AI, Writing, and Foundational Skills
The future of K-12 Education is at a crossroads, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) is on the cusp of becoming a central focus in America’s classrooms. But declining reading and comprehension scores raise an important question about AI’s ability to help students learn. Can AI and other technologies improve student critical thinking and writing when students are lacking in foundational skills and fundamentals?
In October 2025, The Atlantic published an article that highlighted falling student reading scores. They tried to connect declining scores to cell phone use and funding but found inconsistencies. The theory that rose to the top, however, was lowered expectations. Coupled with technology that distracts students, a plausible argument starts coming to the surface. New technology may not be the answer; in fact, it may be causing the problem. We integrate new technology into education, promote its use with data; we push a new classroom tool. AI, the latest in technology, promises to be different and better.
Since many states education boards’ handling of Covid fully exposed learning gaps, exacerbated chronic absenteeism, and sped up the decline in American education, Artificial Intelligence has become the latest buzz word in schools across the country. When AI became a topic in my high school, I wanted to understand how AI tools like ChatGPT work and what they can and cannot do. I also wanted to understand the best and worst-case scenarios for AI use in the English classroom and its impact on student learning.
The National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) sees AI as a positive force in the English classroom. In their latest framework posting titled “Artificial Intelligence English Language Arts (AI ELA) Framework,” the NCTE sees AI as a tool that can help students with revision and editing. But what happens when students use AI, not as a tool, but as a replacement for their own thinking and writing?
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning is a framework educators use to identify and understand which learning objectives must be mastered before moving on to higher-level skills like analysis and critical thinking. Blooms places critical thinking in the upper levels of learning, but with students’ declining reading and writing scores, students aren’t mastering the foundational skills needed to think critically. How can AI help students with the upper levels of learning when they struggle with the basics?
Discussing the writing process on a UK teacher podcast, my stance on AI in the classroom started to evolve. As I went through teaching methods for my dual-credit (high school/college credit) English class, I saw that focusing on the process as well as the final product helped create stronger student writers – no AI needed. An AI focused MIT study found – and confirmed my thoughts – participants who didn’t depend on LLM tools such as ChatGPT “reported higher satisfaction and demonstrated higher brain connectivity” than those in the group who used LLMs to assist in the writing process.
My students saw the importance of learning writing skills on their own before implementing tools that could potentially help with the process. After writing ten essays in my year-long English class, students who embraced the process felt they grew as writers. In fact, during class discussions, students took ownership of their writing process and felt empowered by their work. That feeling of empowerment is something that AI cannot replicate.
That feeling of growth didn’t end with the class. When I run into or connect with former students – sometimes four or more years after they leave my classroom, they talk to me about how lessons from this English class still resonate with them today. One former student, who was applying to several masters’ programs, told me that because of what she learned in English, she is confident in her ability to write. That confidence is something that AI cannot give students.
Working through the process also addresses expectations for teachers and students. I provide feedback for every part of the writing process, from prewriting to peer editing to revisions, culminating in the final product. We work together through each writing assignment; they learn the writing process from the ground up, and I provide support and feedback during each step. Students have clear steps and expectations, and they know what is expected of them at each stage of the process.
There are parts of every assignment that require students to work together. During prewriting and peer editing, students either run ideas past each other, and they edit each other’s papers. As the year progresses, students depend on feedback from their peers and help each other through each part of the assignment. The discussions that take place, the encouragement they give each other, and what they learn can’t be replicated with AI. For example, one of my students talked to me about how fear of failure was affecting her writing. Other students responded with words of encouragement and shared their own fears. That kind of connection and learning can’t be replicated with AI.
Using LLMs and AI as an aid in the writing process will not increase classroom expectations; in fact, AI has the power to lower them. Instead of independently mastering writing skills, students will learn how to utilize a tool to supplement the writing process. Expectations are lowered because they will shift to effective prompt construction not mastery of independent writing.
Another inventive piece of technology is not going to “fix” education. Going back to the basics will. We need to renew our commitment to mastering foundational skills. The mantra that students need to fully understand AI to enter tomorrow’s workforce makes no sense if they can’t read, write, and think for themselves.
