It’s 11:47 pm on a Tuesday. You have a discussion board to post to. It’s late, but you’ve done this a million times, and you know it will only take a second to hit the word count. You skim the same weekly directions, so you respond with the same structure as last week. You restate the question, then insert some buzzwords, grammar check, and post. The task gets done, but next week, none of this will stick. When every professor is assigning repetitive, predictable work, it trains us all to do the minimum and stop caring.
I feel that repetitive, low-engagement assignments push students into an efficient, empty, autopilot-like state. Whether educators realize it or not, they’re reducing attention, curiosity, and effort, which makes students look for shortcuts. That includes using tools that make the work faster. If the prompt has one obvious answer and feedback is minimal, students stop thinking because their effort does not feel rewarded. I believe that some students understandably fall back on AI for template work because they feel behind or disconnected from the assignment. This is not the only issue, but it is part of the pattern – that no one is putting thought into their work, so no one is benefiting from their classmates. But better lesson design can change the “Post once, reply twice” cycle.
As an art education (BSEd) student, I feel qualified to speak –- I kind of majored in unorthodox pedagogy. In art classes (K-12 and beyond), the learning is built into the doing. The art room is part of the lesson. The process matters more than the product, and the student’s choices matter too. Classes for art educators are taught in a way that mirrors an actual art class. Because of this, we get to benefit from the same teaching strategies we will employ.
One of my art ed courses is extremely reading-heavy. They’re dense and sometimes hard to enter, but I feel motivated to do it because class time feels so active. It’s an evening class in the basement of Tyler, where we sit in a circle with a cup of tea (herbal or caffeinated, depending on where you’re at). Most days, the room changes to connect to the day’s theme or activity. Sometimes, lighting changes or objects are staged in the room, but a variety of artmaking materials are ALWAYS at each desk. Before you even sit down, gears are turning. “How does this relate to the 200-page reading I did last night…?” Room design is one of my favorite tools to help draw attention. It’s a nonverbal cue that today will not be identical to the last. A small amount of novelty can really set the mood. It helps students arrive mentally and for the following discussion to feel more embodied.
We are almost always given materials during discussion. It can be paper, markers, paint, magazines, clay, you name it. The task is simple. Your hands stay occupied, and your listening improves. Idle hands can make speaking to a group feel so much more tense BUT with some Play-Doh, talking becomes less performative, and it helps students regulate attention.
Flexible response formats are a cornerstone in art ed. We can always answer prompts in different forms – written, visual, or material-based. The task is still academic since the student explains the connection to the prompt, but it supports different strengths without lowering standards like a discussion board may.
I feel that engagement is not only about making things “fun,” but it also makes thinking necessary. If the prompt requires a real choice, students must participate, and if the assignment has a real audience, students care more. And most of all, if the work creates something specific, students remember it. I have done hundreds of discussion boards, and I couldn’t name you a single one of them, but I can explain the lesson behind every painting I’ve ever made.
I’m not raving about art ed to make students switch majors, but more in hopes that profs can try some of the practical swaps as a solution to vague repetitive lessons.
- Replace template discussion boards with structured, varied prompts.
Instead of: “Summarize the reading and respond to two classmates.”
Try rotating between:
Compare two quotes and explain the tension.
- Apply one idea to a real example of campus life.
- Write one strong question and defend why it matters.
- Find one detail you disagree with and explain why.
I think that this is great for professors who have a tight comfort zone, but it works by changing the cognitive task and inserting some multimodal learning. It reduces copy-paste responses, and it makes class discussion more engaging.
- Try adding choice-based submissions by letting students pick one format:
- short written response
- annotated diagram
- collage or visual map
- audio note
- one-slide mini-poster with citations
Accompanied by a short explanation, this is another tame option that lets students achieve the learning goal, with the same rubric categories, but has students make a real decision. I can see this active learning increasing ownership and reducing that autopilot tone.
- Make a “thinking artifact” instead of a summary! This might be a:
- Semantic map of the reading
- Timeline of the argument
- Concept map linking vocab terms
- One-page “teach it to a friend” sheet
- Before/after chart: what I thought, what shifted
I feel that this works because a student still has to structure information, but it shows understanding better than a summary.
- For a more tactile lesson, add small physical actions during discussion. Try some simple materials at tables during a lecture or seminar:
- index cards
- sticky notes
- markers
- scrap paper
- pipe cleaners or cheap clay
Then students might be prompted to:
- Build a shape that represents the argument.
- Make a quick symbol for each major point.
- Create a “tension map” with arrows and labels.
This tactile tactic’s strong points are that it supports focus, breaks the “sit still and stare” moment after a question, and it incorporates universal design that may help quieter students participate.
- I love engaging classes by giving assignments to an audience. One way to do so is to try having students create a public version of an idea:
- a campus flyer
- a short zine page
- a mini op-ed
- a resource guide
- a letter to a stakeholder
This is great because the audience creates stakes, which improves tone, and when given a direct task, students may stop writing like they are filling space.
As a student and educator, I’m trying to form my values now since I’m at this intersectional point. I also hope that I can show other educators that creative formats can still be rigorous – that throwing pipe cleaners in the mix doesn’t discredit the academic value of an assignment. A collage can show analysis when it is explained clearly. A visual map can show argument structure, and as long as you have a rubric to keep standards consistent, choice does not have to mean “anything goes.”
College students can handle hard work, and they already do! But the issue is work that feels pointless. Better design makes attention more achievable and makes learning visible for students and educators alike. By engaging your class, shortcuts matter less to them. By making tasks specific and personal, I believe that the student’s voice becomes harder to replace and easier to attach to a memory. Most importantly to me: we are all balancing jobs, health, and other classes, but engaging assignments respect time because they feel worth doing.