MLA Statement on AI and Assessment

"The following statement of endorsement was drafted by the MLA Task Force on AI in Research and Teaching. The Executive Council approved it as an MLA statement in February 2026.

"The purpose of assessment in language, literature, and writing courses is to provide feedback on how students are developing as writers, readers, speakers, and thinkers. 

"Effective feedback is both formative and summative, but most important, it is centered on communication. Communication, education, and assessment are human-centered activities, conducted for human-centered purposes. 

"The increasing development and marketing of products by educational technology companies that promise to ease the burden of grading, giving students feedback or measuring learning outcomes comes with significant risk. 

"Outsourcing this critical component of instructional work undermines professional integrity, falsely reinforcing the notion that human experts are unnecessary for effective instruction. 

"These systems can also avoid accountability for mistakes and bias, and they lack the human authenticity and experience to draw on their teaching interactions to adjust their feedback when rigid adherence to criteria would not serve student learning or fairness.

"The Modern Language Association therefore

• Asserts that centering communication as a human act is at the core of our work as educators. Providing feedback on student writing is how we get to know our students —how they think and how they write —so we can guide them more effectively throughout the learning process.
• Acknowledges that generative AI might have some utility in the assessment process; however, it should never replace human feedback. All uses of generative AI in instructional contexts must be deliberately designed to center transparency, educator expertise, and student agency.
• Strongly opposes the use of generative AI technology as a primary means of assessing student writing. At no time should AI be used as the sole means of grading student essays. To rely on generative AI systems risks eroding students’ trust and sense of writing as an act of human expression and communication.

"Companies marketing these products appeal to the pressure instructors feel to provide timely, accurate, and equitable feedback under often less-than-ideal conditions. 

"However, despite these pressures, we must take care neither to abdicate our core values and sense of mission nor to capitulate to transactional interests that are driving some of these changes. 

"In particular, the ability for AI to be leveraged for assessment purposes should not be used as justification for increasing class sizes or teaching loads.

"'It became clear to us that if faculty members are to continue to design pedagogy to cultivate human reading and writing,' says Anna Mills. 'We need to have a say in shaping digital learning environments, and we need tech companies to cooperate' [pdf]."