WRC & GPWC Stance on Generative AI

Generative AI (GenAI) can be useful for experienced writers with developed writing processes. For instance, writers can use GenAI to increase their genre awareness, understand rhetorical strategies, provide feedback, format citations, and proofread writing when they are also able to critically assess the GenAI output (Celik, 2025; Darvin, 2025). Effective use of GenAI comes after you develop your writing skillset and voice. Using it too early in your writing development can negatively impact your writing and thinking abilities.

The WRC & GPWC value human writing and thinking, and our writing support focuses on the fundamental skills and writing confidence necessary to write effectively. We believe writing is a tool for learning: when you write in college, you learn course content, understand your own beliefs and thinking, and work through complex concepts.

The WRC & GPWC are cautious about recommending GenAI use in the writing process for the following reasons:

Loss of learning and thinking skills. In a 2025 MIT study, writers who relied on ChatGPT (versus writers who used search engines and writers who only used their brains) over the course of several months learned less, produced less effective writing, and became progressively more reliant on ChatGPT to assist with thinking (Kosmyna et al., 2025). A similar study (Barcaui, 2025) reveals that students who relied on ChatGPT to create a presentation on an unfamiliar topic retained less information about that topic than their peers who did not use this technology on the same task.
Lack of engagement in the writing process: The writing process is important for two reasons: one, you practice and deepen your writing abilities, and two, you learn concepts and skills necessary in your field of study. The product of your writing (your final paper, for example) is not as important as the process of writing it. Learning and sharpening skills requires productive struggle. Like going to the gym, if your muscles don’t experience some amount of struggle, they aren’t growing. Your brain is the same! When overrelying on GenAI, you risk skipping the productive part of the writing process (MLA-CCCC Joint Taskforce, 2023).
Distortion of meaning: A GoogleDeepMind study shows that large language models (tools like ChatGPT) edit texts differently than humans do, often resulting in changing the meaning of texts. This happens even when these tools are prompted to make only grammatical changes to a piece of writing (Abdulhai et al., 2026).
Loss of ownership: Writers who overuse GenAI tools during the writing process might experience a loss of ownership over their writing, and thus their thinking and learning (Kosmyna et al., 2025; Seddiki & Korichi, 2026)
Loss of confidence: Writers who rely on GenAI tools for writing can also experience a loss of confidence in their own abilities to write without this technology. This loss of confidence can lead to writing avoidance, an inability to edit their own unassisted writing, writing anxiety, and learned helplessness when writing without GenAI tools (Seddiki & Korichi, 2026).
Flattening of individual voice: AI-generated writing has a generic feel that lacks human voice. Even asking GenAI to revise your writing can flatten your voice and make your writing boring and unoriginal (Abdulhai et al., 2026; Hasanbaşoğlu & Baloglu, 2026; Mak & Walasek, 2025; Seddiki & Korichi, 2026)
Perpetuating bias: Studies have shown that GenAI tools generate texts, images, and information that exhibit gender and racial biases (Gichoya et al., 2023; Ferrara et al. 2024; Zhou et al. 2023).

Talk with a WRC or GPWC Tutor about generative AI

WRC & GPWC tutors are open to having genuine conversations with students about generative AI and do not police GenAI usage. Tutor and client conversations are confidential. Individual tutors have varying stances on the ethics of writing with GenAI. For instance, some tutors never use it in their writing process, while others might use it as an editing or research tool. Below is a guide for how tutors can and cannot help you when it comes to GenAI:

Tutors can help with:

Deepening your AI literacy: understanding of “the nature, capacities, and risks of AI tools” (MLA-CCCC Joint Taskforce, 2023).
Understanding your instructor’s GenAI policy.
Examining the limitations of GenAI.
Making sure your writing is true to your own voice and perspective.

Tutors cannot help with:

Making AI-generated writing sound human.
Disguising the use of Gen AI when it’s against an instructor’s policy.

Tips from WRC tutors

“I love generative AI, but I also am very aware of its potential ethical implications, its reliance on algorithms to create content, and the very unreliable nature of it. Knowing the bad and good that can occur with AI use, it is a lot easier for me to separate the good and bad AI content and critically think about what I need from that content. I fear that others who are ignorant to the dangers of AI and rely wholeheartedly on AI to generate content and ideas are doing themselves a disservice and reducing their ability to think critically.” – Sophia, Double Major in Computer Engineering and Computer Science

“Writing is thinking. Being able to meaningfully articulate your thoughts is a skill that impacts more than just academics. Practicing writing encourages better communication skills and critical thinking.” – Trevor, Writing, Rhetoric & Digital Studies Major

“Personally, I use Grammarly as an AI correctional tool. Grammarly can catch small grammatical errors I would otherwise overlook, such as commas and misspellings. However, I have noticed that Grammarly might suggest a different word or a grammatical move that is technically correct but takes away from my distinct writing style. Overall, AI is helpful for little corrections but can take away from one’s unique writing style.” -Mary, Writing, Rhetoric & Digital Studies Major

“At least for now, the best ChatGPT can do is imitate writing and language; it does not seem to actually understand language from a linguistic perspective. Because of this, anything it generates will always be derivative of whatever writing it chooses to pull from.” – Luke, Psychology Major

“For me writing is one of the best ways to not only connect with myself, but also engage with people in the field. The topics I have researched and wrote about in essays, are the ones that have stayed with me the longest. I strongly believe that writing is one of the best tools to gain knowledge, even for people who do not feel that they are good writers. After all, the only way to get good at something is by continuously practicing it.” – Emanuela, M.A. English Grad Student

Other Resources

References

Abdulhai, M., White, I., Wan, Y., Leibo, J. Z., Kleiman-Weiner, M., & Jaques, N. (2026). How LLMs Distort & Transform Our Language. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.18161.

Barcaui, A. (2025). ChatGPT as a cognitive crutch: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial on knowledge retention. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 12, 102287.

Burçin, H, & Mustafa, B. (2026). The double-edged sword of artificial intelligence: Gifted college students’ use of ChatGPT in academic writing. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(2), ep637.

Celik, S. U. (2025). Integrating artificial intelligence into scientific writing: a narrative review for clinical and surgical researchers. The American Journal of Surgery, 116657.

Darvin, R. (2025). The need for critical digital literacies in generative AI-mediated L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 67, 101186.

Ferrara, E. (2024). Fairness and Bias in Artificial Intelligence: A Brief Survey of Sources, Impacts, and Mitigation Strategies, Sci, 6(1), https://doi.org/10.3390/sci6010003

Gichoya, J. W., Thomas, K, Celi, L. A., Safdar, N., Banerjee, I., Banja, J. D., Seyyed-Kalantari, L., Trivedi, H., Purkayastha, S. (2023). AI pitfalls and what not to do: mitigating bias in AI, British Journal of Radiology, 96(150), 20230023, https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20230023.

Hasanbaşoğlu, B., & Baloglu, M. (2026). The double-edged sword of artificial intelligence: Gifted college students’ use of ChatGPT in academic writing. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(2), ep637.

Hyland, K. (2026). Writing in the AI era: Rethinking writing, research and teaching. Journal of Second Language Writing, 101302.

Kosmyna, N., Hauptmann, E., Yuan, Y. T., Situ, J., Liao, X. H., Beresnitzky, A. V., … & Maes, P. (2025). Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant for essay writing task. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08872, 4.

Mak, M. H. S., & Walasek, L. (2025). Style, sentiment, and quality of undergraduate writing in the AI era: A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of 4,820 authentic empirical reports. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9, doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100507

“MLA-CCCC Joint Taskforce on Writing and AI Working Paper: Overview of the Issues, Statement of Principles, and Recommendations.” (2023). https://hcommons.org/app/uploads/sites/1003160/2023/07/MLA-CCCC-Joint-Task-Force-on-Writing-and-AI-Working-Paper-1.pdf

Seddiki, M., & Korichi, S. (2026). The AI Paradox in L2 Writing: Why Helpful Feedback Creates Unhelpful Dependency in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8731897/v1 Zhou, M., Abhishek, V., & Srinivasan, K. Bias in generative AI. [unpublished manuscript] www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/ales/cib/bias_in_gen_ai.pdf.