Machine Learning’s Unintended Curriculum: The Impact of Large Language Models on Agency, Style, and Action in Literacy Ecologies

References

1. Aguilar Gabriel Lorenzo. “Rhetorically Training Students to Generate with AI: Social Justice Applications for AI as Audience.” Computers and Composition, vol. 71, Mar. 2024, doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102828.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Alloway Tracy, and Weisenthal Joe. “What Surging AI Demand Means for Electricity Markets.” Bloomberg, 15 Apr. 2024, bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-04-15/what-surging-ai-demand-means-for-electricity-markets.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Altenried Moritz. “The Platform as Factory: Crowdwork and the Hidden Labour Behind Artificial Intelligence.” Capital and Class, vol. 44, no. 2 2020, pp 145–58.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Arnold Lisa R. “‘Now I Don’t Use It at All … It’s Gone’: Monolingual Ideology, Multilingual Students, and (Failed) Translingual Negotiation Strategies.” Research in the Teaching of English, vol. 54, no. 4 2020, pp 318–41, doi:10.58680/rte202030736.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Aten Jason. “Google’s Apology for Its Gemini Image Debacle Reveals a Much Deeper Culture Problem for the Company.” Inc., 25 Feb. 2024, inc.com/jason-aten/googles-apology-for-its-gemini-image-debacle-reveals-a-much-deeper-culture-problem-for-company.html.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Ayash Nancy Bou. “Conditions of (Im)Possibility: Postmonolingual Language Representations in Academic Literacies.” College English, vol. 78, no. 6 2016, pp 555–77, doi:10.58680/ce201628627.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Baker-Bell April. Linguistic Justice: Black Language, Literacy, Identity and Pedagogy. Routledge 2020, doi:10.4324/9781315147383.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bawarshi Anis. Genre and the Invention of the Writer: Reconsidering the Place of Invention in Composition. Utah State UP 2003, doi:10.2307/j.ctt46nxp6.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Beaufort Anne. Writing in the Real World: Making the Transition from School to Work. Teachers College Press 1999.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Bender Emily M., Gebru Timnit, McMillan-Major Angelina, and Shmitchell Shmargaret. “On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? 🦜” Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAccT ‘21, pp. 610–23, doi:10.1145/3442188.3445922.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Benjamin Ruha. Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. John Wiley and Sons 2019, doi:10.1353/con.2022.0013.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Bogost Ian. “The First Year of AI College Ends in Ruin.” The Atlantic, 16 May 2023, theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/05/chatbot-cheating-college-campuses/674073.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Bolter Jay D., and Grusin Richard. Remediation: Understanding New Media. MIT Press 2000.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Boyle Casey. Rhetoric as a Posthuman Practice. Ohio State UP 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Brandt Deborah. Literacy in American Lives. Cambridge UP 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Butler Paul. “Introduction: The Stylistic (Re)Turn in Rhetoric and Composition.” Butler, Style, pp. 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Butler Paul, editor. Style in Rhetoric and Composition: A Critical Sourcebook. Bedford/St. Martin’s 2010.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Butler Paul, Ray Brian, and Vanguri Star Medzerian. “Introduction: Moving Forward with Style.” Style and the Future of Composition Studies edited by Butler Paul, Ray Brian, and Vanguri Star Medzerian, Utah State UP 2020, pp 3–22.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Byrd Antonio. “Truth-Telling: Critical Inquiries on LLMs and the Corpus Texts That Train Them.” Composition Studies, vol. 51, no. 1 2023, pp 135–42.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Canagarajah A. Suresh. “Negotiating Translingual Literacy: An Enactment.” Research in the Teaching of English, vol. 48, no. 1 2013, pp 40–67.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Carradini Stephen. “On the Current Moment in AI: Introduction to Special Issue on Effects of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Technical Communication Pedagogy, Practice, and Research, Part 1.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, vol. 38, no. 3 2024, pp 187–98, doi:10.1177/10506519241239638.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Christian Brian. The Alignment Problem: How Can Machines Learn Human Values?. Atlantic Books 2021, doi:10.56315/PSCF12‑21Christian.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Cicero. “From Orator.” Butler, Style, pp. 37–53.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Collins James, and Blot Richard. Literacy and Literacies: Text, Power, and Identity. Cambridge UP 2003, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511486661.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Comstock Edward. “Toward a New Neurobiology of Writing: Plasticity and the Feeling of Failure.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 74, no. 4 2023, pp 695–730, doi:10.58680/ccc202332523.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Connors Robert J. “The Erasure of the Sentence” Butler, Style, pp. 82–107.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Cooper Marilyn. The Animal Who Writes: A Posthumanist Composition. U of Pittsburgh P 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Corrigan Julie A., and Slomp David H.. “Articulating a Sociocognitive Construct of Writing Expertise for the Digital Age.” The Journal of Writing Analytics, vol. 5, no. 1 2021, pp 142–95, doi:10.37514/JWA‑J.2021.5.1.05.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Cummings Robert E., Monroe Stephen M., and Watkins Marc. “Generative AI in First-Year Writing: An Early Analysis of Affordances, Limitations, and a Framework for the Future.” Computers and Composition, vol. 71 2024, doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102827.
    [Google Scholar]
30. D’Agostino Susan. “Professors Plan Summer AI Upskilling, With or Without Support.” Inside Higher Ed, 26 May 2023, insidehighered.com/news/tech-innovation/artificialintelligence/2023/05/26/professors-plan-summer-ai-upskilling-or.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Daugherty Chris, Duralsamy Karthik, Jones Bob, and Shillace Sam. “Integrating AI into Engineering Instruction: A Panel Discussion.” Engineering Education Innovation Days, 13 May 2024, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Davison Robert M., Chughtai Hameed, Nielsen Petter, Marabelli Marco, Iannacci Federico, van Offenbeek Marjolein, Tarafdar Monideepa, Trenz Manuel, Techatassanasoontorn Angsana A., Andrade Antonio Díaz, and Panteli Niki. “The Ethics of Using Generative AI for Qualitative Data Analysis.” Information Systems Journal, vol. 34, no. 5 2024, pp 1433–39, doi:10.1111/isj.12504.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Deas Nicholas, Grieser Jessica, Kleiner Shana, Patton Desmond, Turcan Elsbeth, and McKeown Kathleen. “Evaluation of African American Language Bias in Natural Language Generation” Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing 2023, doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.14291.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Dixon-Román Ezekiel, Nichols T. Philip, and Nyame-Mensah Ama. “The Racializing Forces of/in AI Educational Technologies.” Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 45, no. 3 2020, pp 236–50, doi:10.1080/17439884.2020.1667825.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Do Tom Hong. “Knowing with Our Bodies: An Embodied and Racialized Approach to Translingualism.” College English, vol. 84, no. 5 2022, pp 447–66, doi:10.58680/ce202231906.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Dobrin Sidney I. Talking about Generative AI: A Guide for Educators. Broadview P 2023.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Dolar Mladen. A Voice and Nothing More. MIT P 2006, doi:10.7551/mitpress/7137.001.0001.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Duffy William. Beyond Conversation: Collaboration and the Production of Writing. Utah State UP 2020, doi:10.2307/j.ctv19fvx77.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Duin Ann Hill, Card Dan, Gresbrink Emily, Breuch Lee-Ann Kastman, Bolander Kathleen, Deets Stuart, Remcheck Jessica, and Ghimire Asmita. “Stronger Relationships, Stronger Programs: Asserting Expertise for a Generative AI Landscape.” Council of Professional, Technical, and Scientific Communication, Annual Conference, 23 Sept. 2023, Charleston, SC.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Duin Ann Hill, and Pedersen Isabel. Writing Futures: Collaborative, Algorithmic, Autonomous. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol. 969, Springer 2021, doi:10.1007/978‑3‑030‑70928‑0.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Duncan Mike, and Vanguri Star Medzerian. “Introduction to the Centrality of Style.” The Centrality of Style edited by Duncan Mike and Vanguri Star Medzerian, WAC Clearinghouse 2013, pp xi–xiv.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Eaton Sarah Eliane, Mindzak Michael, and Morrison Ryan. “Artificial Intelligence, Algorithmic Writing and Educational Ethics.” Canadian Society for the Study of Education/Société Canadienne Pour l’Étude de l’Éducation, Edmonton, AB, Canada 2021, ucalgary.scholaris.ca/items/552d1ec3-c89f-4d1a-b2f9-30525dd921b7.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Elstermann Annika. “Computer-Generated Text as a Posthuman Mode of Literature Production.” Open Library of Humanities, vol. 6, no. 2 2020, pp 1–23, doi:10.16995/olh.627.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Fanger Ella. “The Dirty Energy Fueling Amazon’s Data Gold Rush.” The Nation, 22 Feb. 2024, thenation.com/article/environment/data-centers-virginia-amazon-environment.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Foulds James, Feldman Phil, and Pan Shimei. “Grok’s Antisemitic Rant Shows how Generative AI can be Weaponized.” The Conversation, 18 June 2025, theconversation.com/groksantisemitic-rant-shows-how-generative-ai-can-be-weaponized-257880.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Flores Nelson, and Rosa Jonathan. “Undoing Appropriateness: Raciolinguistic Ideologies and Language Diversity in Education.” Harvard Educational Review, vol. 85, no. 2 2015, pp 149–71, doi:10.17763/0017‑8055.85.2.149.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Franzoni Valentina. “From Black Box to Glass Box: Advancing Transparency in Artificial Intelligence Systems for Ethical and Trustworthy AI.” Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2023 Workshop, 3–6 July 2023, Athens, Greece. Springer 2023, pp 118–30, doi:10.1007/978‑3‑031‑37114‑1_9.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Freire Paulo, and Macedo Donaldo. Literacy: Reading the Word and the World. Routledge 2005.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Fyfe Paul. “How to Cheat on Your Final Paper: Assigning AI for Student Writing.” AI and Society, vol. 38, no. 4 2023, pp 1395–405, doi:10.1007/s00146‑022‑01397‑z.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Gallagher John R. “The Ethics of Writing for Algorithmic Audiences.” Computers and Composition, vol. 57, Sept. 2020, doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2020.102583.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Gallagher John R.. “Lessons Learned from Machine Learning Researchers about the Terms ‘Artificial Intelligence’ and ‘Machine Learning.’” Composition Studies, vol. 51, no. 1 2023, pp 149–218.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Gee James Paul. Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. 4th ed., Routledge 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Geisler Cheryl. Academic Literacy and the Nature of Expertise: Reading, Writing, and Knowing in Academic Philosophy. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1994.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Gonzales Laura. “Building Transdisciplinary Connections between Composition Studies and Technical Communication to Understand Multilingual Writing Processes.” College English, vol. 82, no. 5 2020, pp 460–71.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Graham S. Scott. “Post-Process but Not Post-Writing: Large Language Models and a Future for Composition Pedagogy.” Composition Studies, vol. 51, no. 1 2023, pp 162–218.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Halliday M.A.K. The Language of Science: The Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday edited by Webster Jonathan J., vol. 5, Continuum 2004.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Haraway Donna J. “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century.” Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. Routledge 1991, pp 149–81.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Hart-Davidson William. “Writing with Robots and Other Curiosities of the Age of Machine Rhetorics.” The Routledge Handbook of Digital Writing and Rhetoric edited by Alexander Jonathan and Rhodes Jacqueline, Routledge 2018, pp 248–55.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Hayles N. Katherine. How We Became Posthuman. U of Chicago P 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Hofmann Valentin, Kalluri Pratyusha Ria, Jurafsky Dan, and King Sharese. “Dialect Prejudice Predicts AI Decisions about People’s Character, Employability, and Criminality,” arXiv, 1 Mar. 2024, doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.00742. Preprint.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Horner Bruce. “Teaching Translingual Agency in Iteration: Rewriting Difference.” Crossing Divides: Exploring Translingual Writing Pedagogies and Programs edited by Horner Bruce and Tetreault Elliot, UP of Colorado 2017, pp 87–97, doi:10.7330/9f781607326205.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Horner Bruce, Lu Min-Zhan, Royster Jacqueline Jones, and Trimbur John. “Language Difference in Writing: Toward a Translingual Approach.” College English, vol. 73, no. 3 2011, pp 303–21.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Horner Bruce, Selfe Cynthia, and Lockridge Tim. “Translinguality, Transmodality, and Difference: Exploring Dispositions and Change in Language and Learning.” enculturation: intermezzo 2015, intermezzo.enculturation.net/01/ttd-horner-selfe-lockridge.
    [Google Scholar]
64. Inoue Asao B. “Classroom Writing Assessment as an Antiracist Practice: Confronting White Supremacy in the Judgments of Language.” Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Culture, and Composition, vol. 19, no. 3 2019, pp 373–404, doi:10.1215/15314200‑7615366.
    [Google Scholar]
65. Johnson Gavin P. “Don’t Act Like You Forgot: Approaching Another Literacy ‘Crisis’ by Considering What We Know about Teaching Writing with and through Technologies.” Composition Studies, vol. 51, no. 1 2023, pp 169–218.
    [Google Scholar]
66. Jordan Jay. “Material Translingual Ecologies.” College English, vol. 77, no. 4 2015, pp 364–82, doi:10.58680/ce201526923.
    [Google Scholar]
67. Kidd David. “The Data Center Capital of the World Is Virginia.” Governing, 17 July 2023, governing.com/infrastructure/the-data-center-capital-of-the-world-is-in-virginia.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Kimmerer Robin. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants. Milkweed Editions 2013.
    [Google Scholar]
69. Lamos Steve. “Drumming a Literate Life: The Pursuit of ‘Resonant Literacy.’” College Composition and Communication, vol. 73, no. 2 2021, pp 312–37.
    [Google Scholar]
70. Leander Kevin M., and Burriss Sarah K.. “Critical Literacy for a Posthuman World: When People Read, and Become, with Machines.” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 51, no. 4 2020, pp 1262–76, doi:10.1111/bjet.12924.
    [Google Scholar]
71. Li Ruth. “A ‘Dance of Storytelling’: Dissonances between Substance and Style in Collaborative Storytelling with AI.” Computers and Composition, vol. 71, Mar. 2024, doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102825.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Loewe Drew. “Style as a System: Toward a Cybernetic Model of Composition Style.” Refiguring Prose Style: Possibilities for Writing Pedagogy edited by Johnson T. R. and Pace Tom, Utah UP 2005, pp 241–55.
    [Google Scholar]
73. Loewe Drew. “Style as a System: Toward a Cybernetic Model of Composition Style.”Refiguring Prose Style: Possibilities for Writing Pedagogy edited by Johnson T. R. and Pace Tom, Utah State UP 2005, pp 241–255.
    [Google Scholar]
74. Lu Min-Zhan. “Professing Multiculturalism: The Politics of Style in the Contact Zone.” Butler, Style, pp. 303–17.
    [Google Scholar]
75. Lorimer Leonard Rebecca. Writing on the Move: Migrant Women and the Value of Literacy. U of Pittsburgh P 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
76. Lu Min-Zhan, and Horner Bruce. “Translingual Literacy, Language Difference, and Matters of Agency.” College English, vol. 75, no. 6 2013, pp 582–607, doi:10.58680/ce201323836.
    [Google Scholar]
77. McKee Heidi A., and DeVoss Dànielle Nicole. Digital Writing Research: Technologies, Methodologies and Ethical Issues. Hampton Press 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
78. McLelland Mark. “Early Challenges to Multilingualism on the Internet: The Case of Han Character-Based Scripts,” Internet Histories, vol. 1, nos. 1–2 2017, pp 119–28, doi:10.1080/24701475.2017.1280889.
    [Google Scholar]
79. Melonçon Lisa. “Toward a Theory of Technological Embodiment.” Rhetorical Accessibility: At the Intersection of Technical Communication and Disability Studies edited by Melonçon Lisa, Routledge 2013, pp 67–81.
    [Google Scholar]
80. Micciche Laura. “Making a Case for Rhetorical Grammar.” Butler, Style, pp. 250–76.
    [Google Scholar]
81. Milic Louis T. “Theories of Style and Their Implications for the Teaching of Composition.” Butler, Style, pp. 140–45.
    [Google Scholar]
82. Miller Carolyn R. “What Can Automation Tell Us about Agency?” Fifty Years of Rhetoric Society Quarterly: Selected Readings, 1968–2018 edited by Gunn Joshua and Davis Diane, Routledge 2018, pp 183–200.
    [Google Scholar]
83. Mills Anna, Bali Maha, and Eaton Lance. “How Do We Respond to Generative AI in Education? Open Educational Practices Give Us a Framework for an Ongoing Process.” Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, vol. 6, no. 1 2023, doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.34.
    [Google Scholar]
84. MLA-CCCC Joint Task Force on Writing and AI. “MLA-CCCC Joint Task Force on Writing and AI Working Paper: Overview of the Issues, Statement of Principles, and Recommendations.” MLA and Conference on College Composition and Communication 2023, aiandwriting.hcommons.org/working-paper-1.
    [Google Scholar]
85. Mueller Alex. Habitual Rhetoric: Digital Writing Before Digital Technology. U of Pittsburgh P 2023.
    [Google Scholar]
86. Nichols T. Philip, LeBlanc Robert Jean, and Slomp David. “Writing Machines: Formative Assessment in the Age of Big Data.” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 64, no. 6 2021, pp 712–19, doi:10.1002/jaal.1160.
    [Google Scholar]
87. Noble Safiya Umoja. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York UP 2018, doi:10.18574/9781479833641.
    [Google Scholar]
88. Olinger Andrea R. “A Sociocultural Approach to Style.” Rhetoric Review, vol. 35, no. 2, Routledge 2016, pp 121–34, doi:10.1080/07350198.2016.1142930.
    [Google Scholar]
89. Omizo Ryan, and Hart-Davidson Bill. “Is Genre Enough? A Theory of Genre Signaling as Generative AI Rhetoric.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly, vol. 54, no. 3 2024, pp 272–85, doi:10.1080/02773945.2024.2343615.
    [Google Scholar]
90. Paolillo John, Pimienta Daniel, and Prado Daniel. “Measuring Linguistic Diversity on the Internet.” UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Montreal, Canada 2005, uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/measuring-linguistic-diversity-on-the-internet-ict-2005-en_0.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
91. Perrigo Billy. “Exclusive: OpenAI Used Kenyan Workers on Less than $2 per Hour to Make ChatGPT Less Toxic.” Time, 18 Jan. 2023, time.com/6247678/openai-chatgpt-kenyaworkers.
    [Google Scholar]
92. Raikov Aleksandr, Giretti Alberto, Pirani Massimiliano, Spalazzi Luca, and Guo Meng. “Accelerating Human-Computer Interaction through Convergent Conditions for LLM Explanation.” Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 7 2024, doi:10.3389/frai.2024.1406773.
    [Google Scholar]
93. Ratcliffe Krista. Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, Whiteness. Southern Illinois UP 2005.
    [Google Scholar]
94. Ray Brian. Style: An Introduction to History, Theory, Research, and Pedagogy. WAC Clearinghouse 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
95. Rickert Thomas. Ambient Rhetoric: The Attunements of Rhetorical Being. U of Pittsburgh P 2013, doi:10.2307/j.ctt5hjqwx.
    [Google Scholar]
96. Robinson Bradley. “Speculative Propositions for Digital Writing Under the New Autonomous Model of Literacy.” Postdigital Science and Education, vol. 5, no. 1 2023, pp 117–35, doi:10.1007/s42438‑022‑00358‑5.
    [Google Scholar]
97. Rudolph Jürgen, Tan Samson, and Tan Shannon. “ChatGPT: Bullshit Spewer or the End of Traditional Assessments in Higher Education?” Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, vol. 6, no. 1 2023, pp 342–63.
    [Google Scholar]
98. Sayers Dave. “A Simple Hack to ChatGPT-proof Assignments using Google Drive.” Times Higher Education 2023, timeshighereducation.com/campus/simple-hack-chatgptproof-assignments-using-google-drive.
    [Google Scholar]
99. Scribner Sylvia and Cole Michael. “Unpacking Literacy.” Literacy: A Critical Sourcebook edited by Cushman Ellen, Kintgen Eugene R., Kroll Barry M., and Rose Mike, St. Martin’s 2001, pp 123–37.
    [Google Scholar]
100. Shipka Jody. “Transmodality in/and Processes of Making: Changing Dispositions and Practice.” College English, vol. 78, no. 3 2016, pp 250–57, doi:10.58680/ce201627656.
     [Google Scholar]
101. Silvestro John J. “Remember Then Recommend: Critically Engaging Spell Checker Algorithms and Other Text Recommender Systems as Memory Infrastructures.” College English, vol. 86, no. 1 2023, pp 59–88, doi:10.58680/ce202332661.
     [Google Scholar]
102. Street Brian. Literacy in Theory and Practice. Cambridge UP 1984.
     [Google Scholar]
103. Syverson Margaret A. The Wealth of Reality: An Ecology of Composition. Southern Illinois UP 1999.
     [Google Scholar]
104. Takayoshi Pamela. “Writing in Social Worlds: An Argument for Researching Composing Processes.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 69, no. 4 2018, pp 550–80, doi:10.58680/ccc201829692.
     [Google Scholar]
105. Tan Rebecca, and Cabato Regine. “Behind the AI Boom, an Army of Overseas Workers in Digital Sweatshops.” The Washington Post, 18 Aug. 2023, washingtonpost.com/world/2023/08/28/scale-ai-remotasks-philippines-artificial-intelligence.
     [Google Scholar]
106. Toyama Kentaro. Geek Heresy: Rescuing Social Change from the Cult of Technology. PublicAffairs 2015.
     [Google Scholar]
107. Tyson Laura D., and Zysman John. “Automation, AI and Work.” Daedalus, vol. 151, no. 2 2022, pp 256–71.
     [Google Scholar]
108. Vee Annette. “Large Language Models Write Answers.” Composition Studies, vol. 51, no. 1 2023, pp 176–221.
     [Google Scholar]
109. Vetter Matthew A., Lucia Brent, Jiang Jialei, and Othman Mahmoud. “Towards a Framework for Local Interrogation of AI Ethics: A Case Study on Text Generators, Academic Integrity, and Composing with ChatGPT.” Computers and Composition, vol. 71, Mar. 2024, doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102831.
     [Google Scholar]
110. Walker Clay. “Composing Agency: Theorizing the Readiness Potentials of Literacy Practices.” Literacy in Composition Studies, vol. 3, no. 2 2015, pp 1–21, doi:10.21623/1.3.2.2.
     [Google Scholar]
111. Walker Clay. “Lifeworld Discourse, Translingualism, and Agency in a Discourse Genealogy of César Chávez’s Literacies.” Literacy in Composition Studies, vol. 8, no. 1 2020, pp 21–46, doi:10.21623/1.8.1.3.
     [Google Scholar]
112. Warschauer Mark, Tseng Waverly, Yim Soobin, and Webster Thomas. “The Affordances and Contradictions of AI-Generated Text for Writers of English as a Second or Foreign Language.” Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 62, Dec. 2023, doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101071.
     [Google Scholar]
113. Wei Li, and Lee Tong King. “Transpositioning: Translanguaging and the Liquidity of Identity.” Applied Linguistics 2023, doi:10.1093/applin/amad065.
     [Google Scholar]
114. Weidinger Laura, Rauh Maribeth, Marchal Nahema, Manzini Arianna, Hendricks Lisa Anne, Mateos-Garcia Juan, Bergman Stevie, Kay Jackie, Griffin Conor, Bariach Ben, Gabriel Iason, et al. “Sociotechnical Safety Evaluation of Generative AI Systems.” arXiv, 31 Oct. 2023, doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.11986. Preprint.
     [Google Scholar]
115. Wolf Maryanne, and Barzillai Mirit. “The Importance of Deep Reading.” Educational Leadership, March 2009, pp 33–37.
     [Google Scholar]
116. Wu Carole-Jean, Raghavendra Ramya, Gupta Udit, Acun Bilge, Ardalani Newsha, Maeng Kiwan, Chang Gloria, Behram Fiona Aga, Huang James, Bai Charles, Gschwind Michael, Gupta Anurag, et al. “Sustainable AI: Environmental Implications, Challenges and Opportunities.” Proceedings of the 5th Machine Learning and Systems Conference 2022, proceedings.mlsys.org/paper_files/paper/2022/hash/462211f67c7d858f663355eff93b745e-Abstract.html.
     [Google Scholar]
117. Young Vershawn Ashanti. “Should Writers Use They Own English?” Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 12, no. 1 2010, pp 110–18, doi:10.17077/2168‑569X.1095.
     [Google Scholar]