Good policy is derived from a strong, shared set of values. When new contexts arise (such as the emergent technologies of Large Language Models (LLM), Generative AI (GAI), and other synthetic media), it’s important to examine classroom policies and practices to ensure the continued integrity of the curriculum.

These values outlined below are complex and contextual. No single set of policies or classroom resources can embody these values for all our personalities, classrooms, and disciplines. Instead, this Values Statement grounds our adaptations to emergent technology in what’s most important to us.

We share these values intending that they will lead to creating policy with integrity and transparency.

Students develop critical thinking skills in a variety of ways. Critical thinking encompasses information literacy, asking and framing questions (broadly), finding and evaluating sources, and demonstrating the cognitive processes of all stages of writing including brainstorming, drafting, researching, incorporating feedback from others, revising, and editing. 

Writing is contextual and arises from human experience and human intention. Writing has authority and credibility because it’s human and has gone through a carefully considered process of weighing the meaning of what is being communicated, and also what the human audience’s responses might be. To assure full transparency in communicating, machine learning should not be anthropomorphized, and we should avoid using anthropomorphic vocabulary when describing machine learning. The default assumption is that communication/writing from instructors and students will be coming from a human. If otherwise, this should be disclosed.

Students have individual purposes and should develop independence and agency alongside the development of their writing process. This includes decision-making and developing a research process of discovery. Students and instructors have a right to retain ownership of their own material, and should be informed if their data is subject to being collected.

Students should have equitable access to information and resources. Every student comes to the classroom situation with a diverse range of experiences and needs. We meet students where they are, and we strive to provide resources to adequately equip students for success in the classroom.

Curriculum should explicitly address student learning objectives. Student learning objectives should be responsive to the environments—digital and otherwise—in which students are writing. The product of writing assignments have different purposes, such as to communicate to an audience, demonstrate process, show evidence of learning, or any combination of these. Clarifying these purposes can guide students on what tools to use, or not use, in responding to the assignment. That means the purpose of each assignment–whether to develop skills or demonstrate proficiency, for example–should be made clear.

The assessment of assignments should align with the pedagogical purpose of the assignment. For example, if a final product will be assessed according to how it shows evidence of process, that should be clearly communicated to students at every stage of the assignment. Students should be encouraged to keep notes and drafts as evidence of their writing process. Writing assessment should help students understand, develop, and transfer their writing process across contexts and from class to class.

Every step of the writing process is valuable. The product is a stage in the writing process and may not on its own demonstrate learning. Working through multiple stages of the writing process develops critical thinking skills, and tangible evidence of the process may demonstrate learning. The curriculum should enable students to develop and demonstrate human-centered proficiency at every stage of the writing process.

Writing can originate in a solitary or a communal environment, and when it’s shared, it is always a communal activity. The situation of the classroom means that we are developing writing and writing skills with each other as a community, and we should take responsibility for allowing ourselves and others to safely and respectfully grow as writers.

The Writing Department recognizes that the marketplace of emergent technologies sometimes demonstrates values that run counter to ours, making practical application of these values difficult. We also recognize that the university has a responsibility not just to acquiesce to and enable marketplace contexts, but also to create knowledge and prepare students to use, adapt, and create technologies that align with the public good. Advocating for the public good is an effort worth undertaking.

We further suggest that any policy or practice resulting from these values should be based on what we teach students about these emergent technologies as part of our larger digital literacy pedagogy. Our goal is to  enable students to engage critically with digital technologies. We aspire to align our classroom activities and assessment with student preparation, need, and interest. Working together with students, we are committed to providing the resources, support, and guidance they need to flourish both today and tomorrow.