This article explores how process-oriented writing assignments (POWAs) can foster critical thinking in political science education amid the challenges posed by generative AI (genAI) and hyperpolitics. It argues that traditional product-focused writing tasks are increasingly insufficient, as genAI tools risk bypassing cognitive effort and political polarisation discourages open inquiry. Drawing on writing pedagogy, the article outlines key POWA principles and illustrates their application in a first-year political science course. Through a scaffolded sequence of assignments, students progressively build research and analytical skills while engaging with diverse perspectives. Despite positive outcomes, challenges remain in managing instructor workload and detecting sophisticated genAI use. The article concludes by advocating for pedagogical and institutional innovations to sustain writing as a tool for critical engagement.
AlexanderDABrownSAWangH, et al. (2025) An early-career lecturer and mentor walk into a lecture theatre . . . repeatedly: Developmental benefits of collaborative lecturing in political science. Politics45: 665–683.
2.
AnYYuJHJamesS (2025) Investigating the higher education institutions’ guidelines and policies regarding the use of generative AI in teaching, learning, research, and administration. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education22(1): 10.
3.
AnsonIG (2017) Audience, purpose, and civic engagement: A reassessment of writing instruction in political science. Journal of Political Science Education13(4): 389–403.
4.
BainbridgeL (1983) Ironies of Automation. Automatica19(6): 775–779.
5.
BeamEA (2021) Leveraging outside readings and low-stakes writing assignments to promote student engagement in an economic development course. The Journal of Economic Education52(4): 274–285.
6.
BlingsSMaxeyS (2016) Teaching students to engage with evidence: An evaluation of structured writing and classroom discussion strategies. Journal of Political Science Education13(1): 15–32.
7.
ButcherC (2021) Using in-class writing to promote critical thinking and application of course concepts. Journal of Political Science Education18(1): 3–21.
8.
CahillCMcCabeK (2024) Context matters: Understanding student usage, skills, and attitudes toward AI to inform classroom policies. PS: Political Science & Politics57(4): 594–601.
9.
ÇavdarGDoeS (2012) Learning through writing: Teaching critical thinking skills in writing assignments. PS: Political Science & Politics45(2): 298–306.
10.
CondonWKelly-RileyD (2004) Assessing and teaching what we value: The relationship between college-level writing and critical thinking abilities. Assessing Writing9(1): 56–75.
ElbowP (1997) High stakes and low stakes in assigning and responding to writing. New Directions for Teaching and Learning69: 5–13.
13.
EnnisRH (1993) Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice32(3): 179–186.
14.
FranklinDWeinbergJReiflerJ (2014) Teaching writing and critical thinking in large political science classes. Journal of Political Science Education10(2): 155–165.
15.
GaultneyIBSherronTBodenC (2022) Political polarization, misinformation, and media literacy. Journal of Media Literacy Education14(1): 59–81.
16.
HanckeT (2020) Ironies of automation 4.0. IFAC PapersOnline53(2): 17463–17468.
17.
HarringtonJJ (2021) Comprehensive education benefits: Teaching students to write collaboratively in political science. Journal of Political Science Education 17(Suppl. 1): 825–834.
18.
IshiyamaJWatsonWL (2014) Using computer-based writing software to facilitate writing assignments in large political science classes. Journal of Political Science Education10(1): 93–101.
19.
JägerA (2023) Hyperpolitics: Extreme Politicization without Political Consequences. London: Verso Books.
20.
JosefsonJ (2005) Don’t argue, reflect! Reflections on introducing reflective writing into political science courses. PS: Political Science & Politics38(4): 763–767.
21.
LandersC (2024) ChatGPT, the CUPID model, and low-stakes writing. American Association of Philosophy Teachers Studies in Pedagogy9: 188–204.
22.
LeeH-PSarkarATankelevitchL, et al. (2025) The impact of generative AI on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. In: CHI ’25: CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Yokohama, Japan, 26 April–1 May, pp. 1–22. New York: ACM.
23.
LeeITipoeE (2024) Education and ideological polarisation: Cross-country evidence and recommendations for higher education. British Educational Research Journal51(1): 369–393.
24.
LobetMHonetARomainvilleM, et al. (2024) ChatGPT: quel en a été l’usage spontané d’étudiants de première année universitaire à son arrivée ?Médiations & Médiatisations18: 67–90.
25.
McMillanSL (2014) Bravo for brevity: Using short paper assignments in international relations classes. International Studies Perspectives15(1): 109–120.
26.
MichelsS (2024) Teaching (with) artificial intelligence: The next twenty years. Journal of Political Science Education20(4): 510–521.
O’NeillS (2025) Decolonising politics curricula: Exploring the experiences and views of racially minoritised students. Politics45(1): 141–159.
29.
PhillipsJL (2019) Making assignments count: The quest for critical thinking in undergraduate political theory essays. Journal of Political Science Education15(2): 142–160.
30.
PithersRTSodenR (2000) Critical thinking in education: A review. Educational Research42(3): 237–249.
31.
QuitadamoIJJKurtzMJ (2007) Learning to improve: Using writing to increase critical thinking performance in general education biology. CBE – Life Sciences Education6: 140–154.
RathbunGTurnerN (2012) Authenticity in academic development: The myth of neutrality. International Journal for Academic Development17(3): 231–242.
34.
ShermanDJWaismel-ManorI (2004) Get it in writing: Using politics to teach writing and writing to teach politics. PS: Political Science & Politics36(4): 755–757.
35.
TimperleyCSchickK (2025) Spacious learning: A critical reflection on active learning in political science. Politics. Epub ahead of print 1September. DOI: 10.1177/02633957251370594.
36.
WenderAMD’ErmanVJ (2021) A compass during the storm: Offering students critical rigor for polarizing times. PS: Political Science & Politics54(4): 739–743.
37.
WongKMMoorhouseBL (2018) Writing for an audience: Inciting creativity among young English language bloggers through scaffolded comments. TESOL Journal9(4): 1–6.
