27-07-2025
Being Creative With A.I., for Better or Worse
To the Editor:
Re 'My Summer of Reckoning With ChatGPT,' by Meghan O'Rourke (Opinion guest essay, July 20):
I'm a parent and a public educator, and I agree with Ms. O'Rourke's suggestion that educators need to make bold changes in our curriculum and teaching strategies to 'minimize the temptation to outsource thinking.' Changes like increasing the amount of in-class reading and writing with no access to A.I. (pencil and paper, please!) are a good start.
The result of a great classroom experience is that we, the learners, are changed — not that we generate the product to receive the mark to advance to the next checkpoint. This is not only true of the liberal arts and those privileged enough to study them; learning a trade requires hard-earned struggle and thought that cannot be outsourced.
A.I. tells us the inner world does not matter — or at least, not nearly as much as the exterior world, particularly if it cannot be advertised, packaged and sold. Schools need to provide a refuge from this paradigm.
Seth Torkelson-ReganGrand Rapids, Mich.
To the Editor:
Meghan O'Rourke correctly identifies A.I.'s threat to students' critical thinking when they have ChatGPT complete their writing assignments. I believe we can still teach critical thinking, but we may need to adjust the medium.
One approach is increasing emphasis on oral presentations. As an engineering professor, I noticed that this year, my students' written reports 'magically' improved. But oral presentation skills still required development through multiple iterations and feedback.
Oral communication demands significant mental effort as students organize their thoughts, consider audience perspective and tell a compelling story. As a bonus, students are motivated to improve oral presentations because they care about peer perception.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
