For what purpose did our administration agree to enter student data into a corporate generative artificial intelligence (genAI) platform? In fall 2025, the UConn administration signed a contract with GrayDI that describes a request for students’ (and their parents’) non-public data for input into genAI (see pdf page 34). Did they do this to lower the cost of higher education for working families? No. The contract appears to pay nearly $200,000 to use our students’ data to substantially inform the profitability of academic programs at UConn.
GrayDI advertises software that supports limiting a student’s educational opportunities based on the community in which they grow up. Is that an ethical aim? UConn’s Q&A says GrayDI will not be used this way. But we encourage the UConn community to read the contract in full (see pdf page 23).
Is this use of genAI at least safe and responsible? No. UConn declined to conduct a CT AI software impact assessment of GrayDI or to enter it into the CT AI software inventory. Although state law did not require these steps until October 1, 2026, these were basic safety protocols that were already in use and considered best practices. Given that genAI is evolving in unpredictable and, sometimes, dangerous ways, why opt out of Connecticut’s AI safety programs?
UConn doesn’t actually believe that genAI is risk-free. Notice how the contract dedicates pages to legal protections for both GrayDI and the administration. But for students, faculty and staff? Not so much.
Our administration promotes genAI use at UConn. They ask us not to close our minds to the possibilities. We don’t. Generative AI could be a valuable tool, and UConn could grow into a leader in this field. If the plan is to deploy AI to fix economic and racial inequality, provide affordable healthcare and education, solve the climate crisis or build new safe jobs for our students, we will be fully supportive.
No technology is inherently good or evil. The question that real leaders should ask is not “How can this technology be monetized?” but rather “Whose values does it reflect?”
Generative AI is owned by billionaires and was built on stolen intellectual property, labor exploitation and environmental degradation. Cynical applications of genAI (such as GrayDI) make paying workers and critical thinking optional across Connecticut while siphoning public education funds away from working families. Instead of taking the lead in assuring safe, responsible use of genAI, UConn’s top administrators are allowing students, faculty and staff to be exploited as customers and products.
UConn is not unique in this regard. Identical initiatives to purchase AI austerity software are being pushed by powerful boards, politicians and AI companies at universities across the US.
In the face of this corporate, elitist push to channel public funds away from Connecticut families towards large AI companies through software contracts, we encourage the UConn community to push back. The voices of students and families have been left out so far. Our experience is that students don’t care for it. Our university’s future should be aligned with the hopes and dreams of our students, not the cold dashboard of GrayDI. Let’s help UConn’s students to have a say in AI, and let’s mobilize as a community to protect them from exploitation.