The essay is dead.
Long live the 10 second video – conceived, designed and produced by AI, from a barely literate prompt by the next generation of troglodyte teenagers, which will, of course, be marked by their AI teacher and given a pass.
Commentators have been announcing the death of the essay since 2022, some ruefully and others more triumphantly, labouring under the false assumption that having to think less was a sign of human progress.
Clarendon has already witnessed first hand the changes taking place at university:
- Students at Ivy League universities given verbal prompts for essays that are super specific to things discussed in seminars.
- More credits than ever being awarded for oral presentations, video essays and visual presentations.
- And, most tellingly, more students than ever before using AI tools to write their essays.
For this last point, we’ve had countless students talk to Clarendon about how dispiriting it is to know that all of your peers are using AI on every bit of work. We even had a student approach Clarendon because his university had flagged his work as potentially written by AI (sadly, ‘potentially’ is the best that Turnitin and other plagiarism apps can do, and there is sad resignation that they will always be behind the best AI models) and he wanted someone to teach him the work he had already handed in as his own. Not the sort of work that Clarendon relishes (interestingly, although superficially well written, almost every single reference had been made up by ChatGPT).
But rather than meekly accepting the essay’s death, Clarendon thinks that the essay is worth fighting for. Here’s why:
1. Construction of arguments. Well structured essays require an academic and intellectual rigour that doesn’t just teach good writing, but good thinking. The essay is not just a tool for persuading others, though of course it is this too, it is a means of reaching your own position after careful consideration. Presentations can’t compare; they prize slick presentation over thoughtful, persuasive argument.
2. Nuance and balance. As early as GCSE, the essay has assessment objectives for evaluation – weighing up both sides of the argument and deciding how important a certain factor is. We are teaching are students to be balanced, to consider both sides of an argument. How important is this in today’s world, where Youtube and TikTok videos show one side of the argument ‘DESTROYING’ the other?
3. Deeper understanding. As students progress to A level and degree level, getting top marks requires a depth of understanding. Insightful analysis and balanced evaluation are only possible with understanding. Likewise, structuring an essay to answer a question comprehensively, from all sides. Undergraduates have to find the right sources to support or counter their argument (or at least they did in Clarendon’s day. Nowadays, students are given comprehensive reading lists, which they then feed into AI, which, in turn, serves up made-up nonsense).
4. Evaluation of sources. In the UK, our History students at GCSE are taught who to evaluate sources for their reliability. History undergrads must do this too, for all their essays. What will happen to this when AI vomits up all students’ essays? We will soon be in a world where AI regurgitates material previously regurgitated by AI in a dystopian feedback loop of ignorance. New ideas will only be possible if we continue to produce peer reviewed articles and properly edited books, and these will only be possible if students are taught essay writing.
