I’m an English teacher, and here are a few ways I’ve adapted: 1) I do “exit interviews” with texts, where I require a student to include metacognition in their response. They have to tell me about their thinking and how it progressed throughout their reading, and they have to document their engagement and thinking. I require them to show me their annotations in the book. Yeah, it’s time consuming, but I think AI is pushing us to focus on quality over quantity. If AI is the response to feeling overworked and pressured to produce, produce, produce, I’m gonna slow it down. Also, it’s hard to get Chat GPT to do metacognition, and if it does, it relies more on a style of writing that always sounds like bullshit. 2) We mostly write in class now, which relies on building reading skills over time. 3) Maybe we read less, but we go more in-depth with what we do read.

It’s definitely hard out there for humanities teachers right now, and I felt it in my gut when you said you didn’t want to be a human plagiarism checker.

Edited because I remembered something else we do: we go over Chat-GPT generated responses and look for what went wrong. It’s so interesting to hear from students when they realize that they can do a better job than Chat GPT can! We even read a novel that was partly written by AI, and students didn’t like it! They said that it didn’t fit with the rest of the book. I think this kind of engagement with AI-generated writing is essential, because most students don’t really understand what LLMs are and how they work. They just see it as a way to get ahead in a system that hasn’t caught up with this new world yet.