Recap
Back To Campus With AI: Learning From Student Ambassadors
As colleges and universities head into a new academic year, conversations about AI are continuing to evolve. But one voice still isn’t always represented enough in those conversations: students themselves.
In our latest webinar, Back to Campus with AI: Learning From Student Ambassadors, we were joined by Lori Robbins, Head of AI Strategy at Denison University, and three of Denison’s AI Student Ambassadors: Shizza Shafqat, Kelsey Sweetland, and Debjani Kakon.
Together, they shared how Denison is giving students meaningful responsibility for shaping AI on campus, along with what students are actually thinking, doing, and asking for as AI becomes a bigger part of their academic and everyday lives.
Here are a few of the biggest takeaways from the conversation.
1. Don’t just talk about students. Bring them into the conversation.
One question was at the heart of Denison’s AI Student Ambassador Program: How can we shift from getting students ready for AI to giving them meaningful responsibility for helping shape what AI becomes on campus?
That shift matters. Students aren’t simply the audience for institutional AI policies, resources, and initiatives. They are experiencing the impact of those decisions firsthand and can bring perspectives institutional leaders may otherwise miss.
At Denison, student ambassadors participate in conversations with campus leaders, contribute to AI guidelines, lead workshops, develop resources, and help shape new initiatives. As Kelsey described it, the role has allowed her to become not just a participant at her university, but an active player in helping decide where it goes next.
2. There is no single “student perspective” on AI.
Students’ attitudes toward AI vary widely, often based on their disciplines, experiences, and how they see the technology affecting the things they value.
The ambassadors described enthusiasm and experimentation among some students, particularly around entrepreneurship and technology, alongside significant skepticism in areas like the humanities, arts, and environmental studies.
That’s an important reminder for institutions: meaningful student engagement shouldn’t mean finding the students who are most excited about AI. Denison intentionally recruited ambassadors with different majors, backgrounds, academic years, and attitudes toward the technology, including AI skeptics.
Those differing perspectives make the conversation stronger.
3. Students need clarity, not just access.
One theme came through clearly: students want to understand what responsible AI use actually looks like in their courses.
Debjani described the confusion students can experience when expectations vary significantly from one faculty member or course to another. Her suggestion was simple: make expectations for AI as clear as other course expectations, like required textbooks, assignments, or grading policies.
Kelsey reinforced that students don’t just need access to AI tools. They need education that helps them understand what the technology is, how to use it intentionally, and when they may choose not to use it.
Clear guidance gives students greater agency to make those decisions responsibly.
4. Experimentation can create space for reflection.
Some of Denison’s most interesting lessons have come from experiments designed to ask questions rather than prove a predetermined point.
During an “AI-Free Week,” Lori and Kelsey stopped using generative AI tools to better understand where AI had become embedded in their routines. The experience surfaced everything from small conveniences to more meaningful uses and prompted reflection about when AI was replacing tasks, conversations, or decisions they could handle themselves.
In another experiment, the ambassadors were asked to consider adding an AI “student ambassador” to their team. They pushed back strongly on the idea, questioning whether AI could truly serve as an ambassador when it had never been a student.
That pushback became part of the lesson.
Experimenting with AI doesn’t have to mean adopting everything it makes possible. It can also help students and institutions ask better questions about where AI belongs, where it doesn’t, and why.
5. The goal isn’t simply to teach students how to use AI. It’s to build with them.
Perhaps the biggest takeaway from Denison’s experience is the opportunity to move beyond one-way AI education.
The Student Ambassadors have developed an AI literacy course for incoming first-year students, hosted peer workshops, participated in institutional conversations, worked with high school students, experimented with AI agents, and explored AI through their own academic and professional interests.
Those experiences build AI literacy, but they also build leadership, critical thinking, communication, creativity, and career-connected skills.
As institutions consider their AI priorities for the year ahead, the question may no longer be simply, “How do we prepare students for AI?”
It may be: “What could we learn and build if students were helping lead the way?”
Continue the Conversation
This webinar surfaced far more questions and ideas than we could cover in one hour. In the weeks ahead, we’ll continue exploring lessons from Denison’s AI Student Ambassador Program, including student attitudes toward AI, responsible use, campus experimentation, and what meaningful student partnership can look like in practice.
Missed the live conversation? Watch the full webinar recording on Alchemy’s YouTube channel to hear directly from Lori, Shizza, Kelsey, and Debjani and learn more about Denison’s approach.
Watch Now
