Surveys Raise Questions About Students’ Critical Thinking Skills
It is no secret that college students are concerned about the impact of AI on future employment opportunities and the skills needed to be successful in using AI. There is some trepidation on the part of students who fear that AI-generated information will lead to a reduction in available jobs as machines do the work of student/workers. Among all student disciplines, accounting students show the highest levels of skepticism toward AI-generated outputs.
You may recall that Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, faced significant backlash during his commencement speech at the University of Arizona. During the ceremony held on May 15, 2026, he was met with boos and jeers from students when he discussed AI and its ever-expanding role of the technology in society.
I fear that students have not learned how to take advantage of the benefits of using AI and how to deal with possible negative consequences of its application in the workplace.
Student Concerns
Data from Inside Higher Ed’s ongoing Student Voice reports students’ complex feelings about AI and how their colleges are responding to its rise. “The flash survey of 1,038 two- and four-year students indicate that most students are neither AI evangelists nor outright opponents, and they’re actively using AI for coursework. At the same time, they wrestle with concerns about agency, a changing career landscape and more. Some four in 10 are explicitly concerned about dependence on AI tools, even as six in 10 see AI’s primary value to them in college as learning support.”
According to the June 11, 2026 report, “Why Students Aren’t All In on AI—and What They Want From Colleges,” as discussed by Colleen Flaherty, some 55 percent of students also expect AI to negatively impact their career prospects. They believe that colleges have not been successful in helping students navigate AI and what it means for their futures. The plurality of respondents, 34 percent, are neutral on their institution’s efforts, describing them as inconsistent, while an additional 21 percent describe them as at least somewhat poor.
The six takeaways from the report regarding AI are:
Takeaway 1: More students are using AI than ever for coursework, while a significant share—20 percent—remain resisters.
Takeaway 2: “Worried about dependence” is the most common student stance on AI.
Takeaway 3: A majority of all students expect AI to somewhat (39 percent) or very (16 percent) negatively impact their career prospects.
Takeaway 4: Just one in 10 students says that their institution is handling AI’s rise very well, in a thoughtful and proactive way.
Takeaway 5: Asked how AI can be most useful in their college experience, students are most enthusiastic about AI as learning support.
Takeaway 6: Students are somewhat split on their priorities for AI leadership at their institution.
2026 GMAC Prospective Students Survey
The 2026 GMAC Prospective Students Survey of 4,253 graduate management candidates across 145 countries provides useful information and guidance in making AI more palatable for college students. Students are not asking to be trained as AI users. They are asking to be developed as thinkers who happen to have new instruments available. These are two fundamentally different educational projects, and most institutions have defaulted to the first because it is easier to operationalize.
The GMAC survey tracks a specific shift that has been happening quickly. In 2022, the year ChatGPT launched, just 17% of graduate management candidates included AI tools in their ideal curriculum. By 2023 that figure had reached 40%, by 2024 it was 46%, and by 2025 it had reached 50%. The trajectory is clear, and the trend line continues to move in one direction.
But the more interesting data is in how candidates want to engage with AI. GMAC asked respondents to identify which forms of AI integration belonged in their ideal program. The top three responses share a common thread. Hands-on AI experience through business simulations and practical applications ranked first at 66%. Courses exploring how AI contributes to business strategy ranked second at 62%. Courses on AI in business decision-making processes ranked third at 58%. Training in prompt-writing and using AI for day-to-day tasks tied for last at 46% with personalized learning paths.
Views of Gen Z
The most striking finding from the survey is that 8 in 10 in Gen Zer’s say it is “very” or “somewhat” likely that using AI tools will make it more difficult for them to learn in the future. Concerns among Gen Z are that AI may undermine skill development and are outweighing its perceived efficiency gains. Even daily AI users — the population that holds the most favorable views overall — have become significantly less enthusiastic over the past year. Excitement among daily users dropped 18 points. Hopefulness dropped 11 points. The students using AI most frequently are not the most enthusiastic. They are often the most concerned about what it is doing to their thinking.
The survey’s implications section names what would actually move the needle: fostering trust in AI among Gen Z will depend on demonstrating how AI can enhance rather than replace human talents. This requires the kind of teaching relationship in which a trusted educator helps students work through, in the context of substantive intellectual work, what AI can and cannot do for their thinking. That is precisely the thing the dominant institutional response to AI has not been designed to deliver.
Views of Employers
GMAC’s parallel Corporate Recruiters Survey asked employers which skills they prioritize when hiring graduate management students, using the same skill list given to candidates. The comparison is instructive.
Strategic thinking is the top-ranked skill for candidates at 75% and remains among employers’ top priorities at 51%. Employers, however, rank problem-solving first at 54%, while candidates rank it second at 69%. Communication is also a shared priority, especially for employers, where it ties strategic thinking at 51%; among candidates, it remains high at 57%. The more revealing divergence appears in human capabilities that employers value more than candidates do. Coachability shows the largest employer-over-candidate gap among these skills, at 38% of employers compared with 23% of candidates. Initiative follows at 44% of employers versus 31% of candidates, and emotional intelligence at 40% versus 33%. The pattern suggests that candidates may be underestimating how much employers’ value receptiveness to feedback, proactive ownership, and interpersonal judgment.
Employers are not asking for graduates who can use AI efficiently. They are asking for graduates who can think, adapt, and work with other humans effectively, with AI as one of several tools available to them. The GMAC report notes that employers expect AI-tool skills to rise sharply in relative importance over the next five years, but their current orientation is clear: they value AI as a vehicle for the development of core capabilities, not as a capability in itself.
Blog posted by Steven Mintz, PhD, professor emeritus from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, on September 29, 2026. You can communicate with Steve at: smintz@calpoly.edu. Visit Steve’s website to learn more about his activities.