What if the real crisis AI has exposed in higher education isn't student dishonesty, but the fact that we've been treating final papers as evidence of thinking—when AI can now simulate that thinking in seconds?

In this episode, host Jeff Dillon sits down with Michael Leggs, who has taught English at St. Paul College for 21 years and is the founder of Smartlby, an AI‑powered revision tutor designed to help students strengthen their writing through guided reflection—without writing for them. Michael brings a rare perspective: he's not a technologist or an administrator talking about AI in the abstract. He's the person reading the papers, watching students struggle, and redesigning assignments in real time.

Michael argues that detection software is a triage response, not a long‑term solution. The deeper problem is that our curriculum and assessment models were already fragile—AI just made it visible. He explains why surveillance tools create environments of mistrust, why revision should be treated as evidence of thinking, and how tools like Smartlby can guide students through a Socratic dialogue about their own writing without ever rewriting a single sentence.

For any faculty member, department chair, or academic leader trying to figure out what actually works in the AI era, this episode offers a grounded, practical, and deeply human perspective.

Key Takeaways

• The Real Problem Isn't Cheating—It's Assessment Design: AI didn't create the problem; it exposed a weakness that was already there. We've been treating final papers as evidence of thinking, but AI can now simulate that product. The solution isn't more surveillance—it's redesigning how we assess learning.

• Detection Software Is a Triage Response, Not a Solution: Institutions rushed to buy detection tools because it was something they could control. But surveillance creates environments of mistrust—students know we don't trust them, and that damages the learning relationship.

• Revision Is Evidence of Thinking: The shift needs to be from product assessment to process assessment. When a student revises, they are thinking. Tools that track revision give instructors visible evidence of that thinking process.

• Process Assessment Is Instructionally Scalable—Not Just Technically Scalable: Many tools are technically scalable (they work at scale) but not instructionally scalable (they don't actually help teachers teach better). Smartlby was designed by a teacher with 21 years of classroom experience, so it solves problems faculty actually face.

• AI Closes the Production Gap—But the Learning Gap Is Still Open: Students can produce more effectively with AI assistance. But producing more isn't the same as learning more. The goal should be to close the learning gap, not just the production gap.

• Redesign Starts at the Grassroots Level: Faculty sharing ideas about how they're redesigning assignments is where real change begins. It doesn't have to be a top‑down mandate. Department‑level collaboration on assignment types can create scalable, shared solutions.

• Surveillance Tools Should Be Abolished in Five Years: Michael's hope is that within five years, institutions will stop policing student writing and instead focus on ethical AI use, assistive tools, and redesigning assignments that actually teach students how to think—not just how to produce.

The Signal Newsletter:
https://edtechconnect.com/newsletter

<...

• (00:00:00) - The Real Problem with AI in Higher Education
• (00:02:11) - The Name of Smartlby
• (00:03:02) - What Pulled You Back into the Classroom?
• (00:04:47) - The Tipping Point for Academic Writing
• (00:06:44) - SmartAlby on How to Prevent Student Cheating
• (00:15:41) - Does generative AI Close the Production Gap?
• (00:21:33) - How to Keep AI Out of the Composition Classroom

Jeff talks to Raffi DerSimonian, VP and Chief Strategy Officer at ERI, a digital agency that has been building for colleges and universities since 2005. Raffi came up on the institutional side—alumni relations at Becker College, then marketing and communications at Maine College of Art—before moving to the agency side. He brings a rare combination: deep empathy for campus dynamics and a strategist's eye for what actually moves the needle.

Raffi shares the story behind ikiGuide.ai, a tool that takes the Japanese concept of Ikigai—the intersection of what you love, what you're good at, what the world needs, and what you can be paid for—and turns it into a guided college search experience. Instead of handing a student a list of programs, ikiGuide gives them a path and the reasoning behind it, pulling in not just curricular offerings but also clubs, activities, study abroad, and stories of students and alumni who have walked similar paths.

The conversation also tackles the shifting role of the college website in an AI-driven discovery landscape. Raffi argues that with nearly half of prospective students now consulting AI before visiting a website, the site's purpose is no longer to provide facts—it's to provide a "vibe check," a sense of connection, and evidence that a student can see themselves there. He also offers a sobering challenge to institutions: if your differentiators sound like they could apply to any school in America, it's time to go back to the drawing board.

Key Takeaways

• Start with Purpose, Not a Major: The traditional college search process begins with "what do you want to study?"—a question many 17‑year‑olds can't answer. ikiguide flips that by asking who you are, what brings you joy, and what you're good at, then connecting those answers to a full ecosystem of opportunities.

• Only 30% of Gen Z Students Feel Prepared for Life After High School: According to Gallup and the Walton Family Foundation, the majority of students enter higher education without a clear sense of direction. Colleges have a responsibility to help them explore, not just funnel them into a predetermined path.

• The College Website's Role Has Shifted from Facts to Vibe: With nearly half of prospective students now consulting AI before ever visiting a site, the website is no longer the primary source of information. Its job is to provide a sense of connection, evidence of differentiation, and a clear path forward—all within the first three seconds.

• AI Is Moving the Discovery Upstream—But Websites Still Matter: Students are coming to websites already briefed by AI, with comparisons and assumptions already formed. The site needs to validate that they can see themselves there, not just repeat the facts they already know.

• Personalization Requires Judiciousness: Over‑personalization can backfire if the institution can't fulfill the expectations it creates. The safer approach is to let users opt in to sharing their interests and then use that data to surface relevant opportunities—not to make assumptions about them.

• Write for Both Humans and the Machines That Read for Them: AI is now summarizing institutions on behalf of students. Content needs to be findable for AI while still resonating with the human who will eventually read it. The line between the two is blurring rapidly.

• Differentiation Is the Only Defense Against Sameness: Most higher ed websites look and feel identical. Institutions that clearly articulate what sets them apart—with evidence, not just claims—are the ones that win attention in...

• (00:00:00) - The Signal: The Future of Higher Ed Websites
• (00:01:51) - In the Elevator With a Consultant
• (00:04:31) - Exploring Ikigai: The College Search
• (00:14:36) - The Future of the University Website
• (00:20:21) - Will Higher Ed Content Be Personalized by AI?
• (00:24:25) - Higher Ed: The Need for Personalization
• (00:28:42) - The Future of Higher Ed: Reimagining the Signal

Jeff Dillon talks to Jenny Petty, Vice President of Industry Relations and Advisory Services at Simpson Scarborough, who has spent over a decade inside higher ed—most recently as VP of Marketing Communications at the University of Montana, where she helped reverse a decade‑long enrollment decline. Jenny brings a rare combination of private‑sector marketing experience (including growing a Facebook community from under 200 to over 1 million at IGT, working with brands like Dolly Parton and Family Guy) and deep institutional knowledge.

Jenny doesn't hold back. She argues that many CMOs are operating from fear disguised as prudence—dressing up inaction as "getting more buy‑in" or "the campus isn't ready." She challenges the instinct to centralize everything when things feel chaotic, warning that org chart changes often mask deeper alignment problems. She introduces the concept of "alignment debt"—the organizational equivalent of technical debt—that compounds quietly until it becomes one of the most expensive problems an institution faces.

For anyone leading marketing, enrollment, or institutional strategy, this episode offers both a diagnosis of what's broken and a framework—assess, align, activate—for actually fixing it.

Key Takeaways

• Fear Disguised as Prudence Is Holding Marketing Back: Many CMOs are afraid—afraid of exposure, afraid of making a public mistake. That fear gets dressed up as "getting more buy‑in" or "socializing the idea more." The result is inaction. The institutions that need to change most are the ones that can least afford to wait.
• Alignment Debt Is the New Technical Debt: Just like technical debt, unresolved misalignment in people, processes, and decision rights compounds quietly until it becomes one of the most expensive problems an institution faces. It shows up in missed enrollment goals, budget crises, and systems that break at the worst possible moment.
• The Scope of the CMO Role Has Become Unmanageable: Job descriptions for higher ed CMOs read like seven jobs in one—crisis communicator, media relations, digital transformation lead, enrollment partner, and more. Marketing can't fix problems with the academic portfolio, pricing, or leadership misalignment. That's not a marketing problem—it's an institutional problem.
• Political Savvy Is Necessary—But It Can Become Self‑Protection: You have to be political in these jobs. But the moment political maneuvering starts protecting your own position instead of serving the mission, it stops being leadership. Know your warning signs. Ask yourself: "Am I building healthy coalition, or am I being manipulative?"
• Assess, Align, Activate Is a Flywheel, Not a One‑Time Process: The activation stage exposes false agreement. It reveals even more misalignment that you would have missed if you skipped from assessment straight to activation. Continuous improvement requires cycling through all three stages repeatedly.
• AI Is Moving Production Work Upstream—Design Around That: AI is making production cheaper and faster. The question isn't whether to use AI tools—it's what humans should be doing when production is no longer the constraint. Judgment, synthesis, creativity, institutional knowledge, and relationship‑building are all moving upstream.
• Managing Decline Is Not Stability: Growth, stasis, and managed decline are all strategies. But many campuses act like they're in a growth strategy while actually managing decline—and the misalignment shows up in budget, resources, and morale. Marketing leaders need to be at the table helping to resolve institutional contradictions, not just communicating outcomes after decisions are made.

The Signal New...

• (00:00:00) - What do you want your marketing leaders to do in the future?
• (00:00:45) - Jenny Petty on The Higher Ed Marketer
• (00:02:25) - CMOs: From Coal Miner to Rodeo Cowgirl
• (00:04:09) - What Did Working in Higher Ed Teach Me About Marketing?
• (00:10:48) - The Alignment Gap in Higher Ed
• (00:19:11) - The 3 Stages of organizational change
• (00:21:46) - What does an AI Ready Marketing Structure look like?
• (00:25:19) - In the Elevator With Consultants
• (00:27:03) - What can you say now about the CMO role
• (00:28:48) - What Higher Ed Marketing Needs