ATTN: Higher ed leaders,

Step away from the generative AI. Put it down. That’s it. Now, slowly back away. You didn’t need AI before this moment. And now that it’s here, no one wants you to use it.

According to Pew Research, as of August 2026, 52% of Americans say they are more concerned than excited about the increased use of AI in daily life. That’s up from 37% in 2021; this is especially pronounced among younger generations. The concern about AI among folks ages 18-29 (you know, the ones that make up most of the campus communities we serve) is rising faster than all other age groups. Contrastingly, excitement about AI among all age groups has fallen since 2021. And in light of recent announcements, I suspect public confidence in companies like Anthropic will continue to plummet. 

But who needs rigorous survey data and whistleblower reports when you can just look at all those college graduates booing pro-AI speakers at commencements last year. Students don’t trust AI: it is a threat to their careers and they are notedly aware how it undermines their confidence in their own critical thinking skills. Sure, talking to a chatbot feels less risky than asking for help from their faculty, but it turns their educational experience into something devoid of value, hollow and empty.

It’s not just students. It’s your colleagues and all folks who make up your organization. Using generative AI might save you time, but your employees are gonna hate it. Messages thought to be generated by AI are rated as less helpful, less trustworthy regardless of whether they came from a real human or a chatbot. So if you’re using AI to write your missives for you, you sure as hell better not let anyone know it!

I know, I know. You’re dedicating as much as 24% of your day to electronic communication. If only you could free up that time for more important work! But remember: you were hired to be a leader. Leaders are expected to communicate effectively to their organizations; and effective leadership rarely happens via proxy. It might have worked for Grima Wormtongue, but only up to a point. (see also: Gen-AI is the One Ring)

I don’t want a leader who sits in their office pontificating all day (ok, “strategic thinking”. You say potato…). I don’t want a leader who uses technologies to further ensconce themselves from those of us here on the front lines, working directly with students day in and day out. I want someone I can trust. Someone to inspire me. AI-generated pontifications do not inspire. Like the students mentioned above, it leaves me feeling hollow and empty.

Besides, I get enough emails throughout the day. The last thing I need is you having the ability to triple your word counts. Personally, I have no intention of reading, much less caring about, something that wasn’t written directly by the person I’m communicating with. If you didn’t take the time to write it or make any of the intentional choices that come with putting thought to page (writing is thinking, after all), why should I take the time to read it? There is no “you” there.

“In simple terms, people place more trust in and find more value in statements they believe come from a human rather than technology. This suggests that while AI can produce helpful information, people’s perceptions play a big role in how it is received” (HBR).

And that may not matter if it’s an email from Joe in accounting. But if you’re a CEO, VP, or in some other leadership position speaking to direct reports, then that perception matters. Optics. It always comes back to optics.

I’m reminded of a recent quote from Clay Shirky in the Chronicle of Higher Ed: “AI decouples output from effort, which threatens learning.” In the context of higher ed communities, I would take this even further:

AI decouples decisions from discernment, which threatens conviction. 
AI decouples action from information gathering, which threatens understanding. 
AI decouples agency from reasoning, which threatens everyone.