> If you want someone to produce a piece of writing about something, how they produced it is less important than the result. If it is correct, clear, and gets the job done, then good.

No, this fundamentally misunderstands the difference between work and pedagogy. With a work product, the end result is all that matters because it is a fundamentally new contribution for which the contribution is prized. If a marketer can get a 0.1% better conversion rate using ChatGPT, then that's the best course of action.

Pedagogy is a deliberate simulacrum of work under artificial conditions where learning is done via the process. Nobody cares that you've built the 10 millionth version of tetris, the work product at the end of it is fundamentally uninteresting. The work product is solely there to force you to engage in the process and deliberately useless so it can be shaped towards maximal learning.

Nobody mistakes, for example, that someone who uses a forklift to lift a 300lb bar or pays a friend to do it for them is getting their reps in at the gym because it's intrinsically obvious that the work of moving metal has no value but is instead, meant to induce an internal change in the athlete. Using ChatGPT on an assignment is no different from hiring a forklift to do your workout but people seem to want to get confused about it.