The title of this blog abbreviates, perhaps too much, the point of this article, I am no longer chairing defenses or joining committees where students use generative AI for their writing.

Lizzie, the author and a professor, writes:

What does this mean for my own students and trainees? I don’t want them to use generative AI for text I will help them with. This is their chance to have me edit their grammar and flow and everything and I think they should use it fully to learn it as well as possible. If they want to write someone else an email using Grammerly or leave the lab and do whatever, fine — but while I am here to help, I want the help I give not to be editing generative AI text.

I can definitely see the argument. Why would you want to edit GenAI content in a student’s paper or dissertation chapter? It takes a lot of time and effort. If the student is not learning from the experience, then it is futile effort for the teacher.

Thomas Baboll’s comment in Lizzie’s piece is striking:

In the future, producing several hundred pages of prose will no longer count as a performance of any relevant academic competence. Instead, we will have to require a brief synopsis of the results the student is prepared to defend. Then we can design a series of written and oral examinations to test them (in a proctored, off-line setting). I would argue that writing those several hundred pages (without AI assistance) will remain the best preparation for such exams, but actually inspecting those pages will tell us nothing (because we can’t tell what AI contributed).

Ouch. I suppose we are back to the problem addressed in the Rhetoric post yesterday.

Even the easiest process for working through this issue seems laden with extra, labor-intensive work…allow me to introduce you to GUIDE, a GenAI solution to Lizzie’s problem. But is it, really? (GUIDE appears later below)

In some ways, GUIDE reminds me of AI in the Writing Workshop process. What’s interesting is that in writing for publication, no author is going to be barred from using GenAI to help them write it (about 45% via BookBub).

Consider AuthorMedia podcast’s take:

Bookbub did a survey of over 1200 authors and trying to figure out what the numbers are of authors who actually use AI and trying to separate it from the noise and the yelling that’s going on on social media right now. And it has found that about 45% of authors who were surveyed are actually using some form of generative AI, whether it’s in their writing, whether it’s in their marketing, whether it’s in their illustrations or what have you. About just under 50% are saying, hard no, don’t plan to, it’s the devil, know, burn the witch. And then just about six or 7% is like, no, but I might in the future. (source)

“And the technology that makes something cheap and easy often eventually kills it,” says Thomas in the podcast. Well, that’s an eye-opener for sure. Will dissertations come to an end if we can’t use written ones to asses the author’s knowledge? I suspect not.

What will change is how we assess, what we assess, and the acceptance of GenAI in doing mundane tasks that don’t lead to learning, but are just mindless work. It doesn’t mean you don’t do that mindless work but that you do it so well you can automate it with a bot. And doing that requires knowing it really well first before you turn it over to a bot.

Crying about spilt milk isn’t going to get us anywhere. A bunch of writers wringing their hands over this, well, we just need to stop and figure it out like thinking, sentient beings.

Can You Speak Your Understanding?

I suppose the real problem is verifying a student really learned something for doctorate. It would seem that a series of conversations sans notes would be the way to go. Will that change how all the work is evaluated? Absolutely.

I go back to Lizzie’s decision as a professor and chair. What has changed is how students are assisted in learning and showing they know what they say they know.

My Journey

I just put together an 8-video series for work. It’s me talking over slide decks I crafted in Canva. What hard work, every image, every idea…and I loved it.

What went into those is a distillation of my notes, ideas found in books, online sources (all cited). I even asked GenAI for help on organizing the content (after feeding it my notes, outline of how I thought things should go). If you catch me on the street, ask me tough questions about the content, I can answer it, no worries. But I can tell you now that formatting some of my audio transcripts in outline format would have been time-consuming without my Outline Helper Bot/GPT I developed.

Bot Helpers

This I think is one possible version of the future. People crafting tools and assistants to help them accelerate the labor intensive part of knowledge work. I made two bots in BoodleBox to do this, EduSynth Pro and Outline Helper, and they shortened the creation of videos from weeks to hours. I made the video recording, I sat there for 30-50 minutes elaborating on my slides. So this isn’t a case of me using Gamma app or ChatGPT Agent to make a PowerPoint.

It isn’t me using Descript to edit my video, although that would have been helpful to get rid of uhs and umms, I suppose. But GenAI did help me with other tasks.

For example, I relied on Whisper to convert audio versions of my video into text, which then got put in outline format by my Outline Helper bot.

I also relied on EduSynth Pro, which is literally a rich knowledge bank from my handwritten note transcriptions to help me with supplemental materials. The more notes I transcribe, the audio that gets transcribed, I put in it.A

gain, what a time-saver and spot on because it took my notes and put them together in the format I spent a lot of time designing and codifying in the bot’s custom instruction.

Below is the GUIDE framework. GenAI is great for frameworks. Below it, you will find a GUIDE version of the process I went through with the project I described above.

I suppose we are all going to find a way forward. Sharing our journey with fear or recrimination may be helpful. In the meantime, I am going to go study rhetoric. 🤣

The GUIDE Framework for Ethical AI Integration in Graduate Education

G – Genuine Authorship First Students must write initial drafts themselves. AI can only be used after completing a full human-authored version, ensuring original thinking remains central.

U – Understand Through Documentation All AI interactions must be logged and submitted alongside work. Students maintain a “process portfolio” showing their thinking evolution, AI queries used, and decisions about accepting/rejecting AI suggestions.

I – Iterative Learning Loops AI becomes a dialogue partner, not a ghostwriter. Students must demonstrate they understand why they accepted or rejected each AI suggestion, turning AI use into a critical thinking exercise.

D – Disclosure with Depth Beyond simple attribution, students must annotate AI-assisted sections explaining: what they learned from the AI interaction, how it changed their thinking, and why they chose specific AI suggestions over others.

E – Evaluation Through ExplanationStudents defend their work through oral examinations or written reflections that demonstrate deep understanding. They must be able to explain every concept, regardless of whether AI helped refine the expression.

GUIDE Example

This example isn’t a dissertation or close to what the professor cited at the top of the blog does. But, I offer it since someone may find it useful.

G – Genuine Authorship First

• Your handwritten notes serve as the original foundation
• You personally created the initial content through your video recordings
• The core ideas and knowledge originate from your expertise

U – Understand Through Documentation

• Whisper transcription creates a clear record of your original audio
• Your custom bots (EduSynth Pro and Outline Helper) provide traceable transformation steps
• The process from audio → text → outline is fully documented

I – Iterative Learning Loops

• You designed the format that EduSynth uses, showing deep understanding
• Creating custom bots demonstrates mastery of how AI should assist your specific needs
• Each tool serves a specific purpose in your workflow, not replacing thinking but accelerating production

D – Disclosure with Depth

• You’re transparent about using Whisper for transcription
• You clearly identify which bots assisted with which tasks
• You explain the time savings (weeks to hours) while maintaining quality

E – Evaluation Through Explanation

• You can explain every step of your process
• The knowledge bank comes from your own handwritten notes
• You maintain control and understanding throughout, using AI as a sophisticated tool rather than a substitute for expertise