Writing teaches us how to think, so let’s rethink, reframe, and reposition the essay, writes Alicja Syska

There is no way to AI-proof essay-writing as a form of assessment. By trying to design something AI cannot do in the name of authentic assessment, our precious attention is going in the wrong direction.

What makes assessment authentic in the humanities, in particular, has a lot to do with writing. What differentiates the humanities from many other fields – and often limits the effectiveness of alternative assessment formats, such as podcasts, short films, curated exhibits, interviews, and presentations – is that, by essay-writing, we look not just for answers or solutions but aim to develop thinking through writing. Writing becomes a way of clarifying thinking, finding ideas, and taking the writer on a journey to knowing.

If writing is a valuable learning outcome in itself, then all we need to do is persuade our students that essay-writing is a skill meaningful sui generis (process) rather than a means to an end (product). The problem, however, is that

we have killed the essay.

We have ruined essay-writing by forgetting about it as a process and treating it as a product. We offered our students a simple transaction – an essay for a grade. We standardised marking, calibrated our expectations, and created a culture of measuring learning via rubrics and outcomes that do not leave much room for valuing the process. University essays became displays of competence rather than a means of growth, with all stages and results predictable, and formative assessment a burdensome addition to the already stretched marker’s workload. What may have felt like death by essay before, AI has merely finished off. Ergo: the proclaimed death of the essay.

Our role in this demise was that we stopped explaining why the essay matters. We lost enthusiasm for essay-writing (and marking). We failed to help our students appreciate that it takes time, that it’s hard, and that it’s part of learning. Worse, we made them believe they hate writing, that they are incapable of it, that one day, after they pass all their assignments, they will never have to write again. We made them accept that creativity doesn’t matter and formulas must be followed. We didn’t talk enough about writing as an embodied practice to which students bring their whole selves. We didn’t show them how writing is a tool for self-knowledge, that persistence pays off, that sense-making – while stressful – gives us our autonomy and agency back, and that wrestling with ideas can be surprisingly rewarding.

Yet, self-flagellation aside, I believe

we can save the essay.

As the Manifesto for the essay in the age of AI brilliantly summarises, besides the fact that an essay is a simple, cheap, familiar, and low-access form of articulating ideas, it is worth saving primarily because writing teaches us how to think.

All we need to do is revamp how we teach it. The essay as assessment needs to be rethought, reframed, and repositioned, so that we and our students see its value again. Instead of treating it as a way of explaining themselves for the marker, students must be able to see it as a way of developing thinking, even a form of disobedience that – as Michael Dean persuasively argues – offers a space for asserting their personal sovereignty.

Instead of aligning writing with societal needs and turning it into a communication tool for instrumental purposes – writing a social media post, an annual report, an application, or an email – we need to present it as a form of independent thinking. Essentially, we must reimagine the essay and, ironically,

the challenges of generative AI can help.

While AI can be easily dismissed for everything it threatens – academic integrity, ability to think critically, the very learning process, and even the earth itself – it also marks an era of unpredictable intellectual progress and cognitive expansion. Between the extremes of refusing to engage with it and engaging fully, we must find a balance and a vision for what constitutes good assessment in the humanities and how to harness technology in ways that empower us as agents in our own learning. AI forces us to look at the essay anew.

What AI can help with is to break down the misconceptions around writing, make it more achievable, more democratic, less fraught, less intimidating, and more rewarding. It still shouldn’t be easy, but neither are other forms of expressing ideas, including podcasting, presentations, poster making, etc. If we can find a sustainable way to use AI as Socratic service that questions, prompts, and encourages deeper engagement with the content, and offers feedback on ideas and argument, style, and voice, but not to appropriate the exact words or answers it comes up with, then we have a chance to use it to learn and grow, rather than reduce learning gains. Encouraging students to treat AI as a writing coach, tutor, or supervisor that challenges them to think through assignments and produce their best work while not doing the work for them currently seems like the most effective approach to preserving the delicate ecosystem of writing for learning.

Maybe in the future we can create new writing genres through hybrid writing with AI but for now, if using AI, we can at least go beyond simply parroting, massaging, or evaluating AI outputs and refocus on the meaning of the writing process itself. How do we do that?

We can

• Begin with values – what matters to you and your students and why, including the value of the assignment – and cultivate trust in the classroom.
• Bring curiosity and enthusiasm back to teaching writing by reframing the essay as a process that clarifies thinking and preserves our students’ autonomy of thought.
• Teach students about flow and normalise failure as part of the learning process, in the spirit of ‘essai’ (French: to attempt).
• Reintroduce joy and playfulness to writing by trying different writing approaches and genres, so students can understand and adapt to different audiences.
• Write collaboratively and with students in the classroom so they appreciate writing as a social activity, in contrast with the more individual nature of assessment.
• Keep innovating and combine essays with other assessment formats for variation, inclusivity, and to meet wider learning outcomes.
• Rethink marking, including designing marking rubrics that emphasise original thinking and writing development alongside creating opportunities for students to (peer) review their writing.
• Most importantly, build relationships with students and make space for teaching with wonder. The rise of AI and our tiredness with essays have proved what we have long known but often forgotten: meaningful learning happens through human connection.

Thus equipped, reimagining the good old essay may just help us fulfil the original vision of Enlightenment education and – by treating writing as a practice of freedom – bring us closer to bell hooks’s ideal of the classroom as a location of possibility.