At the University of Arizona, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was loudly booed as he compared A.I. to previous waves of technological innovation and urged graduates to help “shape” its future. At the University of Central Florida, real estate executive Gloria Caulfield drew loud jeers when she called A.I. “the next industrial revolution.” At commencement ceremonies across the country, these moments of backlash against A.I. have made leaders across industries take note: Gen Z’s pushback against A.I. is getting louder. What are they telling us?
As the incoming interim dean at the Kogod School of Business at American University, where we have intentionally integrated A.I. throughout the curriculum since 2023, I see those clips of graduation boos less as a protest against the technology and more as a message from students. Perhaps they are not rejecting A.I. itself (many use it every day!). Rather, they are likely reacting to the way A.I. is often presented: as an inevitable force that will disrupt their lives and careers, and one they are expected to accept with enthusiasm.
The landscape for college students and new graduates is changing faster than we can prepare them for, and students feel uncertain about their futures. Many are entering a labor market already marked by economic volatility, shifting career paths and evolving employer expectations. Some resent the advent of A.I. for that uncertainty, because they say it’s taking away their ability to control their own path. They are skeptical of a technology that corporate executives praise while saying little about what it means for workers starting their careers. They hear promises of productivity gains and business transformation while also seeing headlines about layoffs, hiring freezes and automation.
Why skepticism makes sense
Students are the ones who have to live with these technologies and their impact the longest, so it makes sense that they are skeptical. In fact, I’d be more concerned if they simply accepted every claim made about A.I. at face value.
Recent polling suggests that adults under 30 are more likely than older generations to view A.I. as “mostly bad,” even as they use it every day. At the same time, employer expectations are changing rapidly. The percentage of students reporting that prospective employers asked about their ability to use A.I. in the workplace jumped from 12 percent in 2024 to 30 percent in 2025. Preliminary data from the 2025–2026 academic year indicates that the figure has already climbed to 42 percent. Students understand these signals and recognize that A.I. will shape the future workplace. What they’re questioning is how, and for whose benefit.
More than anything, students are worried. Through their boos at commencement, each of these student skeptics is demonstrating something of paramount importance in the age of A.I.: critical thinking.
Real critical thinking is a lot more than just being a contrarian. It means asking questions like: What can this technology do more effectively than I can? How can it strengthen my work without diminishing my judgment? What responsibilities should never be delegated to a machine?
That’s where the real power of properly using A.I. lies: helping students build the judgment to understand where A.I. creates value, where tools fall short and how to use A.I. in ways that amplify—not replace—their own thinking. That’s critical thinking beyond mere criticism.
When A.I. tools help vs. hinder learning
That philosophy has shaped how we approach A.I. across the student experience at Kogod: not as a standalone tool to master, but as something students learn to question, experiment with and apply to enhance their innate human intelligence, like creativity, communication and ethical reasoning.
Like many technologies, A.I. can either deepen learning or undermine it. I’ve seen students use A.I. to take shortcuts, bypassing the intellectual work required to build expertise and weakening their learning outcomes. I’ve also seen students use A.I. intentionally and with curiosity to explore ideas more deeply, challenge assumptions and expand the scope of what they can create.
This past spring, first-year students in my introductory business course completed a final project that required them to develop a product concept and pitch it to a prospective investor (think Shark Tank). The assignment challenged them to think like entrepreneurs: identifying a market opportunity, developing a solution and presenting a compelling business case.
The results were remarkable. Their slide design was excellent. We had practiced delivering the presentations often throughout the semester, so they were confident in their delivery, and then they used A.I. to tease out creative ideas and embellish their content. Students developed apps, built prototype websites and even created commercials to bring their concepts to life. They demonstrated a level of creativity I haven’t seen from students their age since I began teaching the course in 2011. A.I. ultimately enabled students to demonstrate a deeper understanding of their customers, more sophisticated product design thinking and greater confidence in presenting their ideas.
What the boos are actually telling us
Like the A.I. skeptics out there, I worry about what gets lost when A.I. substitutes learning: practice, deeper understanding and the development of judgment students will need to thrive in their chosen careers. It’s exactly what many students fear when they hear leaders talk about investing in tech to create efficiency rather than investing in people. And it’s exactly why educators need to empower them to use A.I. as an amplifier for their intellectual output—not a replacement for it, or a replacement for them.
At Kogod, we’ve found students respond very differently when A.I. is introduced not as a threat to their future but as a tool integrated into how they learn, solve problems and create more effectively.
We need to listen to what students are telling us. As educators, it’s our responsibility to revise our assignments to take advantage of these new tools, while ensuring students still meet their course learning objectives and develop the foundational skills that technology cannot replace. It also means preparing them for a workforce where A.I. literacy will be essential, while reinforcing the human capabilities that remain their greatest advantage. As a dean, I am excited to set a strategy for our business school that prepares our students for the future of work and all it will require of them.
So when I hear those boos at graduation? I hear engagement, skepticism and critical thinking in action. In the age of A.I., that’s worth applauding.
