Bret Carpenter

I think about my students every day. It is summer, and I am in the thick of redeveloping courses, trying to figure out what entrepreneurship actually looks like next year. The entrepreneurial landscape is an amusement park. You never know where the ride goes next. Predicting what works, what fails, or what people will want is nearly impossible.

There is a mystical belief in the “self-made” entrepreneur. The idea is that someone did it all alone. It is a fallacy. It is a lie. Nobody does it on their own. We are all dependent on people we never see, never hear, and never talk to. Entrepreneurs rely on engineers, salespeople, marketers, operations staff, factory workers, contractors, and thousands of invisible connections that converge to make an enterprise function. Even in small ventures, no one builds everything completely solo. But when a business scales to serve millions, that dependency explodes into the thousands.

We ignore this in our current climate. We point to a founder and call them “self-made,” acting as if they need no one. Yet we all need each other so desperately, and we keep forgetting it.

Because of this, I have shifted my entire approach. My classes are no longer about executing a rigid plan. Instead, we focus on the big questions we try to answer as individuals, teams, and a whole class. These answers do not come because one person is individually brilliant. They come because we ask the right questions, stay open to possibilities, listen to each other, and test ideas. We do not assume we know everything. We question. We try. We fail. We learn.

As we face a bumpy, uncertain future defined by AI and technological shifts, this is the most critical lesson. We do not know it all. AI certainly does not know it all. Tech CEOs definitely do not know it all. We need each other. We need to talk, listen, and believe in one another. Only then can we build a future that serves the humans who will live in it. Not the companies. Not the algorithms. And certainly not some imagined future of AI overlords. We build it for the people.

And that brings us to the hard truth. If we let AI think for us, we are not just losing our jobs. We are losing the very capacity to ask the questions that matter.

We hear so many messages these days about “being present.” But what does that actually have to do with who’s driving in your life? Everything, actually. If you’re not present and not driving, then who is?

I used to think that being present was hard work because I had to let go of all the other things going on in my head. Turns out, when I do let go of all that, it’s much less work. Being present isn’t sitting cross-legged and meditating. It’s the act of paying attention so you can notice when you’ve been on autopilot.

And that’s where the question comes in. Are you handing over the wheel to technology? Because this is really about our relationship with technology.

Think about it. When you’re scrolling aimlessly through whatever your social media of choice is, are you present for that? When you let AI write your emails for you, do you read them? When you search something and just accept the Google summary, do you question it? These are little transfers. Each one, you’re transferring your agency.

Now, I’m not anti-technology. I use the crap out of technology. I’m on it constantly. I’ve worked in IT. I’ve been an AI coordinator. I’ve been at the forefront of this stuff. But all of that experience has made me realize something: I have handed over agency to the technology. And we all do it. We look at our feeds, and our feeds are just feeding that back to us, right? We don’t go out and find the content. It shows up. We click on something, and more of that shows up. People forget about this.

So I’m not saying you need a digital detox. I’m not saying we all need to put down our phones, though it’s probably a good idea to put them down sometimes. What I’m saying is that we need to stay present in our relationship with technology.

And what does that really mean? Especially with AI, are you leading the conversations, or are you following them? Because to me, that’s the biggest question we need to ask ourselves as we head into this future. Are you behind the wheel, or are you in the passenger seat letting the machine decide where you’re going?

As instructional staff, many of us are exploring cutting-edge ways to integrate AI tools like custom chatbots and generative AI frameworks into our courses. These innovations can enhance efficiency, creativity, and engagement—but they also come with risks. Recent research from Microsoft and Carnegie Mellon highlights a troubling trend: over-reliance on AI can erode critical thinking skills, especially when students trust outputs without scrutiny.

So, how do we strike the right balance? Here are some strategies we’ve been discussing:

• AI as a Catalyst for Inquiry: Design assignments where students must critique or improve AI-generated outputs.
• Transparency in Use: Require students to disclose how they’ve used AI and evaluate its limitations.
• Socratic Prompts: Use AI to simulate debates or flawed arguments that challenge students to think critically.

At our college, we’re piloting frameworks that combine these approaches while developing policies to guide responsible AI use. But this is just the beginning—we need collective insights!

💡 How are you using AI in your teaching? What strategies are you employing to ensure it enhances, rather than replaces, critical thinking?

Let’s collaborate and share ideas below! 👇 #AIinHigherEd #CriticalThinking

I thought I’d share some insights from a recent project I’ve been working on. It’s an interactive assignment designed to give students a taste of screening interviews, with a little help from AI. Here’s the setup:

• Students pick a job from a list (or choose their own), and the AI generates a job description.
• The AI conducts a quick three-question screening interview and provides feedback on the student’s performance.
• It even explains whether they’d be selected for the next interview and why.

I decided to test it out by choosing the role of a marketing specialist. The AI gave me a decent job description and asked me to describe a successful marketing campaign I’d worked on. I gave a vague response about a social media campaign, and to my surprise, the AI started coaching me through the process, asking for more details about the goals, strategies, and tactics. Even when I pushed back with minimal information, the AI continued to guide me, breaking down the question further and helping me formulate a better answer.

This level of interaction and coaching was not something I had initially intended, but it turned out to be a fascinating aspect of the exercise. Overall, this AI-driven interactive assignment has shown potential in providing students with valuable practice and feedback in a simulated interview setting. I’m excited to see how this approach can further enhance student learning and development.

Check out the video below to see some of the results of the AI conversation:

Watch the video

Stay tuned for more updates and insights.

“Whole communities suddenly fix their minds upon one object, and go mad in its pursuit.”
— Charles Mackay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)

This quote—shared in Gary Marcus’s critique of today’s AI frenzy—makes me want to read Mackay’s 1841 study of mass hysteria. Though I haven’t yet explored his analysis of tulip mania or witch trials, its relevance to our AI moment is unmistakable:

Three Echoes Across Centuries

• Gold Rushes: From Dutch tulip bulbs to AI startups, speculative fever repeats.
• Herd Dynamics: Social media amplifies today’s AI debates, mirroring Mackay’s “madness in herds.”
• Ethical Alchemy: Visionaries promise transformation; critics warn of unintended consequences.

Mackay’s work whispers: Question hype, seek nuance, and remember—we’ve danced this dance before.

#AIHype #CollectiveMadness #HistoryRepeats

A nudge from Gary Marcus’s writing to revisit old wisdom. Explore more at Humanovate.com.

When I think about the future of education, I find myself both curious and cautious. Artificial intelligence (AI) is being heralded as a transformative force across industries, and education is no exception. But is it truly the “killer app” that justifies the billions being poured into AI development? Or are we still searching for the breakthrough that will make all this investment feel inevitable?

One intriguing possibility lies in AI tutors. These systems promise to personalize learning, adapt to individual needs, and scale education in ways we’ve never seen before. But as I reflect on this potential, I can’t help but wonder: Is this the future of higher education—or just one possible path forward?

The Promise of AI in Education

AI tutors are designed to provide personalized learning experiences by analyzing student performance in real time and offering targeted support. Imagine a tutor that knows exactly where you’re struggling and can guide you through complex concepts at your own pace—available 24/7.

In higher education, this could mean:

• Personalized Support: AI systems could adapt to each student’s learning style, providing tailored feedback and resources.
• Scalability: Unlike human instructors, AI tutors can assist thousands of students simultaneously without compromising quality.
• Accessibility: Students from diverse backgrounds could benefit from on-demand support, breaking down barriers to education.

Institutions like Arizona State University (ASU) are already experimenting with AI tools to enhance learning outcomes. For example, ASU uses adaptive learning platforms to provide personalized feedback while allowing faculty to focus on mentoring students through more complex challenges.

The Role of Educators in an AI-Driven Future

While the benefits of AI tutors are compelling, they also raise important questions about the role of educators. If routine tasks like grading or answering basic questions are handled by AI, instructors could focus more on mentoring and fostering critical thinking. However, this shift prompts deeper concerns:

• Will we lose the personal connection between teachers and students?
• Do we need as many educators as we did in the past?
• What are the skillsets that educators will need in the future?
• How do we ensure that educators remain central to the learning process?

AI should augment—not replace—the human elements of teaching. The best outcomes will likely come from collaboration between educators and AI, where technology handles repetitive tasks while teachers focus on creativity, empathy, and mentorship.

Challenges and Risks

As exciting as these possibilities are, they come with risks:

• The Human Element: Can AI truly replicate the inspiration and connection that great teachers bring to their students?
• Data Privacy: AI systems require vast amounts of personal data to function effectively. How do we protect this sensitive information?
• Over-Reliance: Could students become too dependent on AI tutors, potentially hindering their ability to develop self-directed learning skills?

These challenges aren’t just technical—they’re deeply human. As we integrate AI into education, we must tread carefully to ensure it enhances rather than diminishes the learning experience.

A Work in Progress

AI hasn’t yet delivered its “killer app” for education—but it might be getting closer. AI tutors represent one possible future for higher education: a future where technology empowers students and educators alike. But whether this vision becomes reality depends on how thoughtfully we navigate these changes.

For now, I remain curious—and cautious. We’re navigating uncharted waters in education. And while AI may help us map new paths forward, it’s up to us to ensure those paths remain deeply human.

This article was developed in partnership with AI as a collaborative tool for research and organization. Together, we are exploring an AI-augmented future—one where technology supports human creativity rather than replaces it.

It’s been on my mind lately how little we talk about the humanity of government workers. Not as bureaucrats or faceless representatives of “the system,” but as people—people with families, dreams, struggles, and lives that look a lot like ours. Somewhere along the way, it feels like we’ve stopped seeing them as neighbors, community members, or friends. Instead, they’ve become symbols in a polarized world, caught in a storm of political rhetoric and public frustration.

But here’s the thing: most folks who work for the government didn’t sign up to push a political agenda or to be pawns in ideological battles. They chose public service because they believed in something bigger than themselves—a sense of purpose, a desire to contribute to their communities, and yes, maybe even a hope to make things better.

Yet today, many government workers are facing threats and hostility at levels we haven’t seen before. Some have had their personal information leaked online; others have been harassed or even physically endangered simply for doing their jobs. And while these stories occasionally make headlines, they often fade quickly into the background noise of our news cycles.

What we often overlook are the quieter moments—the parent working late at a government agency who still tries to make it to their kid’s soccer game, the neighbor processing permits or fixing potholes to keep our communities running, or the friend in public health who has spent years protecting us during crises like COVID-19. These aren’t just “government workers”; they’re real people with real lives—someone’s mom or dad, sibling or spouse. They’re the person you wave to at the grocery store or chat with at your kid’s school event. And while it’s easy to lump them into an abstract “other” when we’re frustrated with politics or policies, it’s worth remembering that they’re navigating this messy world just like the rest of us—trying to do good work while keeping their heads above water.

I’m not ignoring the political dynamics here—those are real too. There are valid debates to be had about how our government operates and where it can improve. But when we reduce people to symbols of our frustrations with “the system,” we lose sight of their humanity. We forget that behind every policy decision or government action is a person who likely didn’t write the rule but is tasked with carrying it out, often under immense pressure and scrutiny.

So maybe this is a call for us all to pause and reflect for a moment. To look past the labels and see the humans behind them—their intentions, their sacrifices, their contributions. Because whether we agree with the policies they enforce or not, these folks are part of the fabric of our communities. They’re standing shoulder-to-shoulder with us in grocery store lines, cheering from the bleachers at Little League games, and walking their dogs down our streets.

In times like these, when division feels so pervasive, perhaps one small step toward healing is recognizing that our shared humanity matters more than our differences. Government workers aren’t just “them.” They’re us—part of this messy, interconnected world we all share—and they deserve to be seen as such.

I have been spending time thinking about our AI infused future. As an instructor of business and entrepreneurship in Higher Education, I look at AI as a learning tool even though many think of it as a cheating tool. We are working hard on how we harness this for the betterment of our students. I am interested to see how other educators are handling it.

Right now, I have used it for a number of things in class: role play scripts for students, step by step article analysis, brainstorming. I am considering custom tutorial chatbots for learning concepts.