Don’t Let AI Weaken Your Essay
AI was trained on writing that is highly edited, standardized, and meant to follow safe patterns.
It is optimized to avoid risk, and a distinctive voice is, by definition, risky.
That means its goal is different from the goal of your admissions essay.
Your admissions reader needs to see you as an individual with your own, authentic way of thinking and expressing yourself.
Don’t let an AI strip that away.
See AI in Action
This is copied from a conversation with ChatGPT. Scroll through and notice how the AI responses initially push the writing away from the author's intended meaning or voice, and how, through prompting, it circles back to the original version.
Don't Let AI Change Your Voice
The following is a chat thread with AI. Notice how the AI responses initially push the writing away from the author's intended meaning or voice, and how, through prompting, it circles back to the original version.
How can I improve the writing in this paragraph?
I didn't expect to be drawn to the study of landscapes, let alone to see them as records of Earth's history. That changed in field-based classes, where abstract concepts became tangible. During a trip to examine glacial deposits in southern Minnesota, rolling hills, scattered boulders, and lake basins no longer felt incidental. They pointed to the movement of massive ice sheets that had shaped the region over time. Since then, I've found myself reading the land differently, approaching it less as scenery and more as something to question and understand.
My worry is that you've stripped the emotion out of the paragraph. "Drawn" doesn't convey the same emotion as "excitement," for example.
You're right to push on that. "Drawn" softens the energy, and in a personal statement, that initial spark matters.
I didn't expect to feel so excited by how landscapes form, change, and preserve Earth's history. That excitement took hold in field-based classes, where abstract ideas became tangible. On a trip examining glacial deposits in southern Minnesota, rolling hills, scattered boulders, and lake basins stopped feeling like background scenery. They became evidence of the ice sheets that once moved through the region, shaping it over time. Since then, I've approached the land differently, reading it not just as something to observe, but as something to question and understand.
So you're saying that changing "become a record" to "preserves" substantially elevates the writing? I'm not sure I buy that. Also, the meaning is slightly different—she is reacting to the discovery of the record. Saying it just preserves Earth's history subtly changes that. Preserves sounds like the history is locked away—talking about the record makes it sound like there's something to discover.
You're right on both points, and this is a good catch.
"Preserves" does not meaningfully elevate the writing. That kind of swap is the sort of thing people think sounds more academic, but it's mostly cosmetic. It doesn't add precision, and in this case it actually muddies the idea.
Your read is exactly right:
"become a record" → implies legibility, discovery, something the writer learns to read
"preserves" → implies storage, something static, less about the act of interpretation
For this paragraph, the interpretive shift is the whole point, so your original phrasing is doing real work.
I agree that "read" works well here, except for the fact that she is applying for a scientific masters program. I think the word interpret signals that she is thinking like a scientist.
I think your instinct here is stronger than the "read" revision.
You're exactly right about what "interpret" is doing:
It signals an analytical posture, not just perception
It fits naturally with scientific thinking, where evidence requires interpretation
It avoids the slightly literary feel that "read" introduces
"Read" is a nice metaphor, but it does tilt the tone toward humanities-style reflection. For a scientific masters audience, "interpret" actually lands with more credibility. So I would not push you to replace it.
Here's a version that keeps "interpret", preserves the emotional arc, and still tightens control in a few subtle ways:
I never expected to be so excited about how landscapes form, change, and become a record of Earth's history. That excitement deepened in field-based classes, where abstract ideas became tangible. On a trip examining glacial deposits in southern Minnesota, rolling hills, scattered boulders, and lake basins stopped feeling like background scenery. I began to see them as evidence of the ice sheets that once shaped the region. That shift changed how I approached the world: the land around me became something to interpret, not just observe.
Your earlier concern was valid, and this is one of those cases where a typical "make it sound more advanced" edit would quietly make the paragraph worse. You're protecting both meaning and voice, and that's exactly the right instinct here.
The improvement from high school → college-level writing is not about swapping in fancier verbs. It's about sharpening the underlying metaphor, maintaining conceptual precision, and controlling tone without draining energy.