Creative Writing Meets AI: Enhancing Science Education with an adapted RAFT Strategy
Creative Writing Meets AI: Enhancing Science Education with an adapted RAFT Strategy
One of my favorite writing activities to do with students in science is to have them use the RAFT strategy. RAFT stands for Role, Audience, Format, and Topic. It provides a clear structure in which students can engage in creative writing. In science we are able to have students take on the role of many things and describe science processes through their perspective. My favorite RAFT to do with 5th graders was when we were learning about animal adaptations. The assignment was as follows:
Role: A carnivore
Audience: An herbivore
Format: An apology letter
Topic: The adaptations of the carnivore
The student samples I got from this assignment were always so funny! They would write as a shark apologizing for eating a fish’s grandma, or a lion apologizing for eating a bunch of the
zebra’s friends (while also inviting them over for dinner that night).
By far, my favorite student example was from a student who in her apology letter began to talk about why she (a tiger) ate the gazelle. In her letter she wrote:
“Hey, but you can’t blame me. You have to blame it on my paw-aw-aw-aw-aw-aw-aw-awwws. Blame it on my claw-aw-aw-aw-aw-aw-aw-awwwws.”
As I sat at my desk reading this student sample trying to make sense of all the extra “aws” it hit me like a bolt of lighting . She was referencing the hit 2008 song by Jaime Foxx featuring T-Pain “Blame it”! I was blown away by her creativity and ability to convey her understanding of adaptations.
RAFTT – Adapting the RAFT strategy with AI in mind
Lately, my favorite rabbit hole to fall down is how generative AI is changing the landscape of education. For the sake of full transparency, I did write all of the words to this blog, but did use ChatGPT to help me edit and refine this post as well as create the image above. I believe that introducing AI into the classroom is akin to when we introduced the internet into schools. It’s an inevitability, with inherent risks, that will be much more understood by the students than the teachers.
With this in mind, I propose that we add an additional “T” to the RAFT writing assignment. The extra “T” would stand for technology. In this step the teacher would outline what technology can or should be used to complete the assignment. Recently I engaged a group of teachers for professional development in this exact process with the following guidelines:
Role: A science educator
Audience: Your students
Format: An infographic
Topic: Why students should look into/ explore STEM or Science careers
Technology: Acceptable Use
– AI to help brainstorm – ChatGPT / Bard/ Co-Pilot
– Canva to create infographic – but without AI generation
– Google doc to collaborate
I believe this type of guidance and structure is very needed as we begin to wade into the waters of students using generative AI in their assignments. Adding this extra “T” accomplishes a number of things:
1. It provides boundaries for students in how much, and with what tasks they can receive help from generative AI.
2. It helps the teacher think through the activity and which parts could be supported by AI without sacrificing the integrity of the students work.
3. It gives students some ideas of where to start or how to set up a collaborative document with peers.
4. It encourages a culture of using AI in an appropriate manner.
While I feel that this addition to the RAFT strategy is a beneficial way to introduce setting AI boundaries in student assignments, I don’t believe it ends with this specific example. I see that in the near future, teachers will have to outline what is acceptable use of AI as a regular part of creating an assignment. Gone are the days of simply asking students to write a 500 word essay about the life of Isaac Newton. Now, the inclusion of AI guidelines is as important as the word count.
This strategy by no means will prevent 100% of students from using AI to do some things they shouldn’t. However, educators are very used to living in the “gray area.” Students constantly push boundaries, test limits, and walk right up to the line. But this simple fact remains, gray does not exist without black and white. If we don’t set the boundaries of what is and isn’t acceptable AI use, the students will. It is up to us as educators to get out ahead of it and at the very least set clear and rigorous expectations for our students.
Ultimately, I believe that many aspects in the field of education are going to change due to advancements of generative AI. However, that’s not to say that we have to start from scratch with everything. By making modifications to current best practices, students and teachers can feel confident entering this new technological age.