Inevitably, when I work with educators across the globe and start talking about the authentic application of Gemini-powered tools within the classroom, the same question pops up, “But if I give them an essay, what’s to stop them from pasting the prompt into Gemini and turning in the response?” Setting aside some of the pedagogical complexity of this question, this is a weekly post outlining possible evolved approaches to the traditional prompt-and-write essay approach in global classrooms. Wherever possible, the ideas presented here will link to applicable research relating to Universal Design for Learning, ICAP, Retrieval Practice, and other research-supported approaches to teaching and learning. Maybe most importantly is the hope you, the reader, recognize each post as an invitation to share your own thinking and practices as we capture the power of these new tools to expand our practice and document student learning.
Previous Practice
One classic use of the essay is as a container, asking students to pour out there thinking into that container. But an essay asks for more than that. The traditional essay-as-container creates some unnecessary cognitive load as well, requiring students to overcome the friction of the blank page and a broad, context-free prompt such as, “In this essay, explain X about Y.”
The ease of cognitive inversion here is high. Students can ask Gemini to write the outline, the summary, the first draft of the essay. All they need to do is polish and paste, thwarting the learning objective. This approach acknowledges that potential off-loading and builds around it.
Theoretical/Pedagogical Frameworks
- Retrieval Practice: This approach aligns with Pooja Agarwal’s findings that durable learning is the result of effortful retrieval. When students perform this unassisted “brain dump,” they force their working memory to retrieve, consolidate, and reconstruct neural pathways.
- Psychological Safety & Agency: Within this strategy, we draw from Bertram Gallant and Rettinger’s (and others’) assertion safety and agency are key to fostering greater academic integrity. By validating raw, unedited thoughts as the necessary foundation of the assignment, this approach works to remove the failure that can drive cognitive off-loading.
Step 1:
Students spend 5-7 minutes writing, dictating, or concept mapping everything they can recall about the topic, unit, text, or original essay prompt. No notes, Googling, or Gemini. Mistakes are welcome as part of the retrieval process. While the temptation here may be to require students to go completely analog during this dump, to better align with UDL, allow for voice-to-text and other multi-modal options. During this time, your approach as instructor is to elevate quantity over quality, encouraging students to get everything they can out of their brains, even (or especially) the mistakes.
Step 2:
Students paste their raw, unedited text (or attached photos of their brain dumps) into Gemini. They use a structured prompt to turn Gemini into an inquisitive tutor. Possible prompt:
“I have pasted my raw, unedited thoughts on [Insert Topic] below. Act as a supportive, constructive writing partner. Read my raw ideas and ask me 3 probing questions that will help me connect my disparate points and deepen my analysis. Do not rewrite my text or structure an outline for me. Just ask the questions.”
Step 3:
Students read Gemini’s probing questions and compose a structured 250-word synthesis addressing those gaps in their own, distinct voice.
Analysis
This approach looks to the initial purpose of the essay as an artifact of student learning. If we’re looking to better understand student thinking (and maybe more importantly help students understand their own thinking and learning), then a traditional essay has high potential for missing the mark. Even absent AI, prep, execution, and refinement can pile on cognitive load focused on product, obscuring content and process.
By incorporating Gemini thoughtfully as a necessary component to the exercise, we’re doing a couple of key things:
- Bringing AI out of the shadows. Where a student may have otherwise, have turned to gen AI as a tool to do all parts of the process and then possibly been flagged for a lack of academic integrity, this incorporation requires the use of the tool and makes more likely a transparent conversation of when and where AI can be helpful.
- Building technological fluency authentically. The approach above is still a thinking and writing assignment. It is those things while also incorporating AI as a tool. The assignment establishes both where these tools can be used and where they shouldn’t, modeling and inviting conversations about what’s important in doing the work of learning.
By doing both of the above, we’re able to build greater psychological safety and agency. While nothing can fully eliminate the chance students will decide to off-load their thinking (to a peer or technology), building this sense of safety helps to increase the likelihood they’ll feel confident doing the work themselves.
TCAP & UDL Alignment Table
| Dimension |
Alignment Strategy |
| Task |
Perform unassisted recall on a text/topic, refine via Gemini's probing questions, and draft an expanded synthesis. |
| Context |
In-class active learning exercise (K-12) or pre-writing seminar preparation (Higher Ed). |
| Audience |
Peers, instructors, or a localized stakeholder (e.g., advising next semester's cohort on what matters most). |
| Purpose |
To cultivate claim-evidence reasoning and demonstrate conceptual depth through structured synthesis. |
| UDL Checkpoints |
Action & Expression: Recall can be written, dictated via voice-to-text, or visually concept-mapped.
Engagement: Low-stakes, formative feedback loops remove the performance anxiety of high-stakes writing. |
