In my research methods course, students are allowed—encouraged—to use generative AI in their project work, while also retaining the option to refuse it. There is one condition: they must document how they use it. Every prompt, revision, discarded output, refusal, and moment of uncertainty goes into a semester-long reflective blog. I designed the course this way because I wanted students to slow down and critically engage with AI-generated outputs rather than treating them as neutral or immediately usable. Instead of simply accepting outputs, students revise prompts, compare iterations, verify claims, rewrite sections in their own voices, and examine the rhetorical…
Recent Posts
- The Sweetland Digital Rhetoric Collaborative Interviews the editors of Computers and Composition
- [Utopia]-in-the-loop in an Emergent Age of Full Automation
- Ghosts-in-the-Loop: Bormann’s Ghost v. AI
- Relational-in-the-Loop Writing: Reframing Rhetorical Load Sharing as a Rhetorical Assemblage
- Accessibility-in-the-Loop: Rhetorics of Resistance, Freedom, and Care
- Operational-Infrastructure-in-the-Loop
- Surveillance-in-the-Loop Writing
- Refusal-in-the-Loop Writing—or, what happened to the field that stood up to TurnItIn, Course Hero, Chegg, and paper mills?