In 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order calling for the implementation of AI in public education. Already with its toe in the technological waters, UC Berkeley eagerly dived into Trump’s race to propel the United States into the glorious victory of AI pedagogy. While this glory may bring the promise of innovation, if UC Berkeley doesn’t stop chasing that promise, it is sure to be left with nothing.

Trump’s executive order is part of his broader AI Action Plan, which aims to make the U.S. a global leader in AI development. The order “Advancing Artificial Intelligence Education for American Youth” is aimed at implementing AI into K-12 education through private partnerships, educator training and workforce preparation. The focus is on primary and secondary schools rather than universities, yet it provides a clear sentiment: AI belongs in education.

A sudden concern for education is interesting coming from the Trump administration, an administration known for dismantling the Department of Education and cancelling university research funding. Any attempt to transform public education from this administration invites, at the least, a skeptical investigation into the intentions behind its actions.

AI can be seen as the perfect justification to transfer control over education from the public to the private sector. This handoff has already begun, as major AI companies are currently funneling millions of dollars into public education with federal grants, threatening the already waning support from the government. If the Trump administration can encourage the private sector to take control of mass education, no matter how poorly executed, their propensity for austerity will ensure that cuts are made to the already declining budget.

On a smaller scale, more than half of all K-12 teachers now use AI in their lessons, which seems to feed into the perception that educators are replaceable and overpaid. If we normalize the outsourcing of teachers’ tasks to AI tools, it is not far-fetched to imagine a world where the claim that “educators are obsolete” is a rational statement.

Further — although UC Berkeley is out of the realm of K-12 education — the trend to organize higher education around the promise of AI is taking place here as well, following a similar pattern to what we’re seeing in K-12. And it is not because of the pressure of Trump’s executive order. We are doing it voluntarily.

AI has become inextricably connected to the everyday campus experience. Students get emails from a chancellor writing his communication materials through a chatbot, attend classes that encourage AI use and wait in line to get free Gemini merch passed out in partnership with the university.

UC Berkeley projects such as a partnership with Gemini, building a $557 million AI hub and leading AI research, may be a push to enter a great new modern age, but as we leave ourselves in the hands of big tech giants, it also births a world that has the parricidal potential to destroy the public education that created it. Don’t forget that the Trump administration — an administration that holds public antagonism toward UC Berkeley — has a cozy, if not colluding, relationship of reciprocal support with AI companies. If UC Berkeley and its staff are reliant on AI, students cannot expect their university to protect them from the threat of Trump’s administration. We are putting our head in the lion’s mouth.

There may be the hope that if UC Berkeley helps the Trump administration win the AI race, Trump is more likely to be softer on us — after all, Trump famously operates under the quid pro quo model of governance. Yet not only does this tradeoff leave humanities programs in limbo, we also cannot trust that our professors and administration can remain capable if the government does choose to continue attacking higher education once campus is tied to the private interests of AI companies.

When those in power use AI to communicate with students, it is not difficult to see how that will inevitably deteriorate their abilities to communicate in general, especially with belligerent federal powers. Administrative bodies will dwindle if AI can do the work of many, leaving us without enough people to effectively take a stand.

These consequences are not limited to resistance against the federal government; AI’s deterioration of critical thinking will seep into the classroom, affecting both professors and students.

It’s been shown that AI use is detrimental to student learning, yet this logic is rarely applied to educators. Recently, UC Berkeley professor Zvezdelina Stankova lamented new trends of student deficiency in an Op-Ed; while acknowledging that AI may have played a role, she mostly dismissed its impact. Instead of blaming a faculty body that has gotten complacent with AI, Stankova condemns the students’ unpreparedness. Such anger must be redirected. Stankova herself, editing that particular article with AI, applies a blatant double standard that raises doubts regarding faculty accountability and capability.

If doctoral-level educators cannot write one article protesting a perceived issue in education without using AI, students cannot trust those educators to speak out on other threats to their education.

Right now, AI is sold as a shortcut, a comfortable way for professors and university administrators to avoid “wasting time” on trivial, seemingly insignificant tasks. The convenience of AI is, additionally, the perfect excuse to overload university staff, leaving them with too many tasks to be effective educators and advocates.

UC Berkeley staff and administration cannot take the bait. Students deserve an attentive body of professors and staff who are willing to stand up to AI and force the university to continue taking care of its students, staff and self. Demanding the resources and time needed for AI-free work demonstrates the commitment to human teaching.

UC Berkeley is teetering under threats from the federal government, and it feels as if every day a new source of funding is slashed from our campus. We cannot ignore Trump’s AI agenda, as it will undoubtedly lead us to where the government wants us to be: a student and administrative body weakened by AI, paving the perfect rhetoric for a federal abandonment of public education.

So before the government can abandon our education, we need to abandon AI.