This is Your Weekly Rundown—Involved Leadership Revisited
The ultimate time to rewind, rethink, reload and relead—#10
I write about leadership from both sides of the desk:
🔄 If you’ve worked for an unreasonable boss, you’ll see yourself in these stories.
🔄 If you are a leader, there’s probably something in Involved Leadership you need to hear.
Please hit the heart ❤️, restack 🔄, subscribe 📨, and all that jazz to help spread the word! 🙌
I recently wrote an article about my friend who attended college orientation. The whole discussion about AI boiled down to just two points: cite your sources, and let each professor decide how to handle it. That was it. Some people told me it should be required reading, while others disagreed with my take.
It’s got me thinking a lot more about this topic.
Higher Ed moves at a deliberate pace
I left my job in higher education three years ago. June orientation was one of the most mentally taxing months for staff. Full of promises we could never actually deliver on, like meaningful one-on-one advising.
It’s not unusual for advising loads to reach into the hundreds, which makes meaningful support nearly impossible.
Higher Ed tends to adapt cautiously to change, with debates that reflect the complexity of balancing resources and priorities. But here’s what I know: we can’t uncork the AI bottle. And I don’t know what the answers are. What I do know is that we can’t pretend it’s not here.
And if history is any guide, many institutions won’t know how to respond.
I’ve wrestled with my own definition of what’s ethical when it comes to this technology. Is it okay to iterate with it and create an entire article? Many would say it’s not. Others would say it is.
Students are already asking: why do I need to learn all this painstaking writing stuff when I can just put it in ChatGPT and have it write exactly what I’m thinking?
Where do you draw the line? The arguments get emotional on both sides.
Teachers are not OK
K–12 schools aren’t going to solve this on their own. Fewer people are choosing to become teachers, and pay often doesn’t match the demands of the job. What teachers face day-to-day is tough.
They carry heavy workloads with limited support—financially, emotionally, and organizationally. Many juggle the expectations of concerned parents and work hard to meet the needs of every student. For years, they’ve been under pressure to teach to tests, which hasn’t made things any easier.
I have friends in the profession who often shared how demanding it can be.
And now, in the U.S., there are ongoing efforts to dismantle the Department of Education. In my opinion, it comes at a particularly challenging time, when we need more structured guidance than ever. This is how it would likely play out.
Each state will go its own way. Some will ban AI tools completely. Others will quietly adopt them with no real training. A few private and well-funded charter schools will invest in these tools and give their students a clear advantage. This is no longer just a tech gap. It risks becoming a thinking gap. A literacy gap. A class gap.
Students who learn to use AI as a tool, who know how to ask good questions, spot weak arguments, and polish their writing, will get ahead. Not just in school, but in work, politics, and influence.
Meanwhile, public schools and underfunded colleges will keep arguing over the same questions: Is it cheating? Is it ethical? Should it be banned from assignments? While they debate, their students will fall behind.
Yes this could implode
Is there potential for people to become dependent on AI? Maybe. It might even add to the mental health crisis and loneliness we’re already seeing. Could it help ease that for some people? Also maybe.
Will it crush critical thinking? Well, there’s a real risk these thinking skills could suffer without thoughtful guidance, mentoring, and education about how these tools function and their limitations.
I’ve been on Medium and LinkedIn for over three years. I’ve watched the evolution of AI content across both of them in that time. On Medium, at the height of it all, there was nonstop gaming of the system.
Constant AI-generated comments.
Strategic takedowns of writers gaining traction so others could float to the top.
Articles that were 100 percent AI-generated but passed as human.
All likely complete fabrications with life events and emotional arcs that never happened. But they got mad engagement.
One writer shared a story about her husband handing her an article and saying, “This is really good. You should read it.” She started into it, got a few lines in, and immediately said, “Are you kidding me? This was written by AI.”
She could tell right away. He couldn’t.
Gen X has receipts
My own personal thoughts are mixed. Especially when I think about younger generations. Because for those of us who are Gen X or Boomers, we know how to write. I painstakingly wrote every word of my dissertation. Even Grammarly wasn’t as big then, and I didn’t use it. Every comma, every period, every em dash? All mine.
And this wasn’t 20 years ago but within the past decade.
Now, we’re raising an entire generation who may rely more on technology to express themselves, changing how writing skills develop. They’ll be able to speak into their phones, turn their voice into a polished essay, and get instant feedback.
It’s hard to fathom what growing up in this generation will look like.
What really keeps me up at night
I don’t pretend to have all the answers because I do not. But what I do know is that if we do nothing, if we keep pretending this is someone else’s job to figure out, we will most certainly guarantee the following:
A generation that may not have had to struggle with expressing themselves clearly
Classrooms where the gap between tech-literate and tech-lost students could widen
Institutions still teaching in outdated ways while the world moves forward
Ongoing debates about academic integrity without clear strategies
A workforce that can generate content but might lack skills to critically evaluate it
The real threat isn’t AI. It’s a generation that never learned to tell the difference between good content, garbage, and what’s even true.
If you're interested in the full post I wrote 👇 The Dirty Little AI Secret No One Is Telling Parents
Welcome to The Spotlight Corner 📢
Here is a shoutout to my favorite piece of the week by
AI Agents Are on the Horizon. What Should You Buy (and Avoid) Right Now?It’s an thorough piece on AI agents and it really cuts through the hype. If you’re curious about what AI agents actually mean in 2025 and why most businesses aren’t using true autonomous agents yet this is a clear no-fluff explanation.
What I liked most is how Stefan breaks down the different types of AI tools. He emphasizes that chasing flashy agent promises can distract from getting the basics right first. If you’re thinking about AI for your team this is a solid realistic guide and worth your time.
📌 Still thinking about AI in the workplace and what it all means. 🤔
In Case You Missed It! 🔙
(Let me know if there is a topic you might be interested in hearing my take on).
👉 Manage This 🎬 Video Drops:
👉 My posts 📝from last week:
➠When Your Nervous System Suddenly Calls the Shots at Work
➠Nervous System Leadership Snapshot Companion Book
➠Last Weeks Weekly Rundown: (I discuss my viral/semi-viral note and what happened).
And until next week, “Don’t forget to lead with purpose in everything you do.”
© 2025 Bette A. Ludwig: All rights reserved
👉 Don’t Forget to Evaluate Your Leadership Approach with This FREE Assessment
If you're getting value from Involved Leadership 📈, I'd truly appreciate it if you could tap the like ❤️ button and share or restack 🔁. Thanks for reading and for your support! 🙌
I imagine that skills such as adaptability, learning, creativity, critical thinking, collaboration are what would best prepare children to an "AI future". Younger generations don't generally have problem adopting new technologies, on top of that technology usually becomes more user friendly and easy to use over time, but the trade-offs (like we have seen with social media for example) are more challenging to handle.
This reminds me of the calculator debates in the 1970s. Schools that banned calculators didn't produce better mathematicians, they produced students who couldn't compete. The difference now is the speed and scope of change. We have maybe 2-3 years to get this right before the gap becomes insurmountable. Let's go, Linda McMahon.
We are so doomed Bette lol