Santiago Schnell

Introduction

Santiago Schnell is a scientist and academic leader who resigned as provost of Dartmouth College — and departed the institution entirely — in October 2026 after an independent faculty-led committee found he “used AI to meaningfully alter his writing” and “failed to disclose his use of AI” in two op-eds and two academic articles submitted to publications with AI-use policies. College President Sian Leah Beilock announced the resignation in an October 28 email to campus, sharing the committee’s report in the same message and writing that Schnell’s resignation was “his choice.” The case — which began when an AI-detection tool flagged every one of Schnell’s 2026 independently authored publications as AI-written — has prompted a national conversation about AI use and disclosure in academic writing.

Background Information

Schnell served as Dartmouth’s provost, the college’s chief academic officer, while maintaining an active record of published commentary and scholarship. National attention landed on that record in August 2026, when a Semafor investigation into AI use in guest op-eds found that an August 9 opinion column by Schnell was identified by the AI detector Pangram as “100% AI-written.” The Dartmouth then reported in late September that all of Schnell’s 2026 independently authored publications had been flagged as “AI-written” by Pangram with “near-zero error.” Four days after that reporting, Beilock convened the five-member advisory committee on September 25 to assess Schnell’s use of AI in his published writing.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Resigned as provost after investigation found undisclosed AI use in published writing. The committee, investigating from September 25 to October 27, 2026, concluded that Schnell “used AI to meaningfully alter his writing” and “failed to disclose his use of AI” in two op-eds and two academic articles submitted to publications with AI-use policies, and found his cooperation “insufficient.” Beilock announced Schnell’s resignation as provost and his departure from Dartmouth on October 28; the committee made no disciplinary recommendation because its charge was solely to “find out what happened.”

The committee’s charge was four questions: whether Schnell met the AI-use and disclosure requirements of the publications that ran his writing, how he used AI in his academic and publishing work, whether he was honest about his AI use, and whether the use violated Dartmouth policies. Its report described Schnell’s cooperation as “insufficient,” noting he “failed to make himself available at the time requested or to propose additional times that he could meet,” and committee chair David Kotz — a computer science professor and former provost — said Schnell’s refusal to give the committee access to his personal AI accounts “limited the amount of information” available; the committee did obtain records of his use of Dartmouth AI tools and his Dartmouth email. Kotz said the committee deliberately did not use AI-detection tools, feeling such results did not constitute “evidence” of AI use: “We did not feel it was necessary or appropriate to use a technical tool to determine whether he used AI.”

The report’s most detailed exhibit involved the Journal of Catholic Higher Education. Executive director for external affairs Kathryn Harrington told The Dartmouth that Schnell “proactively submitted” an article titled “Academic Freedom and Catholic Mission: The Procedural Overlap Zone in University Governance,” but “withdrew his submission” before the journal could decide on the piece because of his AI use. Per the committee’s report, Schnell “prompted Claude: ‘Are there many signatures of AI writing in this article?’” and then submitted a “revised manuscript that incorporated the kinds of changes Claude suggested.” Journal of Catholic Education associate editor Edward Mahoney had asked Schnell about his AI use; Schnell withdrew before any decision. The committee reviewed Schnell’s Washington Post column and two academic articles published in journals with AI disclosure requirements, as well as his communications with the Journal of Catholic Higher Education.

Schnell’s attorney, Andrew Miltenberg — who specializes in workplace and Title IX investigations and defamation — told The Washington Post after the resignation that Schnell did not have a “meaningful” chance to respond to the allegations, and that Schnell resigned out of “deep respect” for the Dartmouth community.

Public Reaction and Consequences

Within the Dartmouth community, the reporting triggered immediate condemnation: members called Schnell’s AI use “hypocritical” and a sign of “intellectual laziness,” and Dartmouth’s American Association of University Professors chapter circulated a petition calling for his termination, which gathered more than 220 signatures by October 1 before being taken down. After the resignation, reaction split — some community members expressed “relief” that he resigned, while others said the investigation into his AI use was “unfair.” The case has since prompted a national conversation about the appropriate consequences for undisclosed AI use in published academic writing.

Current Status

Schnell resigned as provost and left Dartmouth entirely effective late October 2026; history professor Matthew Delmont, the associate dean of faculty for international and interdisciplinary studies, began serving as interim provost on October 28. Kotz presented on behalf of the committee at the November 9 general faculty meeting, where the college continued to reckon with the report. No disciplinary proceeding was recommended by the committee, and the findings about his published record remain as the investigating committee wrote them: undisclosed, meaningful AI alteration across four submitted works.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Schnell’s fall made him a national test case at the intersection of academic integrity and generative AI: a sitting Ivy League provost whose own scholarly output was flagged by a detector, investigated by his own college, and gone from the institution within eight weeks of the first Semafor story. The episode has pushed journals, universities and publishers to sharpen their attention to AI-disclosure policies — the Journal of Catholic Higher Education learned of Schnell’s AI use “because it was in the broader media” and saw the submission withdrawn — and has left Schnell’s published record permanently annotated by a faculty committee report quoting his own Claude prompt.

Sources

• The Dartmouth, “Schnell’s resignation prompts conversation on appropriate consequences for AI use.” source