Speculative Propositions for Digital Writing Under the New Autonomous Model of Literacy

Robinson, Bradley

doi:10.1007/s42438-022-00358-5

Cited by 20 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although little is known about how content creators might compose or write in a way that responds directly to the algorithm, “algorithmic imaginaries” (Bucher, 2019; Kang and Lou, 2022; Low et al , 2023) reflect users’ perceptions of the algorithm’s inner-workings to manipulate the platform for their advantage. Newberry (2023) posited that the TikTok algorithm responds to signposts including types of captions, sounds, hashtags, tools or “trending topics.” The TikTok algorithm, like other AI tools, privileges whiteness and heteronormativity (Noble, 2018) by repurposing and exporting the racist, gendered, ableist ideological content already present within the platform (Nash et al , 2023; Robinson, 2023). Within TikTok, this preference for Whiteness is sometimes not as apparent as it is masked by hidden components such as human moderators and perceived values systems (Gillespie, 2018; Boffone, 2022) describes TikTok’s bias saying, “TikTok is built around TikTokers mimicking the platform’s most-followed accounts.…”

Section: Composing On Tiktokmentioning

confidence: 99%

Writing with, for, and against the algorithm: TikTokers’ relationships with AI as audience, co-author, and censor

Jerasa,

Burriss

2024

ETPC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly important and influential in reading and writing. The influx of social media digital spaces, like TikTok, has also shifted the ways multimodal composition takes place alongside AI. This study aims to argue that within spaces like TikTok, human composers must attend to the ways they write for, with and against the AI-powered algorithm. Design/methodology/approach Data collection was drawn from a larger study on #BookTok (the TikTok subcommunity for readers) that included semi-structured interviews including watching and reflecting on a TikTok they created. The authors grounded this study in critical posthumanist literacies to analyze and open code five #BookTok content creators’ interview transcripts. Using axial coding, authors collaboratively determined three overarching and entangled themes: writing for, with and against. Findings Findings highlight the nuanced ways #BookTokers consider the AI algorithm in their compositional choices, namely, in the ways how they want to disseminate their videos to a larger audience or more niche-focused community. Throughout the interviews, participants revealed how the AI algorithm was situated differently as both audience member, co-author and censor. Originality/value This study is grounded in critical posthumanist literacies and explores composition as a joint accomplishment between humans and machines. The authors argued that it is necessary to expand our human-centered notions of what it means to write for an audience, to co-author and to resist censorship or gatekeeping.

show abstract

Section: Composing On Tiktokmentioning

confidence: 99%

Writing with, for, and against the algorithm: TikTokers’ relationships with AI as audience, co-author, and censor

Jerasa,

Burriss

2024

ETPC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet despite critiquing the “extractive,” “exploitative” nature of AI language models, Perrotta et al speculate that the interactions between human users and AI language models could engender “creative and emancipatory potential” by inviting resistance to AI’s biases (p. 23). Robinson (2022) similarly argues for a “resistive digital writing pedagogy wherein literacy scholars, educators, and students can resist the dominating potentials of technologies ostensibly designed to assist them” (p. 117).…”

Section: Reflection On Writing and Teaching Found Poetry With Artific...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“Weaving tales of resilience”: cyborg composing with AI

2024

ETPC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to offer an approach to cyborg composing with artificial intelligence (AI). The author posits that the hybridity of the cyborg, which amalgamates human and artificial elements, invites a cascade of creative and emancipatory possibilities. The author critically examines the biases embedded in AI systems while gesturing toward the generative potential of AI–human entanglements. Drawing on Bakhtinian theories of dialogism, the author contends that crafting found poetry with AI could inspire writers to problematize the ideologies embedded into the corpus while teasing apart its elisions or contradictions, sparking new forms of expression at the interface of the organic and the artificial. Design/methodology/approach To illustrate this approach to human–AI composing, the author shares a found poem that she wrote using ChatGPT alongside her reflection on the poem. The author reflects on her positionality as well as the positionality of her artificial interlocutor, interrogating the notion of subjectivity in relation to Bakhtinian dialogism and multivocality. Findings Weaving tales of resilience in harmony or tension with AI could unravel threads of possibility as human writers enrich, deepen or complicate AI-generated texts. By composing with AI, writers can resist closure, infiltrate illusions of objectivity and “speak back” to AI and the dominant voices replicated in its systems. Originality/value By encouraging students to critically engage with, question and complicate AI-generated texts, one can open avenues for alternative ways of thinking and writing, inspiring students to imagine and compose speculative futures. Ultimately, in animating assemblages of the organic and the artificial, one can invite transformative possibilities of being and becoming.

show abstract

“…The survey aimed to “find out teachers’ attitudes and practices in relation to “digital writing”. Little is known about how English teachers are using generative AI, with the whole field of AI writing still emerging (McKnight, 2021; Robinson, 2023).…”

Section: Introduction: Is Technology For Communication “Just a Tool”?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“Just a tool”? Troubling language and power in generative AI writing

McKnight,

Shipp

2024

ETPC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to share findings from empirically driven conceptual research into the implications for English teachers of understanding generative AI as a “tool” for writing. Design/methodology/approach The paper reports early findings from an Australian National Survey of English teachers and interrogates the notion of the AI writer as “tool” through intersectional feminist discursive-material analysis of the metaphorical entailments of the term. Findings Through this work, the authors have developed the concept of “coloniser tool-thinking” and juxtaposed it with First Nations and feminist understandings of “tools” and “objects” to demonstrate risks to the pursuit of social and planetary justice through understanding generative AI as a tool for English teachers and students. Originality/value Bringing together white and First Nations English researchers in dialogue, the paper contributes a unique perspective to challenge widespread and common-sense use of “tool” for generative AI services.

show abstract

Speculative Propositions for Digital Writing Under the New Autonomous Model of Literacy

Cited by 20 publications

References 43 publications

Writing with, for, and against the algorithm: TikTokers’ relationships with AI as audience, co-author, and censor

Writing with, for, and against the algorithm: TikTokers’ relationships with AI as audience, co-author, and censor

“Weaving tales of resilience”: cyborg composing with AI

“Just a tool”? Troubling language and power in generative AI writing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About