The use of generative AI tools in the reading-into-writing process: gains, losses and recommendations

Using generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools has recently been deemed acceptable in some university policies, but how does this impact on students’ writing processes? How can we ensure that using GenAI in the writing process does not detract from learning outcomes? In our conference session, we reported on a collaborative project between the Academic Communication Centre at University College London (UCL) and 3 students (studying BSc Bioscience, BSc Linguistics, and MSc International Planning), which explored what was gained and what was lost when incorporating GenAI-driven tools in the reading-into-writing process. We asked students to complete a written assignment from their course using GenAI tools. The project consisted of 3 stages: 1) a pre-task reflection on writing processes and learning outcomes; 2) completion of an assignment using GenAI tools and ongoing diary entries; 3) interviews exploring the students' feelings towards GenAI tools, and their gains and losses experienced during the writing process.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education
Published
2024-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi32.1464
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Natural Language Processing Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.69

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The use of generative AI tools in the reading-into-writing process: gains, losses and recommendations

J. W. Brook, Ayanna Prevatt-Goldstein, Peter Puxon
2 citations
Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education
Natural Language Processing Techniques
0.69
article

The use of generative AI tools in the reading-into-writing process: gains, losses and recommendations

J. W. Brook, Ayanna Prevatt-Goldstein, Peter Puxon
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Using generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools has recently been deemed acceptable in some university policies, but how does this impact on students’ writing processes? How can we ensure that using GenAI in the writing process does not detract from learning outcomes? In our conference session, we reported on a collaborative project between the Academic Communication Centre at University College London (UCL) and 3 students (studying BSc Bioscience, BSc Linguistics, and MSc International Planning), which explored what was gained and what was lost when incorporating GenAI-driven tools in the reading-into-writing process. We asked students to complete a written assignment from their course using GenAI tools. The project consisted of 3 stages: 1) a pre-task reflection on writing processes and learning outcomes; 2) completion of an assignment using GenAI tools and ongoing diary entries; 3) interviews exploring the students' feelings towards GenAI tools, and their gains and losses experienced during the writing process.

Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education(32)
University College London (GB)
University of Reading
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Natural Language Processing Techniques
0.69
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.