Should We Use ChatGPT to Make Literature Accessible to Students?

            In this Boston Globe article, MG Prezioso (Harvard University) tees off on teachers who are using AI tools like ChatGPT to simplify texts for students. “As an education researcher, I understand the appeal of AI-adapted texts,” she says. “Classrooms play host to students with a range of language and literacy skills, and AI-adapted materials, which can be translated and tailored to each individual’s reading level, allow students to access the same content – along with supplementary resources, like discussion questions and vocabulary words – at their own pace. This is especially valuable in social studies and the sciences, where information is a prerequisite for conceptual understanding.” But Prezioso has several concerns:

            • Watered-down language – AI-generated text tends to be syntactically repetitive and stylistically flat, she says. Students need to read complex and varied sentences to develop reading comprehension skills. “Why not use authentic texts with additional instructional support, like drawing on background knowledge or helping students break down meaning-filled, ‘juicy’ sentences instead?”

            • Artistic integrity – AI-modified works of fiction, essays, and memoirs can do violence to the original authors’ integrity.

            • Bias – “Can we really trust AI,” asks Prezioso, “with its racial and gender biases, to adapt a novel like Beloved– one that embodies not only Toni Morrison’s lyrical, enchanting style but also the complexities of the black experience?”

            • Love of reading – AI-processed texts simply don’t have the same ability to develop students’ appreciation of authors’ word choice, imagery, and character dialogue. Reading will be a chore, not a joy. “Divorcing a story from its style is like separating humans from atoms,” says Prezioso. “You can try, but if you were to succeed, you would create something entirely different.” There’s already a trend of fewer young people reading for fun, and AI is likely to make things worse.

            As an example, Prezioso takes a passage from the end of The Great Gatsby, a novel often used in high-school English classes:

Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter – tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther… And one fine morning – So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.

Now here’s a ChatGPT rendition:

Gatsby believed in the green light, a symbol of the bright future he dreamed of. Each year, that future seemed to slip further away. It was out of reach then, but that didn’t stop him – tomorrow he would try harder, stretch further… and maybe one day, he would achieve it. So we keep moving forward, like boats trying to move against the current, always being pulled back into the past.

“The original is elegant, complex,” says Prezioso. “Its arrangement of words and syntax, from the expanded clauses to the ellipsis and dashes, embodies Gatsby’s yearning for the past, as well as our own faith in, and pursuit of, illusory dreams. The message is tragic, but its tone is  hopeful, leaving us to wonder: are we foolish for beating on, or is the honor in the attempt?” The AI-generated text, on the other hand, is rigid, mechanical, lacks complexity and tone, and distorts Fitzgerald’s message. 

            What makes the original meaningful is that it is “crafted by a person, a breathing, feeling person,” says Prezioso. “There is wisdom in human-crafted words, and it is hard-earned. We mustn’t overlook this wisdom. It’s why we read. It’s what we’ll lose. And it’s something AI will never provide.” 

 

“Teachers Are Using AI to Make Literature Easier for Students to Read. This Is a Terrible Idea” by MG Prezioso in The Boston Globe, April 13, 2025; Prezioso can be reached at mgprezioso@fas.harvard.edu.