Assignment: Generative AI Discussion Post
This is a simple discussion post that can be dropped into an existing asynchronous online writing class. Its purpose is to provide students a venue for doing some practice with generative artificial intelligence without the instructor having to modify an existing course’s structure or major assignments. In my case, I identified a discussion assignment early in the course that itself was a fairly standalone activity, and I swapped this one in for it.
The drawback, of course, is that this doesn’t have as much scaffolding in the reading or elsewhere in the course as other activities. But since the course is so well-designed as it is, I didn’t want to get into the weeds doing a wider revamping. I am hoping it will at least give students some practice working with a generative AI tool and thinking critically about it. As an instructor, I’ve developed a pretty good sense for when I’m looking at AI-generated writing and how it ought to be improved, so here I’m hoping this practice will help students develop that sense for themselves as well.
Please feel free to reuse this if it suits your needs and feel free to reach out to me if you have any suggestions on how this might be improved. I use Microsoft Copilot because it’s supported by my institution, but any other AI tool would work just as well.
Discussion: Writing with Generative AI
Disclaimer: This discussion board invites you to practice using a generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool and evaluating its output. Note that the course's policy on the use of AI as detailed in the syllabus still stands, and remember that individual courses may have different guidelines on when you can or can't use generative AI, if at all.
Always consult your syllabus and, if need be, check with your instructor before using a generative AI tool in your work, so as to avoid allegations of academic misconduct.
Introduction
The popularization of generative AI platforms has caused tremendous ripple effects throughout higher education. In many cases, the immediate response has been concern over easy, mass plagiarism. This concern is warranted, though it is also important to recognize that generative AI isn't going anywhere—it is quickly being incorporated into popular applications, and literacy in this area may ultimately be expected in the workplace.
Some institutions have attempted to balance a recognition of generative AI's ubiquity with the need for students to develop their own core writing skills. Penn State's Program in Writing and Rhetoric has issued its own statement on how it approaches this new technology, and there are even resources online for how you can use Generative AI effectively and ethically in academic writing.
While generative AI isn't deeply integrated into this course, this discussion assignment is intended to give you at least some practice prompting a generative AI application, critiquing its results, and discussing with your classmates the benefits, drawbacks, and ethical implications of these tools.
Your Post
Sign in to Microsoft Copilot.
Ask Copilot to provide you with a 100-word response to a prompt that you might conceivably ask to complete a task in a classroom or workplace setting.
Some examples might include:
Write me a 100-word email asking to meet with a professor about a recent project.
Provide a 100-word summary on recent innovations in nuclear reactor engineering.
Write a 100-word email on why staff meetings should go no longer than 30-minutes.
Look over Copilot's response and think about what you like or don't like about it.
Give Copilot further directions that might help it improve the provided text.
In your Canvas post, tell a brief story about what you asked Copilot to do, how it responded, and how you refined its results. What sounded good or bad in its responses and why? What revision directions got you closer or further from your desired result? What ethical complications might arise from using a generative AI tool in the context that you've chosen?
Discussion Replies
Read your peers’ posts and responses, then choose at least two to respond to. You might comment on a particularly innovative prompt, revision direction, or insightful comment on the tool's ethics and utility.