How Professors Can Lead the AI Transition in Their Institutions by 2026

Artificial intelligence is reshaping universities, but the people who will determine whether this change actually helps students are not platform vendors or policy makers. They are professors. By 2026, institutions that thrive with AI will be the ones where faculty step forward as guides, critics, and designers of new practices rather than passive recipients of tools. When professors work with partners such as Dendritic Health to connect teaching, simulation, and analytics into coherent learning environments, they show their institutions what responsible and effective adoption looks like in everyday courses, not just in strategy documents.

This leadership role is urgently needed. Global bodies such as the World Health Organization warn that AI in health and education raises questions about fairness, accountability, and privacy, while academic organizations including the Association of American Medical Colleges have issued principles for using AI responsibly in medical education. Professors sit at the intersection of all these concerns. They see what really happens in classrooms and clinics, and they are trusted by students in ways no tool ever will be.

Claim Ownership of the Educational Vision

The first way professors can lead is by claiming ownership of the educational vision for AI in their context. Technology roadmaps and institutional task forces are important, but they often stay abstract. Students, on the other hand, experience AI in concrete ways, such as study tools, writing assistants, virtual cases, and grading systems. Professors can bridge this gap by articulating what a good learning experience looks like and then asking how AI can support that vision rather than drive it.

One practical move is to write a short teaching philosophy for AI use in your courses and share it with students and colleagues. This philosophy can describe where you see AI adding value, where you expect human interaction to remain central, and how you will handle issues such as transparency and data use. When educators base this narrative on trusted guidance, such as the AI ethics recommendations from the World Health Organization and the integration principles from the Advancing AI Across Academic Medicine resource collection, they make it easier for their departments to align around a thoughtful direction instead of moving piecemeal.

Build Personal Competence with Real Tools

You cannot lead a transition that you only know from headlines. Professors who want influence in AI decisions need at least a working familiarity with the kinds of tools their students already use. That does not mean becoming a programmer or data scientist. It means experimenting with a curated set of systems and asking how they behave with your own materials.

For instance, a clinical educator might upload lecture content and cases into a medical learning platform similar to Neural Consult and compare the resulting question sets and study flows with their existing resources. A basic science professor might try different generative tools to see how well they summarise complex diagrams or explain mechanisms to a specific level of learner.

Faculty can deepen this exploration through structured opportunities such as the Artificial Intelligence in Academic Medicine webinar series, which showcases practical examples from peers rather than abstract hype.

This kind of hands on familiarity gives professors credibility when they advocate for or against particular uses of AI on committees and in departmental conversations. It also helps them model thoughtful experimentation for their students.

Start With One Course and Design End to End

Trying to transform an entire institution at once is a recipe for frustration. Professors can lead by choosing one course where AI could genuinely improve learning and designing an integrated experience from start to finish. The goal is not to sprinkle tools everywhere but to build a coherent journey that uses AI where it adds real value.

A professor might, for example, redesign a clinical reasoning course so that pre class preparation happens in an adaptive study environment like the tools provided by Dendritic Health, in class sessions focus on case discussion and simulation, and post class work involves reflective practice and follow up questions. At each step, AI handles tasks such as generating practice questions, tracking patterns in student responses, and suggesting cases that match common gaps, while the professor keeps control over content, pacing, and assessment.

Faculty who take this approach can then study the results, comparing engagement, performance, and equity across cohorts. Their experience becomes a concrete case study that can inform program level decisions, aligning nicely with the emphasis on evidence informed adoption found in resources like the AI enhanced medical education content creation framework.

Model Critical and Ethical Use for Students

Students are already using AI tools, whether institutions acknowledge it or not. Professors can lead by showing what critical and ethical use looks like in practice. Instead of banning AI outright or ignoring it, they can design activities where learners must compare AI generated outputs with primary sources, identify errors, and reflect on when automation is helpful or harmful.

For example, a class might ask an AI system to draft a patient education leaflet, then use small group work to critique its accuracy, cultural sensitivity, and reading level. Another exercise might involve asking AI to explain a complex topic and then having students cross check the explanation against trusted guidelines or textbooks. This kind of work resonates with warnings from the World Health Organization that generative systems can produce confident but misleading answers, and it helps learners build habits of healthy skepticism.

By framing AI as a fallible assistant that requires supervision, professors reinforce professional norms and reduce the risk that students will outsource thinking without reflection.

Participate in Institutional Governance and Policy Making

Many AI related policies in universities are being written right now and will shape practice for years. Professors who want to lead the transition should make sure their voice is part of these conversations. That means volunteering for working groups, joining committees that are drafting guidelines, and bringing concrete classroom examples to the table.

Institutional teams can use external frameworks like the Principles for the Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education as starting points, then adapt them to local context. Faculty who understand both AI tools and student realities are well placed to argue for policies that protect learners without blocking innovation. They can help define issues such as acceptable use in assignments, expectations for disclosure when AI assistance is used, and safeguards around learning analytics.

Professors can also advocate for investments that align with educational priorities. For instance, they might make a case for platforms that integrate teaching, simulation, and assessment, like the ecosystems offered by Dendritic Health, instead of a patchwork of isolated tools that increase complexity without improving learning.

Mentor Colleagues and Build Communities of Practice

Leading an AI transition is not a solo performance. Professors can extend their impact by mentoring colleagues and building communities of practice around AI in teaching. Some faculty are excited but uncertain, others are skeptical, and some feel overwhelmed. Peer support can make the difference between isolated pockets of innovation and a broader cultural shift.

Simple steps include running low pressure workshops where instructors try AI features on their own materials, hosting informal discussions about cases where AI helped or failed, and sharing curated sets of resources such as the Artificial Intelligence Competencies for Medical Educators or the Global Initiative on AI for Health.

Professors who facilitate these spaces do not need to claim expert status. Their role is to invite exploration, keep the focus on pedagogy and ethics, and help colleagues translate big ideas into discipline specific practices.

Protect Human Relationships at the Center of Education

Perhaps the most important leadership task for professors is to insist that human relationships remain at the center of education, even as AI becomes more capable. No matter how advanced simulations and study tools become, students still look to educators for role modeling, encouragement, and accountability. They learn how to handle uncertainty, conflict, and moral stress partly by watching how their teachers respond.

Guidance documents from the World Health Organization and statements from professional societies frequently remind institutions that AI should support, not replace, person to person care and mentoring. Professors can embody this principle by using AI to free up time for office hours, small group discussions, narrative feedback, and reflective conversations that no system can replicate.

When faculty tell students explicitly that they are using AI to create more space for meaningful contact, and then deliver on that promise, they reinforce trust and show what a healthy partnership between humans and technology looks like.

Conclusion

By 2026, the story of AI in universities will not be written only in board rooms or vendor roadmaps. It will be written in lecture halls, clinics, labs, and seminar rooms where professors decide how to use new tools to support or undermine real learning. Educators who claim the role of guide, experiment thoughtfully with platforms, influence policy, and mentor colleagues will ensure that AI strengthens rather than weakens the values of their disciplines. International guidance from organizations like the World Health Organization and practical frameworks from the Association of American Medical Colleges give professors solid ground on which to stand as they lead this transition.

Within this evolving landscape, Dendritic Health offers professors and institutions a way to bring teaching workflows, clinical simulation, and learning analytics together so that faculty stay firmly in control of educational decisions, and neural Consult provides a medical learning environment where lectures, readings, and realistic clinical cases are transformed into adaptive journeys that let educators focus on mentoring and professional formation while intelligent systems quietly support the work behind the scenes.

Learn More