The emergence of technologically empowering AI solutions has confronted several traditions practiced in the American educational system. Take-home exams to application essays, today students are equipped with technology that can create work in a matter of seconds with what once could have been hours worth thinking. The recent language model, GPT-5 developed by OpenAI, has made this dialogue even louder. With these advancements, educators, parents and even students are wondering what it would mean to have an AI write something at the level of a decent essay; what does that say about authenticity in learning and the college application process?
From Skepticism to a B+ Essay in Seconds
When OpenAI released ChatGPT, many dismissed it as a novelty. But for one adjunct professor of U.S. history at the City University of New York, the potential became clear after a simple test. The professor entered a recent final exam question into the chatbot — a prompt requiring analysis of societal change in America from 1920 to 1995. In about 15 seconds, the screen filled with a coherent essay that would likely earn a B+ in an introductory class. The AI supplied examples, structured arguments, and maintained historical accuracy.
This moment was a turning point. If a general model could handle survey-level coursework, what would happen if students applied it to more personal writing — like the college admissions essay?
Adjusting the Classroom for the AI Era
In response, the professor overhauled online courses to make them more resistant to AI assistance. Students now analyze visual sources — such as photographs, political cartoons, and charts — in short-answer quizzes. In the Writing Intensive section, the traditional written final was replaced with a multi-part project that included a presentation, a physical artifact, and a short research essay to tie the work together.
For non-Writing Intensive students, the final essay was removed entirely, a decision influenced by concerns that AI might still be capable of completing it convincingly. These changes were designed to ensure students engaged directly with course material in ways that an AI could not easily replicate.
The College Application Essay in the GPT-5 Age
While the professor acknowledged AI’s growing role in academic writing, they expressed doubt that even the most advanced model could consistently produce the kind of personal, compelling narrative needed to succeed at the most selective U.S. universities. Yes, some students might paste a Common App prompt into GPT-5 and submit the output without edits. And yes, those essays could be good enough for institutions where essays weigh lightly in admissions decisions.
The formulaic or generic writing is not sufficient even to the most competitive schools. These universities seek activities, specifics, and original voice, all of which are poorly provided by AI due to the lack of human prompting, even when used at its most developed.
Why Human Creativity Still Wins
Examples from recent students reinforce this point. One essay, from a student later accepted to Northeastern University, used a love for Chopin’s waltz rhythms as a metaphor for learning to code. Another, from a student nominated to the U.S. Naval Academy, connected a fascination with the “Ghost of Kyiv” legend to a dedication to serve in the Navy. A third wove together a first-generation American’s bilingual upbringing and her ambition to develop translation software for immigrants.
These introductions stand out because they respond to prompts in surprising ways. They are deeply personal, layered with experiences and emotions that no AI could fabricate convincingly from scratch. GPT-5 might mimic structure or tone, but it cannot invent a lifetime of lived details that make these stories resonate.
Testing GPT-5 as a College Essay Coach
The professor was interested in filling the gap between AI capability and students’ real voices and attempted to use GPT-5 instead of a ghostwriter as a coach rather than a writer. The model might advise on structural enhancements, cliches, and advisable means of explaining themes. However, the results lost weight when minus raw material on the part of the student, viz. personal anecdote, details of sensation, and true reflection.
When fed vague information, GPT-5 produced equally vague drafts. When given richer material, it could polish and refine, but the emotional and creative leaps still had to come from the student. In other words, GPT-5 worked best as a tool for revision, not as a replacement for the human act of writing.
The Risk for Students Who Over-Rely on AI
The professor warns that overreliance on AI could backfire for applicants. Competitive admissions readers are adept at spotting generic responses. An essay that reads like a perfectly structured but personality-free composition is unlikely to stand out in a pool of thousands. In some cases, it could even raise questions about authenticity, prompting schools to request supplementary writing samples completed under supervision.
For students, the lesson is clear: AI can be part of the process, but it cannot be the process. Using GPT-5 as a brainstorming partner or grammar checker may enhance a strong essay, but letting it dictate the entire narrative risks missing the point of the assignment.