Santiago Schnell, who stepped down this week as provost of Dartmouth College, had built part of his public profile warning that universities weren’t doing enough to fight AI cheating. An internal investigation found he’d failed to disclose his own extensive use of artificial intelligence, including in that very warning.
Ars Technica reports that Schnell wrote a Washington Post op-ed on August 9 titled “Universities are fighting AI cheating. But there’s a deeper problem.” An advisory committee at Dartmouth later found that he had not disclosed significant AI use in that op-ed, nor in at least one academic paper, even though both publishers required such disclosure.
The committee’s report said Schnell showed “insufficient cooperation” during the investigation. He handed over his Dartmouth laptop but did not turn over logs from his personal AI accounts tied to the writings under review, and he declined to meet with the committee. Investigators did get access to his Claude enterprise account, used through Dartmouth, and those logs showed him using the chatbot to revise papers, find and fix bugs in code, and edit or generate figures.
In one exchange cited in the report, Schnell asked Claude to review a paper headed for the journal ChemSystemsChem as though it were a specialist referee. “I am getting read[y] to submit the enclosed paper, its supplementary materials and the enclosed repo to ChemSystemsChem. This paper is not biological, but rather chemical. Imagine that you are a reviewer for this paper with expertise in nonlinear chemical dynamics and mathematical chemical kinetics. What would be your referee report for this paper?” he wrote. He also asked language models to take TeX files, correct files and a code repository, and generate new figures.
The report also describes Schnell uploading a manuscript titled “Academic Freedom and Catholic Mission: The Procedural Overlap Zone in University Governance” to Claude and asking whether it contained “many signatures of AI writing.” He then submitted a revised version incorporating the chatbot’s suggested changes.
Schnell told Semafor he had used AI chatbots “to refine a few arguments” and “check for grammatical errors.” He told one journal editor he had “used AI as an editorial tool” to “help refine sentences, improve clarity, and the expression of arguments.” Asked why he had not disclosed AI use to an academic journal, he said he “did not understand that this type of AI-assisted editing required disclosure.”
The committee wasn’t satisfied it had the full picture. Its report said “the nature of the Provost’s actual AI use” remained unclear, and that his public statements may have understated how much he actually relied on AI tools, noting his use “went beyond his other public” characterizations of it.
