From legal research to software development, tasks that once defined entry-level roles college graduates aimed to fulfill are now being automated or completed more efficiently with the help of artificial intelligence (AI). At Chapman University, professors are starting to confront what this means for students preparing to enter the workforce.
More than one-third of entry-level jobs now require AI skills, nearly triple the number from fall 2025. At the same time, Gen Z’s skepticism toward AI is rising, with young adults increasingly concerned about how it will affect their careers.
At Chapman, that uncertainty is showing up in the classroom, and professors have no clear way to combat it. Some professors are restructuring assignments to reflect a workplace where AI is expected while others are pulling back, arguing that higher education should focus on the skills AI cannot replace.
Riaz Tejani, a professor at the Fowler School of Law, said students are already thinking differently about their futures.
“I think (AI) is internalized into students’ outlook on the future,” Tejani said. “There seems to be a mix of anxiety and maybe excitement.”
In law, that uncertainty is tied to changes in the job market. Tejani said AI tools are reducing the need for junior-level work, especially in legal research and document review. These tasks have traditionally been entry points for new attorneys.
To reflect that shift, Tejani has changed how he teaches. This fall, he introduced an assignment where students evaluate work that appears to be AI-generated and assess its quality.
“I’m concerned (with making) students feel comfortable and empowered when they step out into the workforce and encounter these tools,” he said.
For some professors, that kind of adjustment is necessary.
“It would be setting (students) up for failure if you didn’t show them how to use the tools that they’re using in industry,” said Erik Linstead, a professor in the Fowler School of Engineering.
Linstead said some jobs will disappear, but many will change.
“The expectation (is) that humans will be using AI to do their job more effectively,” he said.
In fields like computer science, that shift is already happening. Students are expected not just to write code, but to work alongside AI systems that can generate it.
Nonetheless, Linstead said there are risks.
“You can definitely hand over a lot of your critical thinking before you even realize that you’ve done it,” he said.
Keith Howard, a professor in the Attallah College of Educational Studies, agreed that ignoring AI is not realistic.
“It’s a disservice to our students not to prepare them to know how to use AI,” Howard said.
Howard said higher education has not seen widespread job loss due to AI, but students will enter workplaces where the technology is expected.
“You can’t just put blinders on and keep going,” he said.
Not all professors agree that more AI in the classroom is the solution.
“My response to it has been less tech, not more,” said communications professor and Fletcher Jones Foundation Endowed Chair in Free Speech Vikki Katz.
Katz said AI tools are changing too quickly for universities to build classes around them. She said focusing too much on the tools risks missing what college is supposed to teach.
“What we need to teach you how to do is the things that these technologies can’t,” she said.
In her classes, students read physical texts and spend more time working through complex ideas. She said these skills help students recognize when AI tools are wrong or misleading.
“The worst thing we could do is not give you the opportunity to develop knowledge that will let you know when AI tools are hallucinating,” Katz said.
“I don’t think this is upending higher (education) as much as it is an opportunity to reinforce why higher (education) matters,” she said.
Professors across disciplines agree that students are entering a workforce that is changing in real time due to AI. But at Chapman, there is no single approach to preparing them.
For students, it means preparing for classes that both incorporate AI and focus on building skills without it.
“These things are not human,” Katz said. “We will always understand each other better than these things do.”