# Two Professors Chart Different Paths Through AI-Driven Assignment Design
College instructors face an urgent redesign challenge as free AI tools like ChatGPT and Copilot make traditional essay assignments obsolete. Two professors are pioneering contrasting strategies to adapt their teaching.
The stakes are real. Students now have access to powerful AI systems that can generate competent written work instantly at no cost. This reality renders the old plagiarism-detection model ineffective. Cheating sites and paid essay mills lose their competitive edge when free tools deliver superior results.
Rather than resist, forward-thinking faculty are restructuring how they evaluate learning. One approach involves redesigning assignments to require real-time problem-solving, metacognitive reflection, and work that depends on student voice and original thinking. These professors ask students to explain their reasoning, document their process, and produce outputs that AI tools struggle with. Taking a raw ChatGPT response and improving it becomes the assignment itself.
The second approach embraces AI as a teaching tool. These instructors integrate AI into the learning process deliberately. Students learn to prompt AI systems effectively, evaluate AI output for accuracy, and use these tools as collaborative partners. The assignment becomes about leveraging technology to accomplish complex tasks rather than proving students can work without it.
Both methods address the same reality: pretending AI doesn't exist no longer works. Faculty Focus reports that these divergent approaches reflect deeper questions about what skills colleges should develop. Is critical evaluation of AI output a valuable competency? Can students develop writing ability while using AI as an assistant? Does authentic learning require unassisted work?
The most successful instructors are likely those who make deliberate choices about when and how AI plays a role. Some assignments may require unassisted work to build foundational skills. Others might scaffold AI use to teach students how professionals actually work with these tools. The key difference is intention, not prohibition.