Is canvas + ChatGPT a problem or an opportunity: Reports

OpenAI has just announced canvas (https://openai.com/index/introducing-canvas/ ) with ChatGPT as a beta in ChatGPT Plus. Canvas is an extra interface along with the standard text interface for ChatGPT prompts and responses. It feels more like using a featured text editor.

At the moment OpenAI are rolling out canvas to ChatGPT Plus and Team users, then Enterprise and Edu users will get access next week; with the plan to make canvas available to all ChatGPT Free users after the beta stage.

So to have a bit of a play I put an old document through it (selected the ChatGPT 4o with canvas option from the ChatGPT Plus drop-down menu), askeing it to use that document as a starting point for a report.

One of the difference is both windows are editable for prompts. So using the lefthand side you can put in a prompt as normal in ChatGPT but in the right-hand wind you highlight the text and ask ChatGPT do action that bit .

You can still ask prompts, as in normal ChatGPT, such as "Add appropriate citations through out the report and then add a reference list at the end of the report" as before.

In OpenAIs announcement (https://openai.com/index/introducing-canvas/ ) they did also suggest a few short cuts that are useful for writing (the ones below are taken directly from the announcement).

Personal view: I do think this is a step to making Generative AI a more user-friendly tool for writing from notes. I do have a concern that this may increase the risk of plagiarism. At the same time the plagarsim concern is balanced out with the hope that tools like canvas are perhaps where Generative AI should be going as a collaborative tool to improve work (not a new insight). It is a more intuitive interface so I believe a step in the right direction.

All opinions in this blog are the Author's and should not in any way be seen as reflecting the views of any organisation the Author has any association with. Twitter @scottturneruon

Comments

Prompt Engineering, Context Engineering and Agentic AI in Higher Education: A Short Briefing

AI in Education Prompt engineering, context engineering and agentic AI are often used interchangeably, but the literature treats them as distinct. Prompt engineering concerns crafting effective single instructions to a model (Glean, 2026). Context engineering is the broader discipline of designing and managing the entire informational environment around a model—memory, retrieval, tool outputs and conversation state—rather than a one-off instruction (Abstracta, 2026); prompt engineering operates within the context window, while context engineering determines what fills it (arXiv:2606.12422, 2026). Agentic AI describes systems that plan and execute multi-step tasks with delegated autonomy, raising organisational questions of accountability rather than purely technical ones (MIT Sloan, 2026; Palo Alto Networks, 2026). There is genuine debate about prompt engineering's durability. IEEE Spectrum (2025) reported research suggesting prompting is increasingly performed by models themse...

Using an LLM to Find Themes using Thematic Analysis in an Academic Career

B rief recap In an earlier post, “Same prompt, four AIs: why answers aren’t always the same” , I looked at what happened when the same prompt was given to four different LLMs. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, the answers were not identical. That raised an interesting follow-on question: what was the prompt actually trying to do? The answer is that it was trying to support a form of thematic analysis. In that case, the object of analysis was an academic profile, including my Google Scholar profile. The version I discuss here is a modified prompt, used with Claude.ai, where I uploaded a CV and asked the system to find other appropriate public resources connected with a named person and institution. The aim was not simply to summarise the CV, but to identify visible and less visible themes across a whole career. Why use thematic analysis? Thematic analysis is widely used by academics, especially in qualitative research. Braun and Clarke’s well-known paper, Using thematic analysis in psy...

AI as a Mirror: Transforming Vague Student Ideas into a More Rigorous Project Agreement

The Problem: The "Generic App" and the "Time Sink" We’ve all been there: a student walks into a 1-to-1 with a vague desire to "do something with AI" or "build a fitness app." You spend 45 minutes trying to find a technical "hook" that justifies a Level 6 or Level 7 grade, only for the student to drift back into "CRUD app" territory by week three. The Philosophy: AI as a Mirror Instead of you doing the heavy lifting, this workflow uses AI as a Mirror . It reflects the student’s own skills and career goals back to them, but with the structural rigour of a virtual supervisory team. It’s not about the AI "giving" the idea; it’s about the AI forcing the student to defend and refine their own concepts until they hold water. The Framework: 3 Months of Rigour This prompt is specifically designed for intensive/conversion MSc or summer capstone projects . It assumes a tight 12-week implementation window. By forcing the AI to w...

Applying prompts to GenAI/LLMs

Search This Blog