ISHIKA RATHI

Alternative Grading and the Ethical Use of AI: Pedagogical Tensions and Opportunities

Panel discussion to be held June 2026. Organized and moderated by Ishika.


Abstract

First-year college writing programs have faced significant pedagogical challenges from widespread use of AI technologies, including ChatGPT, Grammarly, and other LLM-based writing assistants. Research shows that AI-assisted writing can diminish students’ authorly ownership, reduce students’ ability to recall their ideas, and homogenize the creative diversity of their final output (1, 2). Alternatively, some studies suggest potential benefits for English as a Second Language (ESL) writers (3, 4), and experts stress the importance of developing AI literacy in writing classrooms (5, 6, 7). Writing programs now face the challenge of integrating AI in ways that guide students through strategies of ethical, responsible, and equitable use while avoiding potential drawbacks to student writing, learning, critical thinking, and long-term success. 

At UC San Diego, several first-year writing programs utilize alternative grading strategies, such as labor-based contract grading and specifications grading (8, 9). Grounded in extensive education research, these approaches have been shown to enhance intrinsic motivation, metacognitive reflection, and autonomy (10, 11). Students report that alternative grading systems allow them greater freedom to experiment, take risks, and develop their individual voices, shifting the focus toward growth and learning rather than the subjective quality of a final product.

Given the potential contradictory outcomes of AI-assisted writing and alternative grading, this panel brings together first-year college writing programs to consider (a) what tensions exist between AI-assisted writing and the pedagogical values guiding alternative grading, (b) what opportunities might arise through these tensions for teaching responsible and equitable use of AI, and (c) how we might guide students to use AI in ways that center their ownership, creativity, and reflective, critical thinking. Discussions consider the value of labor vs. efficiency in learning and writing, examine the use and impact of AI-assistance for ESL writers, and explore assignments that serve as opportunities for critical engagement with AI. 

Panelists: 

Panel Moderator:

Citations:

  1. Kosmyna, Nataliya, et al. “Your Brain on Chatgpt: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt When Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task.” arXiv.Org, 10 June 2025, arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872.
  2. Moon, Kibum, et al. “Homogenizing Effect of Large Language Models (Llms) on Creative Diversity: An Empirical Comparison of Human and Chatgpt Writing.” Science Direct, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S294988212500091X. Accessed 29 Oct. 2025.
  3. Marzuki, et al. “The Impact of AI Writing Tools on the Content and Organization of Students’ Writing: EFL Teachers’ Perspective.” Taylor & Francis, www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2236469. Accessed 29 Oct. 2025.
  4. Gayed, John Maurice, et al. “Exploring an AI-Based Writing Assistant’s Impact on English Language Learners.” ScienceDirect, doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100055. Accessed 29 Oct. 2025.
  5. Cardon, Peter, et al. “The Challenges and Opportunities of AI-Assisted Writing: Developing AI Literacy for the AI Age – Peter Cardon, Carolin Fleischmann, Jolanta Aritz, Minna Logemann, Jeanette Heidewald, 2023.” Sage Journals, journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23294906231176517. Accessed 29 Oct. 2025.
  6. Chan, Cecilia Ka Yuk. “A Comprehensive AI Policy Education Framework for University Teaching and Learning.” arXiv.Org, 29 Apr. 2023, doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2305.00280.
  7. Ng, Davy Tsz Kit, et al. “Conceptualizing Ai Literacy: An Exploratory ReviewSciencedirect.” ScienceDirect, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666920X21000357. Accessed 29 Oct. 2025.
  8. Inoue, Asao B. Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Classroom. THE WAC CLEARINGHOUSE, 2023.
  9. Nilson, Linda Burzotta, and Claudia J. Stanny. Specifications Grading: Restoring Rigor, Motivating Students, and Saving Faculty Time. Routledge, 2023.
  10. Blackstock, Alan, and Virginia Norris Exton. “Feature: ‘Space to Grow’: Grading Contracts for Basic Writers.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, NCTE, 1 Mar. 2014, doi.org/10.58680/tetyc201424607.(11) Villanueva, Nayelee. “Impact of a Grade Contract Model in a College Composition Course: A Multiple Case Study.” OAsis: UNLV’s Repository for Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity, doi.org/10.34917/7048627. Accessed 29 Oct. 2025.