The Revenge of the Poof! Papers: Perfectionism and AI in Student Writing

A funny thing happened in Florida in the late-2000s. In response to the state’s high-stakes and rigidly marked FCAT Writing exam, large swaths of elementary and middle school students generated nearly indistinguishable papers, all beginning with (often a literal) “BANG!” or “POOF!”. Like fields of dandelions springing up after a summer storm, these papers emerged at a unique point in education history, nearly a decade after the passage of No Child Left Behind, en mass. Florida Education Department officials at the time attributed this to teachers having students memorise evocative language aligned to the scoring of the assessment, calling it “rote memorization trying to masquerade as creativity”(“Creativity Goes Poof! on FCATs, Officials Say”, Orlando Sentinel, 2008). Read individually, these papers could seem creative, well-written and even witty. Read one after another, they are a depressing statement on the industrial legacy of American public schooling.

Education systems have continued to invest in professional learning for teachers, assessment, curriculum and curriculum aids which have purported to help students develop their “voice” within the box of rigid writing structures. The Jane Schaffer Method provided weary teachers of writing with a simple yet effective formula beginning in 1995. PEEL paragraphs (point, evidence, explanation, link), ACE (answer, cite, explain), APE (answer, prove, explain) and RAGE (restate, answer, give example, explain) are all examples of formulaic writing supports that many teachers of writing have used in the past decades. These methods have had the positive impact of helping many students achieve greater success on essential writing tasks and assessments, particularly those which are externally marked. There is a social good inherent in the intent of using these structures; they are meant to empower young writers, especially struggling writers, with the means to express themselves clearly.

However, many gifted and high-achieving students, especially those who manifest perfectionistic and teacher-pleasing attitudes and behaviours, may have absorbed these structures so totally that they are now a fundamental part of their writing process, their own “voice” ironically indistinguishable from the training wheels they were meant to have used and shed. We have taught these students to write perfectly according to a formula; their writing is therefore more akin to computer code than the beautiful, often-messy prose of an authentic voice.

Do you know who else writes like a computer?

A computer.

With the rise of ChatGPT and AI, these students may be at heightened risk of false or exaggerated accusations of “cheating” based on imperfect and nascent AI detection software. Parents and teachers should provide all students with a clear understanding of their state, system and school policies around ChatGPT, AI, detection software and (urgently!) the appropriate and ethical use of these tools, in context. Most of all, we must truly empower our young people to develop their own voices- as messy, creative and unique as they may be.

Dr Sarah Bond