Don’t Let AI Write Students Out of the Story

I am old enough to have used — or tried to use — a slide rule in high school math, so I remember the kerfuffle over the emergence of handheld calculators. Oh, no, people exclaimed: kids won’t learn their times tables! Indeed, calculators and subsequent tech have changed what kids learn and how they do math. Every advancement in technology has impacted education, for both good and bad. Word processing and text analysis have transformed my own writing and the way I interacted with students’ writing for the better, even as it empowered students to plagiarize more easily — definitely a worse outcome.

My attitude toward emerging tech has always been to embrace what is useful even as I worked to limit any harm. Why, then, do I feel so threatened by the ubiquity of artificial intelligence. I believe the impact of this tech on learning is different. Calculators didn’t replace mathematical learning and processes; they just shifted the labor and focus. When students use AI to write, however, the only meaningful process they might engage is crafting a prompt, and that doesn’t require the deep thinking of crafting their own writing. 

Gallup tells us that “The percentage of high school students who report using GenAI tools for schoolwork is growing, increasing from 79% to 84% between January and May 2025.” (https://newsroom.collegeboard.org) That percentage appears to be growing. More and more students use AI not as a tool for writing, but as a complete substitute for it.

What are those students sacrificing? What does learning to write well offer that is lost with dependence on AI?

My answer? So much… Research supports a multitude of benefits from developing the capacity to write with clarity and effective expression. The cognitive psychologist Dr. Ronald

T. Kellogg considers writing a “technology for thinking.” His article lists key benefits of writing:

  • Deepening knowledge
  • Helping readers retain what they have read.
  • Building executive planning skills
  • Developing metacognition — “the ability to think about our thinking, weigh alternate viewpoints and revise for clarity and style.”
  • Forcing writers to stress-test ideas
  • Allowing the writer to respond to counterarguments and cite sources.
  • Revising as a practice of self-critique and self-improvement
  • Empowering because it allows self-expression
  • Dealing with emotions productively through journaling (www.nytimes.com)

I would add a few more benefits:

  • Writing to learn: the very act of writing can be a tool to for the author to figure out what they’re thinking, to gain more understanding, to examine topics critically, to make connections, etc.
  • Developing voice: great writers develop a recognizable and specific voice, just like many singers. HS student Hadley Benson writes about the program for middle schoolers that she leads. With the help of high school students, these middle schoolers learn and practice public speaking in a safe, supportive environment, culminating in their delivering a public speech. She says they gain confidence when they “believe their own thoughts are worth sharing, even when they come out wrong the first time. Students who feel they have a voice at school are seven times more motivated to learn.” [www.the74million.org)
  • Generating “original” thought: even if there is “nothing new under the sun,” writers who come up with a meaningful idea on their own – before discovering that others have had that idea as well – develop their own thinking and engage with the material in a deeper and more meaningful way. I will never forget the epiphany my remedial students had: they were reading Of Mice and Men and asked me why Steinbeck always referred to a character as “Curley’s wife” instead of giving her a name. When I turned the question back to them, they decided she wasn’t a person in her own right, a powerful discovery they made on their own. Turning everything over to AI will rob students of discoveries like that.  

This long list of the benefits of writing may not be fully realized when students depend on artificial intelligence. We should be wary. Last year, a small study from M.I.T. showed that individuals who wrote in partnership with A.I. chatbots recorded lower brain activity while they wrote, compared with those who worked without chatbots. The writers who used A.I. struggled to remember what, exactly, they had written, and felt little ownership over their work. This long list of the benefits of writing may not be fully realized when students depend on artificial intelligence. We should be wary. Last year, a small study from M.I.T. showed that individuals who wrote in partnership with A.I. chatbots recorded lower brain activity while they wrote, compared with those who worked without chatbots. The writers who used A.I. struggled to remember what, exactly, they had written, and felt little ownership over their work.  (https://arxiv.org). These findings join a growing body of research suggesting that frequent A.I. use can degrade critical thinking.

For students with still-developing minds, the most urgent question, then, is how to protect thinking in a world where it has become so easy to outsource writing.

Dr. Steve Graham, a writing expert and educational psychologist at Arizona State University, asserts that “Intellectual growth occurs at every stage, from brainstorming to fine-tuning a final draft. If writing is thinking, then any part of the struggle that is outsourced to technology amounts to relinquishing some freedom to perceive. How will students ever know what they really think of anything — whether it’s “The Crucible” or A.I. itself — if they ask a machine to spit out an answer for them?” (www.nytimes.com)

Artificial Intelligence can be a useful tool, but it is no replacement for a writer’s own work, and dependence on it can limit personal growth. A Brookings study finds AI undermines educational and social-emotional development, as well as teacher-student trust. “The risks we found are things like shortcutting learning so that you have less cognitive development,” said Rebecca Winthrop, who heads Brookings’ Center for Universal Education and is an author of the report. Their brains are still developing and school should ideally help them practice critical thinking and “sustained engagement with challenging material.” Yet for most young people, AI isn’t a “cognitive partner” but a surrogate. It doesn’t accelerate their development — it diminishes it via cognitive offloading. The result, researchers say: declining skills across the board. (www.the74million.org2)

Teachers can lead students to use AI as an appropriate tool for many stages of the writing process and preparation for it: brainstorming, initial feedback on drafts, identifying gaps in thinking, explaining complex ideas, offering multiple perspective, etc. None of these replace the students’ own synthesis and expression.  

Michael J. Coren says it better than I ever will:

“AI may be making our work better. There’s new evidence it’s making our thinking worse.

When AI tools are accurate — and they get better every month — the gains can be profound. The costs are less obvious but could be just as real: a steady erosion of our natural intelligence.

Imagine hiring a personal trainer. Your goal is to get stronger. But when you go to the gym, you tell your personal trainer to lift the weights for you.

The next hour is a blur of motion as “you,” via your hired muscle, lift more than ever before in your life. Each time you call out another set, the trainer lifts hundreds of pounds with perfect form. Having never broken a sweat, you inscribe your name on the building’s wall of fame.

That, in a sense, is what many do with AI when they direct it to solve the algebra equation, draft the client memo or write the code achieving the task at hand, but eroding their own ability to.” (www.washingtonpost.com)

The Tech Backlash

Whether it’s Jeremy Adams, a high school social studies teacher, writing about his students’ fatigue with the overdose of technology in their lives or the Gallup survey of 14-29-year olds that shows they are becoming “increasingly skeptical of — and downright mad at — AI, ” (www.the 74million.org), a tech backlash seems to be building momentum. The Gallup poll quantifies the change clearly: “Gen Zers’ strong agreement or agreement that they feel excited about AI has dropped 14 percentage points to 22%, while hopefulness has fallen nine points to 18%, and anger has increased nine points to 31%. At the same time, anxiety about AI is steady at 42%.” (https://news.gallup.com/poll)

A senior education researcher at Gallup, believes there might be a link between recent revelations about the harmful nature of social media and AI-related distrust. Zach Hrynowski points out that many of the respondents came of age just as former surgeon general Vivek H. Murthy called for a warning about its use. “Year over year, among that super user group, they’re much less excited, they are much less hopeful — and they are more angry,” he said. “So this is not a case of some people who are adopting it and loving it and some people who are just avoiding it and feel negatively about it.” He goes on to say that Gen Z is keenly aware of the risks of technology in general, “whether it’s social media, whether it’s AI or screen time.” (www.the74million.org/)

Examples of this discontentment abound. In May, the 2026 graduating class of the University of Central Florida booed a real estate development executive whospoke about how “the rise of artificial intelligence is the next Industrial Revolution” and about “living in a time of profound change.” (www.theguardian.com) The same month, when pro-AI  Big Machine Records CEO Scott Borchetta said, “AI is rewriting production as we sit here”,  Middle Tennessee State University graduates jeered. (the-independent.com) Glendale Community College in Arizona used AI to read graduates’ names and many were skipped. President Tiffany Hernandez acknowledgement that the school was using AI to read names for the ceremony “was met with resounding boos.” (nbcnews.com) Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was also booed by students as he spoke about the rise of artificial intelligence during his speech at University of Arizona’s graduation ceremony. (bbc.com)

Students have reason to be skeptical about technology and its impact on them. AI threatens their job plans and hopes, social media has been shown to be harmful to their psyches, and technology has too often failed its promise to improve our educational system. According to two new reports, schools that retreat from AI create “’the worst of both worlds’ — students who can neither think independently nor use AI effectively,” while schools that embrace AI run into a wide array of problems and misfires. Furthermore, many educators acknowledge that “AI is currently being thought of as a productivity tool for the education system that we have, rather than a tool to radically improve teaching and learning and outcomes for kids,” said Robin Lake, Executive Director of Center on Reinventing Public Education. (www.the74.million.org2)

There is another path. Author and expert on student-centered learning, Stephanie Malia Krauss assures us, “‘We don’t have to remove all tech…We need to remove toxic tech’ and bring back play and adequate sleep.” She considers any other approach an empty gesture. Krauss considers tech toxic if it keeps kids from what they need to be happy and healthy, to learn and develop. But she supports what she calls “humane tech”:  technology that actually assists or amplifies the ability to tap into the essentials that keep us healthy and happy. She decries the approach of schools that see the solution as removing all tech for two reasons: that prevents the limits of humane and productive technology, and it allows us to ignore what she describes as “the other ‘dangerous weather conditions’ that I talk about — being overtapped, overworked, and overwrought, really afraid for our lives, safety issues that students feel.” (www.the74million.org3)

Jeremy Adams is right. Technology is valuable as a supplement to teachers themselves, but it must not replace them. He says it better than I ever could:

This is why — especially in this era — the humanity of teachers and the personal vitality of our classrooms are essential. The voices of instruction our children hear should be the voices of teachers who know and care about their students — not Alexa, not Siri, not some anonymous digital interface designed to maximize engagement rather than human flourishing.

Eye contact. Conversation. Personal relationships. No code or product required.

The kids know this. The kids want this.

Shame on us if we fail to give it to them.

(www.the 74million.org)

Reinventing High Schools for the Future

If you’ve read my blog before, you probably already know that I’m a passionate fan of problem-based learning experiences and real-world, hands-on learning. These approaches help students learn to work collaboratively for a meaningful purpose, to think critically to justify their solutions, to build schools that focus on real-life skills integrated with academic content, and to prepare for a future ever more uncertain.

Recently I’ve collected an array of schools that do just that. Each has a different focus, but all of them value the life skills their approaches develop. For example, the Grand Rapids Public Museum School (GRPMS) has learners work in small and collaborative cohorts co-taught by teachers. The community is their classroom, and their mission is to “use place-based design thinking and the museum context to create learning experiences that develop confident, creative, and competent thinkers, doers, and leaders.” They have an impressive list of core competencies as goals: “Read Critically; Reason Quantitatively; Learn Independently; Lead Inquiry; Explore Social Phenomena; Communicate Effectively; Collaborate on Teams; Build Community; Design Solutions; Develop Self-Knowledge; Cultivate Well-Being; and Think and Act Globally.” (https://grps.org/schools/high-school/gr-museum-hs/) At this school, housed inside the Grand Rapids Public Museum itself, students “help museum staff collect, process, and curate new materials in a design lab where they play a role in designing and updating existing exhibits.” They’ve found artifacts like a spacesuit from an Apollo mission and a flapper dress from the 1920s, and they’ve recorded interviews about the artifacts and created podcasts. (https://xqsuperschool.org/where-we-work/grand-rapids-public-museum-school) At this school the content is integrated across subject areas, and classroom activities are blended with community-based experiential projects. How powerful that approach must be!

Another example, Elizabethtown High School is the only high school in its northeast Tennessee district, in a region hit hard by opioid epidemic and poverty. Teachers there invited a sociology class to design a school that could earn an XQ Super School grant.  As a result, they added two new classes the following school year, “Community Improvement” and “Entrepreneurship.” Students were able to work in the community; build relationships with government, non-profit, and business leaders; and start their own community project or business. One sociology class “investigated and helped solve a cold case from the 1980s, leading the authorities to identify the murder suspect.” They started in 2018, and subsequent students continued “investigating links between that crime and a series of murders. In 2024, their work became the subject of iHeart radio’s hit true-crime podcast series ‘Murder 101,’ now set to become a feature-length film.”

Other students there have found their own opportunities to make a difference. A student is now liaison to the local school board, and the at the prompting of students, the school has a Cyclone Student Center where students can find school resources and college information. (https://xqsuperschool.org/where-we-work/elizabethtown-high-school) Yet another student took on painting murals in the community during her senior year, even though she knew nothing about it prior to that effort. As an alumna, she still leads this ongoing project that’s transforming the downtown. Another student learned how to network and build relationships to make art “a viable business endeavor while providing a public service.” (https://ehs.ecschools.net)

These schools are not alone in their reinvention of high school. Crosstown High in downtown Memphis, a charter school with about 480 students, is sited within a one-million-square-foot landmark with over 40 business and agencies. It recruits students from all over Memphis who then learn “through projects, such as analyzing pollution in local soil and its correlation to cancer rates.” (https://xqsuperschool.org/where-we-work/crosstown-high) 

The learning framework at Crosstown High is action-based:

  • Center learning around authentic, real-world problems
  • Incorporate student voice and choice
  • Build in feedback, revision, and public exhibitions
  • Align projects with both academic content and transferable skills

(https://crosstownhigh.org/adult-learning)

In 2024, award-winning documentary filmmaker Lee Hirsch premiered “The First Class,” a documentary that goes inside Crosstown High to tell the story.

Check out Thomas A. Edison High School is an anchor school among the 100-plus city high schools participating in FutureReadyNYC, a consortium for career-connected learning. Their students choose from thirteen different career tracks that allow them to seek internships and earn industry certifications. They can also earn college credit. The school focuses on developing five essential skills—communication, collaboration, giving and receiving feedback, design thinking, and professionalism. That focus guides classroom work, with students and teachers collaborating to co-design curricula suited to the modern world and workplace. For example, an English class may include a student-run theater. (https://xqsuperschool.org/where-we-work/thomas-edison) They don’t focus on career skills in place of academics; they integrate the two. Their vision: “Thomas A. Edison Career and Technical Education High School envisions empowering every student to become a leader of tomorrow by excelling academically, technically, and civically through strong collaboration among faculty, students, parents, and community partners.” (https://www.taehs.org)

Take a look at Brooklyn STEAM Center, a school that “delivers innovative, industry-informed experiences that empower students—treated as young professionals—to shape their futures. (www.spacesmith.com) The Brooklyn Navy Yard behind the school hired Spacesmith, a design firm keyed to each client’s mission, to expand it. As a result, “school leaders and contractors, along with architects and interior designers from Spacesmith, put the entire high school body in the driver’s seat to design their future.” Already a bastion of student-centered learning, the school sought student input both pre-design and during design and construction. Students played a central role in designing quieter and more private spaces, adaptable classrooms, acoustic and health-grade materials, and glazed classroom entrances enhance transparency and connection. They learned a whole new level of advocacy and collaboration. (https://schoolconstructionnews.com)

My own students experienced this kind of learning in my problem-based learning classroom. Even as they worked for the school, public and private agencies, and a Chicago law firm to solve real-world problems, they met curriculum standards and developed academic skills. You can read all about it in Tales Told Out of School, my teaching memoir.

At a time when students are so disengaged and often not even present, offering learning opportunities that prepare them for the future is an invaluable approach. American public schools suffer from inertia, and change is somehow always harder than it should be. It’s up to all of us – students, parents, teachers, taxpayers, citizens – to demand that change occur now.

Maine Is onto Something

I stumbled onto a program in Maine that may become a national model. Now used in 84 high schools (about 2/3 of all Maine high schools), Jobs for Maine Graduates “teaches high school students 30 ‘soft’ or ‘durable’ skills — including communication, leadership, goal-setting, and adaptability — and awards badges to students who master them.” (https://www.the74million.org)

Created by the Maine state legislature in 1993, this program initially focused on at-risk students. Officials are now expanding this approach in a separate non-profit, GenUS. It starts in middle school with practice of simple skills like accountability, budgeting, and digital safety. High school students can earn “Micro-credentials” by submitting “Evidence of Learning” that is reviewed against clear rubrics; successful demonstrations are awarded as digital badges with embedded metadata, making skills visible, portable, and recognized by colleges and employers. “Aligned with learning standards, Maine’s Economic Strategic Development Plan, and national frameworks, Micro-credentials form the building blocks that stack into larger Credentials of Value within the GenUS Competency to Credential Model.” The goal is to expand this program nationally. (https://gen-us.org/)

Maine also has an Extended Learning Opportunity program [ELO] “to help Maine youth gain a better understanding of their career opportunities, acquire valuable foundational and 21st Century skills, as well as create meaningful connections to employers in our state.” These hands-on experiences, which emphasize community-based career exploration, take place outside of the traditional classroom, and students can earn elective or core credit. “These programs include paid work experiences, expanding educational opportunities in rural Maine, work skills development, and increasing engagement of otherwise disengaged youth. ELO Expansion Grants totaling $7.1 million have been awarded for 38 ELO programs across Maine covering 13 of Maine’s 16 counties since 2022.” (www.maine.gov/)

By 2025, Maine DOE grant-funded ELO programs have seen:

  • 3,000+ core and elective credits earned.
  • 6,000+ student participants.
  • 3,000+ new school-employer partnerships.
  • 8,000+ community and business engagements.

(https://mainedoenews.net)

Yet another program launched in 2022: the Maine Outdoor Learning Initiative is “a statewide effort to connect Maine’s young people to the outdoors through engaging, hands-on learning opportunities. In its first two years, more than 2,500 students have participated in programs ranging from hiking and kayaking to farming and forestry.” An expansion grant in 2024 increased its reach to about 4,000 students. (https://content.govdelivery.com)

Maine also has an apprenticeship program for learners 16 years of age and over that has grown dramatically. “In 2019, 757 registered apprentices, or 26% of the total, were ages 16–24. By 2025, that number had more than doubled to 1,591, representing 42% of all apprentices statewide.” It is a work in progress. While areas like construction, manufacturing, healthcare, education have thrived, the state lacks a consistent set of benchmarks applicable to all industries and a coherent statewide strategy for employer engagement and youth recruitment. (www.maine.gov) To address those concerns, Maine has been accepted as one of the ten states to participate in The Future Ready Apprenticeship Center as an “Apprenticeship America” center. (www.careerwiseusa.org)

More localized programs exist, too. Career Access through National service and Outdoor Education, or CANOE, “will offer classroom instruction, experience through service and in-person training modules with Maine-based outdoor businesses and professionals… to create pathways into and to expand year-round outdoor recreation jobs in central and western Maine, in fields such as fishing, whitewater guiding, trail building and maintenance, outdoor business, retail, manufacturing and hospitality.”  Because jobs in rural Maine are scarce and because the outdoor recreation industry is a major contributor to Maine’s economy, this program aims to equip participants with the skills they need “to access good jobs while advancing the region as a four-season outdoor recreation hub.” (https://mainebiz.biz)

We know that too many American youth suffer from anxiety and depression. Today’s youth have grown up during a pandemic, an epidemic of school shootings, and a breakdown of norms and institutions. They are battered by the threats of polarization, climate change, the impact of AI, misleading social media, etc. We know that too many aren’t hopeful about the future. Why don’t more states develop the kind of leadership that Maine is modeling. We may not be able to solve all the problems that bedevil them – and all of us – but we can show them a path that leads to a more hopeful future. We can offer them more agency. We know how. It’s time for us to make it happen.

Changing the World, One Student at a Time

Too much bleak news distorts our hope for the future. I’ve been collecting stories about youth who make a difference, and I’m ready for some good news – aren’t you?

Remarkable teens out there challenge the status quo, seek innovation, and work to ignite change. Some are famous already: Greta Thunberg’s quest to educate people about climate change, Malala Yousafzai‘s fight for education of girls in Pakistan, even Sal Kahn, who founded the  free online non-profit educational platform Khan Academy years ago.

But there are many others toiling in relative obscurity. Simmi Sen, a high school senior from Vancouver, WA, founded the clothing brand Tints Streetwear to help women in Bangladesh and India get vocational and educational training that could break the cycle of poverty. (https://tintsstreetwear.com/) When he was a freshman at Harvard, Sahil Sood founded HYPE, a health care non-profit that distributed money and led to his current role as the International Vice President of HOSA-Future Health Professionals, a nonprofit career technical organization that aims to help students pursue careers in healthcare. (https://www.arielfoundation.org/mr-sahil-sood/ – :~:text=Sahil Sood is a youth,prominent issues in the community.) A victim of Lyme disease as a child, Olivia Goodreau founded the LivLyme Foundation to provide financial support to families, fund research, and provide education and awareness. (https://livlymefoundation.org/)

There are many others. As a high school student, Radhika Goyal founded the nonprofit TechPower4All to break gender and socioeconomic barriers in technology. (https://techpower4all.org/) High school student Alex Chen Alex Chen launched Youth for Finance, the largest youth-led financial literacy nonprofit organization in the U.S., with over 75 registered school chapters, 3,000 members, and four finance events hosted with more than 400 attendees. (https://www.youthforfinance.org/) When she was only 18, Neha Shukla was a New York Times-featured young inventor, chair of the World Economic Forum’s Generation AI Youth Council, and the bestselling author of Innovation for Everyone: Solving Real-World Problems with STEM and A Kids Book About AI. (https://www.neha-shukla.com)

Still more: To deal with her own depression and an eating disorder, Emily Bhatnagar founded For Love & Buttercup, collecting tens of thousands of books for sick children and schools in economically disadvantaged communities. (https://www.forloveandbuttercup.com/) When she was only eight years old, Sammie Vance  launched the Buddy Bench project, collecting plastic bottle caps to turn into benches that promote kindness and inclusion at schools. Her eco-friendly project encourages kids to make friends while also helping the planet. (https://sammiesbuddybenchproject.com/) Two years ago, after taking a sixth-grade programming class at his San Francisco private school, Jacob Shaul wanted to share his passion with students at other schools.  Despite a lack of enthusiasm from most school administrators, he managed to launch Mode to Code to introduce computer programming to middle schoolers. Mode to Code now partners with 30 institutions, offers classes in other countries, and is teaching senior citizens in the Bay area. (https://www.modetocode.com/)

There are so many stories like these – an internet search offers profiles of youth making a difference. Many other stories go unnoticed, but they matter. There’s even an organization to support these efforts called “Do Something.” Founded 31 years ago, their mission is to fuel young people to change the world by making volunteerism as cool as sports for young. They have over 1 million active members ages 13-25 committed to leading the change they want to see. https://dosomething.org/)

These youth should inspire us. Their leadership shows us what’s possible. They may be extraordinary, but every teen has potential to innovate, to support their community, to make a difference. What can – and should – we do to motivate more young people to follow their lead?

For years I advocated for a senior service project. I saw first-hand how my problem-solving class, which exposed my students to service-learning projects of both my and their design, transformed their commitment to others. At a time when so many of our students seem disconnected if not downright alienated, why don’t we lead the way?

AI’s “Jagged Intelligence”

If you’ve read my earlier blogs about Artificial Intelligence and teaching, you know that I’m convinced it’s here to stay, that the questions we should be answering are how can we use it to improve teaching and how can we limit the harm it can do. I don’t pretend to have the answers, but I’m committed to the questions and exploring our options.

Recently I had the privilege of reading Mason Broxham’s blog on Riddance called “The Accountability Gap.” As someone who believed that guardrails are our best hope to limit harm, I was startled to read, “At Riddance, we’ve observed a pattern in our investigations: When two or

more AI systems overlap, the guardrails designed to reduce harm and prevent Terms of Service (ToS) violations stop working like they should.” (www.riddance.ai) He goes on to explain that this is a structural phenomenon. Because AI is sometimes “stitching together AI scenes that were not necessarily problematic in isolation,” and because platform moderation is automated, AI is not capable of recognizing the harmful content that evolves from these patchwork efforts.

“The AI that made the content had no mechanisms in place to understand the harms it perpetuated, and the AI moderating the content had no general concept of what those harms look like in the first place,” he argues. Human beings make decisions in a context that informs those choices. Humans live in a “real, messy world of interconnected reasons and norms” that informs their “decision-making calculus.” AI models lack this kind of overall context, creating what Broxham calls the “accountability gap.”

This thunderbolt struck terror in my generally optimistic vision. If guardrails cannot create real accountability, what can educators do? I posed the guardrail issue to my husband and sons, all of whom work/worked in tech. In the AI arms race, one son sees a dire future while the other works on building better guardrails. My spouse argues that “humans using AI will probably be able to work around the above guardrails. Furthermore, immoral builders of an AI system can just not put in needed guardrails. All this means is that just like before AI, humans will be able to be immoral and illegal even using AI.” My pessimist son lists tools with capacities that keep me awake at night.

I struggle to maintain some optimism in the face of these discussions, and the inertia of education and the overwhelming power of AI make me wonder if we’re doomed. I don’t have an answer. I do know that we’re failing to ask enough questions, to bring together enough human minds to counter this trajectory. But we cannot afford to wait. I hope that people smarter about this than I am are doing more than I currently know… We need them to.

Reading Matters, Redux

I am an avid reader, devouring books at an even more rapid rate now that I’m retired. I have read before sleep since I was a little girl, and now I have the luxury of reading during the day as well. Books sustain me, they entertain me, they show me new worlds and new worldviews. I cannot imagine a life without reading.

Sadly, I have become a unicorn. Last September I blogged about the dramatic decrease in reading. The stats are compelling. The data from the National Endowment for the Arts’ 2022

Survey of Public Participation in the Arts (SPPA), shows the regression of reading as a pastime.

(www.arts.gov)

This fiction-reading rate was the lowest in the history of the SPPA, a survey that goes back more than three decades. Daily reading for pleasure in the US has experienced a sustained decline, dropping 40% over the past two decades. (Ibid.)

Those stats are skewed, though, because they offer an average rather than a mean, so heavy readers skew the percentage upward. Consider these stats:

  • 40% of Americans don’t read a single book per year.
  • 27% of Americans read no more than four books per year [even when digital, audio, and print formats are included].
  • The median American read two books in 2025. The average reader clocked in with eight. To put it starkly? 19% of American adults did 82% of the country’s reading. (https://lithub.com)

Students don’t read for fun as much as they used to, either.

(www.the74million.org)

On March 19, 2026, my favorite Chicago Tribune columnist, Heidi Stevens, made yet another argument for reading: “Books are little empathy gardens, feeding and growing the stuff that makes us feel, makes us care, makes us human.” (www.chicagotribune.com) She references neuroscience at Emory University (https://esciencecommons.blogspot.com) to support this claim. She reminds us that books are a way to walk in someone else’s shoes, to imagine their lives and learn to care about them.

In a new study from the University of Florida and University College London, experts affirm this value of reading: “Reading for pleasure has long been recognized not just as a tool for education, but as a means of supporting mental health, empathy, creativity and lifelong learning.” (https://news.ufl.edu)

Stevens acknowledges that current English curricula may not be designed to foster a love of reading, and I agree. We need to meet students where they are before we can lead them to the texts we so value. We should include more appealing choices because we have never needed to encourage reading more than we do now, in this time of division and lack of empathy. Stevens writes,

Because empathy doesn’t just seem like the best way forward right now. It seems like the only way.

What better way to pivot and heal from a chapter like the one we’re in now, a chapter marked by constant cruelty and chronic chaos? What better way to recoil, reflexively, from the next leader who comes along behaving like the one we have now? (Ibid.)

Last September, I wrote, “Reading well develops critical thinking skills, grows vocabulary, and makes us better writers. It introduces us to wider worlds and other ways of being. It helps us figure out who we are and what we believe. Why would we settle for less?” All of that is true. Let’s add a piece that’s more critical now than ever, though: let’s read widely so we may rediscover our shared humanity and rebuild an inclusive and welcoming society.

Will A.I. Triumph?

I am mortified! The New York Times posted a quiz, “Who’s a Better Writer: A.I. or Humans?” They offered five pairs of writing samples in a variety of styles and genres. They asked A.I. to “to choose an existing piece of strong writing and then craft its own version using its own voice.” Readers then indicated their preference for each pair. (nytimes.com)

Certain that I could tell the difference, confident that A.I. could not have as strong a voice, I plowed through the quiz quickly. I was wrong. I choose more A.I. than human-written passages. Even my scientist spouse did better than that!

What happened? I can blame the small sample, the particular genres chosen that don’t happen to be my favorite, or even the stars not aligning… but I think the truth is that A.I. has made huge progress in writing effectively.

So, confession over, what are the implications for writers and the teaching of writing? I’m going to switch gears here: instead of offering evidence-based and cited information, I’m going to share my own musings.

Efforts worth considering:

  • Writers have been reading. Our kids have not been reading. We must do more to foster the habit of reading, especially the reading of good writing and of passages longer than sound bites.
    • Resurrect the pattern of Silent Sustained Reading using printed books for young students to build the habit of reading and to improve attention spans.
    • Revise book choices in school to include works with more appeal alongside some of the canon.
    • Consider using excerpts of longer works.
    • Develop book clubs in classrooms where students choose what to read more freely and then “sell” their choices to their classmates.
  • Let go of formulaic writing like the five-paragraph essay. That’s exactly the kind of writing that A.I. can do, perhaps even better than most of us. Instead, look for more meaningful writing tasks that depend on the author’s voice.
  • Teach the concept of author’s voice and of original work. Perhaps start with music and have students identify singers whose voice is instantly recognizable; then play with writing samples. Perhaps offer a quiz like the one the New York Times provided, but choose strong works likely to have an appeal over the A.I. version.
  • Provide more writing time in class without access to technology tools. If students are using tablets or laptops, turn off the internet access temporarily to limit access to technology tools like A.I.
  • Use a writing workshop approach and portfolio grading to show that the process of writing matters and helps writers produce better finished works.
  • Teach students to use A.I. to assist them instead of replacing their own efforts:
    • Brainstorming tool
    • Sounding board – let it play devil’s advocate to make the opposite case in a persuasive piece, for instance.
    • Help with character development and word building.
    • After developing one’s own outline for a piece, ask it for one and use additional ideas for scaffolding.
    • Feed a draft into A.I. and ask it to create an outline – that will show disorganized and disconnected parts.
    • Help with sentence variety by asking it to evaluate and improve variety in sentence length, type, and openings.
    • Help with transitions.
    • Identify a specific, desired tone like “conversational” and ask A.I. to revise the piece in that tone.
  • Show students A.I. written passages riddled with misinformation and passages that are badly written as exemplars of what’s wrong with using A.I. in place of their own writing.
  • Teach students to write effective and specific prompts for A.I. Not only will they get more out of their A.I. collaboration, but that in itself is a form of writing that will help them improve their clarity and focus.

We have been using technology to improve writing since the advent of personal computers and the internet. Spellchecks, grammar checks, and internet research are old hat. More sophisticated programs have offered tools to evaluate and improve readability, sentence variety, etc. Before the turn of the century, the high school where I taught for my last 24 years was the beta site for AT&T’s writing analysis program, Writer’s Workbench. I had my writers run their drafts through the analysis, then turn in their first draft along with the analysis and their revision. I saw huge growth for many of them. I know we can figure out how to use these tools for good.

And I know that we have to figure that out. We don’t have a choice. I graduated high school before most of the technology that students now take for granted. I didn’t have a calculator and needed to depend on a slide rule (which, I admit, I never fully mastered). I wrote lots of papers in high school and over 80 in college, all of which were drafted longhand on yellow legal pads with arrows and asterisks to my revisions, before most of them were typed on a manual typewriter. I got my first electric typewriter in college, my first computer in 1981. I have watched the inevitable progression of tech into every aspect of our lives. I helped promote that progression by having a paperless problem-solving classroom in the 1990s where students used Palm handhelds, a web target to share files, a classroom computer, and CDs to turn in their work. I commented on and graded their work directly on their CDs. I responded to their writing in the computer lab in real time, and I had my writers turn in their portfolios digitally. Instead of fearing the constant new opportunities, I worked to harness them

A.I. is here. It isn’t going away. Are we brave enough, determined enough, smart enough to figure out how to harness it? I certainly hope so!

“The Future Is High School”

One of my favorite resources, XQ “exists to transform high school in America so every student graduates ready for the world they’re entering—prepared to thrive in college, career, and life.” Having spent most of my career working in and with high schools, I remain convinced that they are not only ripe but also overdue for systemic reform. So it was with bated breath that I read XQ’s new policy report, “The Future Is High School.” (policyactions.xqinstitute.org)

XQ proffers ten specific policy changes. For each they specify what the change does, why it matters, and what the criteria should be for its implementation.

Two of the policies have had my support for years. One involves identifying the Core Competencies necessary for high school graduates. XQ argues that academic knowledge and skills matter but that “today’s graduates need a more expansive toolkit that includes timeless, transferable skills like communication, problem solving, and critical thinking.”

I’ve written before about my belief in the “Essential Qualities of a Glenbard Graduate” that my district developed decades ago. After a hiatus, this revision appeared in 2019: “● Communicates – A graduate communicates effectively in a variety of ways and understands their audience. ● Thinks Critically – A graduate needs to identify problems and find multiple ways to solve them. They also examine and challenge assumptions and make decisions based on evidence.  ● Embraces Diversity – A graduate has empathy for others, respects diverse backgrounds and seeks varied points of view to deepen understanding. ● Creates – Our graduates create solutions to real world problems. They also generate original ideas, solutions and products and are open and responsive to new ideas and perspectives.  ● Collaborates – More than just working with others, they take responsibility to work together for a common goal. They also receive, provide and learn from constructive feedback. ● Is Self-Empowered – Graduates have a growth mindset and build strong relationships. They advocate for themselves and have realistic goals.” (www.glenbard87.org) I love this more proactive version and wish all high schools would develop similar profiles for their graduates. Focusing on what students can and should be able to do is far more powerful than measuring specific content knowledge, especially at a time of information glut and information growth. Competencies like this encourage lifelong learning skills and adaptability.

The second policy I’ve long supported is the use of Mastery-Based Credits. In this system, students earn credit for what they know and can do rather than just how many hours they’ve been in class. Although a surprising number of states [Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Rhode Island] allow this approach, and still others allow a capstone project or other demonstration of mastery, too many states still depend upon Carnegie Units. (https://reports.ecs.org) Introduced in 1906, these units simply measure 120 hours of “seat time” regardless of the amount of learning. (www.carnegiefoundation.org) The passage of time is not a meaningful measure, and I sincerely hope more states will adopt a mastery-based approach.

I’m also a fan of XQ’s policy on Internships and Apprenticeships. They argue that rigorous, real-world learning happens everywhere, not just in the classroom, and that these opportunities “enable students to explore potential career pathways, gain valuable workplace experience, and graduate with the knowledge and competencies necessary for success after high school.” I couldn’t agree more. Many of the students who joined my “Tech Squad” in high school, helping faculty navigate newer forms of technology, got internships in high school that led them to their careers. I’d also advocate for another program my district had for several years: rotating faculty members accompanied groups of students to workplaces to learn about employers’ expectations/needs and about opportunities for life after high school. So many students found that eye-opening and motivating. Hearing businesses extol virtues like teamwork, lifelong learning, and a good work ethic was far more powerful than anything we teachers could promote.

And I love that XQ recognizes the need for Professional Development [PD]for staff so they can implement these changes effectively. States should require better PD for pre-service teachers, fund ongoing PD for existing faculty, and publish resources that provide models of excellence and guidance. I would add teaching coaches and mentors within the school.

I also support Next-Generation Assessments that “that widen the lens on learning to reliably measure mastery of real-world skills like creative problem-solving, alongside academic content.” Multiple choice tests and short answer exams focus on one right answer. Meaningful assessments also evaluate process, like portfolios for writing. One of the reasons I loved my work in problem-based learning [see prior blogs] is that it invited a multitude of possible answers and it also valued and evaluated process. Life after high school is not a multiple-choice test!

Of course, all of these changes would require Redesigned Transcripts, adopting a “new student transcript, badging, or record system, such as learning and employment records (LERs), that awards students badges or other types of credentials for demonstrating the requisite knowledge, skills, and competencies. States need both the infrastructure to demonstrate student competencies and also the artifacts (e.g., badges) to be included.” It is often said that we pay attention to what we measure. Instead, let’s measure what we should be paying attention to.

There are four more recommended policies that you can explore in the published report. (policyactions.xqinstitute.org) These first six strike me, however, as the most compelling and effective way to ensure that the future is indeed high school.

Today’s high schools should prepare students for the world they’ll face after high school. They should develop a disciplined, motivated, and adaptable workforce to face the ever-changing realities of life in the future. Our old system doesn’t do that. Isn’t change overdue?

A Happy Success

Last week I had the privilege of speaking with a double class of sixth graders and their two teachers. I told the story of how this came about in the previous blog; now I can tell what it was like.

Before I started talking about writing nonfiction and the importance of revision, I encouraged them to interrupt with questions at any point. They frequently did, asking to see my books, asking if I made money writing them, asking where I got my ideas. You could power a city with their energy!

When I asked why they wrote, the first answer was, “for fun”—my heart sang. When I asked about purposes for writing, they were able to list many. They also understood the importance of audience, agreeing that a letter to a grandparent would describe their weekend differently from one to a buddy. And when I asked about artificial intelligence and both its impact on and role in writing, their sophistication blew me away. Students referenced the unreliability and poor quality of AI writing, though they acknowledged using it.

I talked about my own writing journey, from being in a junior high writing group and seeing my poems—bad though I now know they were—in print to the writing of my most recent book, my first work of fiction. I encouraged them to read widely because it was fun and would make them better writers. Many nodded at that, and some even described their favorite books and series. Others complained that they hadn’t found books of interest, and I encouraged them to use librarians as resources, assuring them that once they found the right books, they would want to read them. I told the story of my scientist husband’s journey from near-illiterate writer to accomplished memoirist, thanks in good part to the support a writing group. They were responsive and engaged; I found their gusto inspiring.

Then they formed small groups to revise the AI-drafted poorly written paragraph I’d sent. They could read it on the whiteboard, and all of them had it on their Chromebooks. Despite the occasional grumbling about group work, their groups did rewrite the paragraph. Some just reworded it without reducing the wordiness, but some did a really good job. If I were to do this again, I would emphasize finding the main idea and amplifying it without extras, and I would explain the difference between revising and editing better.

After our debriefing, students began to pack up. One brought me a part of her story to read, several surprised me by asking for autographs, and one gave me the picture that you see here as a gift. They really made me feel validated. I hope they found it to be a good learning experience. I know I learned from them.

When I research the state of education for my blogs, the doom and gloom can be daunting. This experience gave me far more hope than the research implies. Two committed teachers working together with a large group of learners, coping with some chaos to produce enthusiastic and effective results—that’s what schools should be like.   

I’m so glad I had this chance… but I confess that I no longer have the stamina more teaching would require. I came home and took a nap! So thank you, students and teachers, for inviting me, and keep on writing!