Drawing on computational rhetoric, writing pedagogy, multimodal composition, and critical AI studies, this session examines AI not as a neutral tool but as a rhetorical system shaped by bias, ideology, and institutional power. Building on scholarship from Meredith Broussard, Ruha Benjamin, Safiya Umoja Noble, and others, the panel challenges the assumption that algorithmic outputs are objective or authoritative. Instead, we argue that AI systems function as persuasive and interpretive rhetors that can reshape human judgment, reinforce hegemonic norms, and obscure systemic inequities. At the same time, the panel explores how writing instruction can reposition AI as an object of rhetorical inquiry rather than passive acceptance.
Taken together, these presentations offer complementary approaches to understanding AI as a rhetorical and pedagogical problem in writing classrooms. Two papers focus on classroom-level interventions in computational rhetoric and curricular design, while a third bridges classroom and program-level work by examining multimodal composition as a program-level requirement implemented in classroom practice. The fourth extends this inquiry to the program level through assessment and analytics. This progression from classroom practice to program-level inquiry highlights how AI reshapes not only individual assignments but also broader structures of evaluation and instruction. Across these levels, the panel shows how students and instructors engage, question, and respond to AI, demonstrating that writing pedagogy must actively intervene in how algorithmic narratives are produced, circulated, and legitimized. This rationale underscores the session’s engagement with the MLA presidential theme, Emancipatory Narratives, as a pedagogical imperative, showing how writing classrooms and programs can challenge dominant technological narratives and cultivate forms of agency that are critical, self-aware, and oriented toward justice.
Fatima Zohra (University of Waterloo) introduces a computational rhetoric framework that critiques the “magical thinking” surrounding AI and demonstrates how uncritical trust in algorithmic outputs enables systems to exert rhetorical agency while reinforcing systemic bias.
Elizabeth Crawford (University of Iowa) presents a Writing-First, AI-Mindful curricular model that re-centers foundational writing and critical thinking skills while integrating AI literacy through structured, department-wide practices.
Eman Al-Drous (University of Tampa) examines generative AI as a rhetorical audience in first-year multimodal composition, showing how students use AI interpretations of visual advocacy projects as a form of “reverse evaluation.” Her findings demonstrate that AI reliably identifies logos-driven elements but often flattens ethos and pathos grounded in lived experience and cultural context, prompting students to revise for greater rhetorical clarity and audience awareness.
Russell Michalak (Goldey-Beacom College) extends this inquiry by examining AI-assisted writing tools such as Grammarly through a library-led, program-level assessment lens. Drawing on usage analytics from a first-year writing sequence, he argues that vendor-generated metrics should be understood as rhetorical traces of student interaction with algorithmic systems rather than as measures of writing quality. His findings suggest that students’ engagement with AI-supported revision reflects not only academic performance but also help-seeking behaviors, confidence, and their negotiation of algorithmic authority. By foregrounding the limits and opacity of vendor-defined analytics, this work calls for standardized, ethical approaches to assessing AI integration that preserve student agency while making visible how algorithmic systems shape revision practices.
These presentations position the writing classroom as a critical site for developing AI literacy that is not merely technical but rhetorical, ethical, and justice-oriented. The panel argues that teaching students to question, prompt, interpret, and revise AI outputs is essential to fostering equitable participation in AI-mediated communication environments.
The session will consist of four 10–12 minute presentations followed by at least 15 minutes of open discussion, inviting audience members to reflect on how writing classrooms can cultivate rhetorical agency across human and algorithmic audiences.
By bringing together interdisciplinary scholars from diverse institutional contexts, including junior, senior, and visiting faculty as well as administrators, this panel contributes to ongoing conversations in rhetoric and composition about writing, authorship, multimodal meaning-making, and equity in the age of AI.