authentic to humans and the learning experience that college can better tap
into?  
Your final essay is 7-8 pages, which means you will have
MULTIPLE paragraphs and examples (perhaps even pages) for each major point you
will make.  Below is a quick overview of how to move from PIE paragraphing
to PEEEC paragraphing.  Remember that the process is essentially the same,
but in PEEEC paragraphing, you will dedicate multiple
paragraphs to ONE point whereas in PIE paragraphing, the main
point, explanation, evidence, and connection to thesis happens all in one
paragraph.