In case it’s not self-evident, this post has not been generated by ChatGPT, QuillBot, Grammerly, WriteSonic, Jasper, HyperWrite, or any of the multiplying-by-the-minute AI-generated writing software.

Yes, admission professionals understand that the future is now. We know applicants can use writing software to compose well-crafted, grammatically correct short answers and essays that sound not just like a thirteen-year-old’s writing, but also sound like software that sounds like a thirteen-year-old’s writing. Genuine Admission: while admission officers are fully aware that these tools exist, we do not possess the power to detect with certainty writing which is AI-generated. In the recent past, it was simple: reading thousands of applications gave one context that provided clues on sentence structure, word choice, tone, and approach to subject matter reflective of middle and high schoolers. Some of us in the Loomis Admission Office have even taught English to said individuals (guilty as charged) or have/have had children of this age (guilty again) and therefore know from experience what such writing looks like. Like many secondary school admission officers, we say to applicants with confidence (and admittedly, some hubris), “We know when the writing is not fully your own. We can tell.” I have spoken these very words myself repeatedly over the years, I have heard my colleagues at other schools say it to students, and I wrote about this very thing in “To Help or Not to Help?” just a few short years ago. To paraphrase Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s famous quote regarding obscenity in 1964, we may not be able to describe it, but we know it when we see it.

Now it’s not so easy. When ChatGPT burst on the scene at the end of 2022, there were numerous articles written lamenting its use in college admissions. In fact, until the Supreme Court released its landmark decision outlawing race-conscious admission practices in June, ChatGPT was regarded by many as the biggest threat to the effective assessment of candidates, popping up as the topic du jour in admission conference seminars, industry webinars, and professional journals. The level of handwringing was high. What would schools do if they couldn’t trust the validity of the applicant essay?

Despite the anxiety ChatGPT and its competitors has caused, the reality is many, if not most, applications are submitted for consideration with considerable “polish” to begin with. It’s just a question of how much. This is nothing new. Years ago, Duke University attempted to glean an answer to this very question by requiring its applicants to address (or was it confess?) whether they had received help with their writing on the application, and if so, noting who helped them. You can imagine the additional stress this caused high school seniors, worrying whether they were supposed to get help, or not. (As if a high school senior needs more to worry about when it comes to applying to college. Perhaps not surprisingly, Duke no longer asks this question on its application).

AI-assisted writing has leveled up the playing field in an entirely new way. Because it’s now more difficult to determine how much of an applicant’s wordsmithing is truly their own, part of the evaluative training we must do around essays is to first acknowledge that getting help with one’s writing is a skill we teach in our schools, and we should expect it, rather than fight it. Students should not be penalized for using their resources effectively. Having a bot write the entire piece is another level altogether, and it’s important for us to communicate clearly to our candidates the importance of ethical decision-making and academic integrity not just in getting into our schools but staying in them. Presenting your own work in the application, even if appropriately edited for grammar and clarity, shows us that you understand, in the words of Justice Stewart, “Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do.” This is important to schools like Loomis that have built into their mission a commitment to the best self and the common good.

Second, the rise of AI writing software has required admission offices to take a hard look at the role of the writing sample in their assessment of candidates. Why do we ask for one, how should we assess it, and what information are we looking for? How does it intersect with our school philosophy about the use of AI software in the classroom? Both balance and innovation are important to Loomis Chaffee, therefore, we are not banning the use of ChatGPT at our school. In fact, as a place that is recognized for the strength of its writing program, the appropriate use of ChatGPT is so important to us that we hosted an independent school conference last spring focusing on AI in education and, specifically, ChatGPT in classrooms. We feel it is important to be at the forefront of the responsible use of technology with our students, recognizing that they need to be taught not just content, but ethical use of skills that they will need far beyond Loomis. Knowing this, what does the future of writing samples look like? What do we use them for, and what will we need to assess to ensure the candidate is a good fit for us? These and other questions are what software like ChatGPT is challenging schools to discuss and ultimately answer.

My best advice is this: your writing is most impactful not when it’s perfect, but when it tells us something about you. Whether it’s helped along by AI, a parent, an educator, or placement professional, if it doesn’t give us a sense of who you are, what kind of personality you have, and what is truly important to you, it doesn’t matter how beautifully crafted it is.

What does this mean for students applying to schools right now, you may wonder. My best advice is this: your writing is most impactful not when it’s perfect, but when it tells us something about you. Whether it’s helped along by AI, a parent, an educator, or placement professional, if it doesn’t give us a sense of who you are, what kind of personality you have, and what is truly important to you, it doesn’t matter how beautifully crafted it is. We want to hear your voice, your story, not someone — or something — else’s. We care a lot less about the “how” and a lot more about the “who.” And while we may not always be able to discern whether a candidate’s writing is truly their own, when we can tell the writing is not the student’s, it gives us pause. No one arrives at Loomis Chaffee ready to win a Pulitzer Prize, and if your writing reads like it is, we may wonder why. We might wonder if you have the academic confidence to do your own work independently, to use resources appropriately, and whether you have the intellectual curiosity we are seeking. As a former college counselor, I fully understand why students are anxious about the writing on their application, and I also know what appropriate help from a trusted adult or peer looks like. It does not look like a computer-generated essay that reads suspiciously like a news bulletin.

And if you include a conclusion that sounds anything like the one based on my latest ChatGPT essay prompt (“Write a 250-word essay on why I want to go to Loomis Chaffee including my interest in global studies, writing, and boarding school,”) I will know. According to ChatGPT,

“The Loomis Chaffee School is the ideal destination for my educational aspirations. Its dedication to global studies, commitment to writing excellence, and transformative boarding school environment will provide the platform for me to grow academically, cultivate cultural understanding, and develop into a confident and globally aware individual. I eagerly anticipate the opportunities that await me at Loomis Chaffee, where I can embrace boundless horizons and embark on an extraordinary journey of learning and self-discovery.”

Now, if that doesn’t read like a computer, I don’t know what does. Be true. Be you.