Writing, Editing, and Generative AI

Back in August, I had the opportunity to hear a short presentation from Heidi Nobles, assistant professor in writing and rhetoric and director of Writing Across the Curriculum at the University of Virginia. The presentation was part of a two-day institute on teaching and generative AI, and Heidi leveraged her background as an editor (as in one who edits books) to provide a different way of thinking about working with generative AI.

When I hear editing, I think of copyediting, but, of course, there are other forms of editing. Heidi pointed us to substantive editing, which involves working with the structure and organization of a manuscript, and developmental editing, which involves helping an author shape their ideas even before there’s a manuscript. I recalled those steps in the process of writing my last book, hashing out the central message and target audience of my book with my editor Jim Lang and receiving very good advice on my chapter arguments from my peer reviewers.

Heidi pointed out that when we ask ChatGPT to polish a draft essay, we’re asking for copyediting. That’s useful, yes, but might generative AI be useful during the substantive or even developmental editing stages of a writing process? Heidi said yes. A chatbot won’t be as good as a human editor, but most writers don’t have access to a human editor, so it’s worth exploring what AI can do.

I invited Heidi on the podcast to share her perspectives on editing and AI, and I was delighted that we also talked about how these other kinds of editing can help us teach our students about writing. Here's just a brief spoiler: When I asked Heidi what we can do to help our students revise their papers with more intention and care, she said that the first step is to not give students any copyedits! I didn't see that advice coming, but it will be advice I follow the next time I teach a writing course.

​You can listen to my conversation with Heid Nobles here, or search for "Intentional Teaching" in your favorite podcast app.

All This

There's a lot of bad stuff happening across higher ed right now thanks to the new U.S. presidential administration. I have many thoughts, but no time to put them to digital paper right now.

I'll just mention that the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, a private funder of science and science education research, just pulled the plug on its Inclusive Excellence grant. That grant was aimed at helping more students pursue careers in science, and it was making a difference across dozens of institutions, including all three of my recent home institutions (Vanderbilt, Mississippi, and Virginia). I believe HHMI is letting grant recipients continue to spend funds they have already received, which means people won't be missing their paychecks next week, but ending a grant before it was contracted to end causes all kinds of problems. And, of course, the work itself is vitally important to both students and our institutions.

Again, lots to say about all this, but I'll leave you with this: I understand that organizations need to move in different directions and set different priorities over time. But cutting programs mid-stream? I don't think that's responsible behavior. It doesn't respect the people who are involved in those programs and the people who benefit from those programs. There are much better ways to handle change.