Are Novel Studies Making English Teachers Redundant?

Walk into most English classrooms during a novel study and you’ll see a familiar scene. Every student has the same book in front of them, regardless of interest or reading level. Together, they plod through the chapters, stop for whole-class discussions on characters and themes, then finish with an essay or in-class test.

It’s a formula that has barely shifted in decades. But here’s the uncomfortable truth, everything in that process, from the comprehension questions to the theme analysis, can now be done by AI.

So if a machine can already deliver the core work of a novel study, where does that leave the teacher?

The redundancy problem

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT can easily generate character analyses, theme breakdowns, and even personalised comprehension questions for any text. AI tutors can already guide a student through chapter-by-chapter reflection, scaffold their understanding, and keep a digital journal of insights for assessment.

So if novel study in its current form is simply:

1. Read a shared text

2. Analyse characters and themes

3. Produce an assessment piece

… then we have to ask, why do we need a teacher for that?

This isn’t just provocation for the sake of it. John Hattie’s synthesis of over 1,400 meta-analyses reminds us that teacher clarity and feedback are among the strongest influences on learning. Yet when the “teaching” of a novel boils down to scripted questions and generic assignments, AI can deliver it faster, more efficiently, and in ways that adapt to each learner’s pace.

The redundancy is not in teaching English, it’s in how we’re choosing to teach novels.

A reimagined model: AI and agency

Instead of the “one text for all” approach, imagine if every student could choose a novel that actually engages them, pitched at their reading level, connected to their interests, and providing real challenge. Research into student agency (OECD, 2019) shows that when learners have choice and voice, motivation and achievement increase.

Here’s how it could look:

• Student choice: learners select texts aligned to their interests and reading levels.

• AI as coach: a personalised AI agent guides them through each chapter, prompting analysis, reflection, and interpretation.

• Learning journals: students build ongoing, AI-supported portfolios of analysis that form the basis of assessment.

The teacher is no longer required to be the gatekeeper of “what the novel means.” Instead, they can spend their time where it matters most.

So what does the teacher do?

This is the pivot point. If AI can handle comprehension and analysis, what unique value does the teacher bring?

1. Teaching AI literacy: guiding students in how to prompt effectively, question AI’s responses, and critique interpretations. This aligns with calls from researchers like Luckin (2023) who argue that AI literacy is now a core competency.

2. Deepening critical thinking: while AI can generate analytical questions, it cannot replace the human work of noticing how students grapple with them, challenging surface-level responses, and connecting discussions to cultural, ethical, and local contexts that matter in their world. This is where teachers are irreplaceable.

3. Focusing on writing and communication: reclaiming time to teach language conventions, persuasive writing, or creative expression - the skills that transfer across disciplines.

4. Embedding reading as a habit: with AI scaffolding comprehension, teachers can cultivate a culture where novel study is ongoing rather than a siloed unit, building the lifelong practice of reading for meaning.

   
   

Redundancy or reinvention?

This is not about making English teachers obsolete. It’s about recognising that when the work is purely procedural, AI can already do it. The challenge is to step back and ask: if AI can teach the novel, what should we be teaching instead?

For English teachers, this could be the most liberating shift in decades. No longer confined to marching an entire class through the same text, they can focus on higher-order skills: critical literacy, argumentation, creativity, and cultural awareness.

But here’s the provocation: if you aren’t thinking about changing, you risk one of two things happening. First, your students will remain disengaged, because the traditional model has already lost relevance for many of them. Or second, and far more confronting, your role will simply become redundant, because AI can and will do the job you are currently doing.

The risk is clinging to old practices that AI will inevitably outpace. The opportunity is to reinvent novel study into a practice that is more personalised, more engaging, and ultimately more human.

So the question is not should AI play a role in novel studies, but are you ready to evolve before it makes the choice for you?

Upset by this post? That’s okay. It’s a tough time. But at EduShift, we are on a mission to transform education for the world we live in today. We will walk with you, support you, and ask you the hard questions. That’s what a trusted friend does. And if you’re nervous, that’s okay; we’re here for you.