On Aug. 10, Drexel University announced access to ChatGPT Edu through a university-wide email. Originally announced back in December 2025, the university estimated students would have access in January 2026; the reason for the six-month delay was not announced.

The first point addressed in the email is the “Protected AI Environment,” meaning that student conversations will not be used to train the AI, which is consistent with what Vice-Provost Steven Weber told The Triangle back in January. This may be beneficial to the university, protecting intellectual property by preventing AI from being trained on textbooks or assignments that are not uploaded to the internet. The general student sentiment, though, is less focused on the fear of AI companies invading their privacy, but on whether this deal allows Drexel Administration to. Students on the Drexel subreddit, r/Drexel, wonder “how much monitoring they'll be doing and who has access to that data,” and if that would be used to get students in trouble for cheating.

Drexel has not made that clear. The account is connected to Drexel Connect, implying there would be a way to easily tie it back to each student. Conspicuously, there is no mention of cheating or misuse of AI in either the Overview of Service page or the Terms of Service page, only a vague description of the activities one might use it for, such as  “brainstorming, assistance with drafting emails or documents, summarizing research articles, generating study materials, analyzing data, debugging code, or exploring new ideas for your coursework or projects.” This may seem hypocritical, because some things on this list, such as debugging code, are expressly cheating in many classes.

The biggest question among Drexel students right now is, why?  Many students self-admittedly use AI for their schoolwork, but there was no clamoring sentiment for a university-provided tool. And for those who do not use it, it can feel confusing or disheartening to see the university push something that goes directly against what professors are saying. An animation student told The Triangle that they “have taken multiple classes at Drexel that discuss the ethics and problems built into AI. It is hypocritical to me to promote AI to students while teaching them about all of the issues around the technology, and then telling them it’s still fine to use.”

A biomedical engineering student expanded that “This whole thing honestly feels hypocritical. There is this constant back and forth of AI is ruining the younger generations and our ability to think critically, but then in the same breath say, 'Oh, AI is gonna take your job, deal with it or be unemployed’. People are so codependent on AI it has entirely changed college both for the educator and the student and creates a new precedent fueled by the lack of desire to actually do anything.”

There are some upsides for the student body, as one user speculated on the Drexel subreddit that “This is also an equity play, no? Some students have paid AI subscriptions and some not, so this levels the playing field a bit.” As well as the added reassurance that students' data would not be used to train new models.

Despite any positives, it seems like the prevailing sentiment falls on the side of the negative. As ChatGPT Edu becomes a standard resource for Drexel students, sentiment may change, especially with incoming first-year students who would have started high school after the rise of generative AI and may have a softer stance on it.