Dartmouth's provost warned us about AI cheating—but his own AI use cost him his job

PUBLISHER ARTICLE PREVIEW

From the original article

People who love AI don’t always love telling others they used it.

On August 9, 2026, Dartmouth College provost Santiago Schnell wrote a Washington Post op-ed called “Universities are fighting AI cheating. But there’s a deeper problem.” This week, Schnell discovered the depths of the problem himself as he resigned from the university after an advisory committee found that he failed to disclose significant AI use in an academic paper and in the Washington Post op-ed, even though publishers required such disclosure.

Schnell didn’t make it especially easy for the committee to investigate his AI use; the report uses the term “insufficient cooperation.” He did turn over his Dartmouth laptop, but he did not turn over logs from his personal LLM accounts related to the writings in question. Nor did he agree to meet with the committee.

The committee did get access to the Claude enterprise account Schnell had used through Dartmouth, though. This shows him using the LLM as a tool for revising his papers, finding and fixing bugs in code, and editing or generating figures.

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?

This is quite a bit different from asking Claude to write your entire paper for you, and Schnell has long insisted that he used AI as an editorial aid and discussion partner. He told Semafor that he had used chatbots “to refine a few arguments” and “check for grammatical errors.” He told one journal editor that he “used AI as an editorial tool” to “help refine sentences, improve clarity, and the expression of arguments.” He had not disclosed his AI use to an academic journal, he said, because he “did not understand that this type of AI-assisted editing required disclosure.”

Indeed, Schnell’s own description of what he did with AI doesn’t sound, on the long list of AI-powered sins, like it would rank near the top. But it’s hard to know. As the Dartmouth committee points out, the full scope of Schnell’s AI use was unclear to them.