Schools disagree about whether and how students should use generative AI. Perspective 1: Schools should embrace AI because students will encounter it beyond school. Perspective 2: AI should be prohibited because it weakens independent thought and reliable grading. Perspective 3: Clear task-level rules can preserve learning while teaching responsible use. Write an essay that evaluates these perspectives and develops your own position.
What the evaluator is looking for
ACT readers reward a clear perspective, analysis of relationships among perspectives, relevant development, logical organization, precise language, and control of standard written English.
Planning approach
Distinguish practice from assessment, weigh AI literacy against outsourced thinking, and argue for disclosed task-level permissions plus unaided checkpoints.
Model response
Schools should neither pretend generative AI does not exist nor allow it to perform every intellectual task. They should permit clearly disclosed uses for practice and revision while reserving regular assignments for unaided work. This division teaches responsible use without making grades meaningless.
The embrace-AI perspective correctly notes that students will meet these systems in college and employment. A learner can ask for alternative explanations, generate practice questions, or compare possible outlines. Prohibition would drive such activity underground and prevent teachers from discussing errors or bias. However, unrestricted assistance can replace the difficult work through which students form judgments. It also makes a polished submission weak evidence of the writer's actual skill.
Task-level rules solve that conflict better than a blanket slogan. An instructor might allow brainstorming on one assignment, editing suggestions on another, and no assistance during an in-class essay. Students should attach a short use note and verify factual claims against trustworthy sources. Periodic handwritten or monitored assessments would show whether independent ability is growing. Schools serve students best by teaching when a tool is useful, when it is deceptive, and when thinking must remain entirely their own.
Structural breakdown
The response draws a functional line between learning support and proof of mastery. It gives legitimate and harmful uses, then demonstrates how permissions, disclosure, verification, and independent checks work together.
- Separate formative practice from graded assessment.
- Give examples of permitted and prohibited assistance.
- Require transparent disclosure and source verification.
- Preserve recurring evidence of independent skill.
Format reference: ACT: Description of the Writing Test. This model is original and is not an official or accepted submission.