Bill Text: CA SB1288 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session | Amended

---

Bill Title: Public schools: artificial intelligence working group.

Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 3-0)

Status: (Introduced) 2024-04-26 - Set for hearing May 6. [SB1288 Detail]

Download: California-2023-SB1288-Amended.html

---

Amended  IN  Senate  April 15, 2024

Amended  IN  Senate  March 21, 2024

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2023–2024 REGULAR SESSION

Senate Bill

No. 1288

---

Introduced by Senator Becker
(Coauthor: Senator Dodd)
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Berman)

February 15, 2024

---

An act to add and repeal Section 33329 to 33328.5 of the Education Code, relating to public schools.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 1288, as amended, Becker. Public schools: artificial intelligence working group.

Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to establish procedures within the State Department of Education to, among other things, annually identify the critical needs for which effective educational programs and practices are to be identified, developed, and disseminated to public schools.

This bill would require the Superintendent, in consultation with the State Board of Education, to convene a working group, composed as provided, for specific purposes related to artificial intelligence in public schools, as specified. The bill would require, among other things, the working group to develop, on or before January 1, 2026, guidance for local educational agencies and charter schools on the safe use of artificial intelligence in education, and to, on or before July 1, 2026, develop a model policy for local educational agencies and charter schools regarding the safe and effective use of artificial intelligence in ways that benefit, and do not negatively impact, pupils and educators, as provided. The bill would require the working group to, on or before January 1, 2027, report its findings and recommendations to the Legislature, as provided. The bill would dissolve the working group upon submission of that report, and would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2031.

Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to establish procedures within the State Department of Education to, among other things, annually identify the critical needs for which effective educational programs and practices are to be identified, developed, and disseminated to public schools.

This bill would require the Superintendent, in consultation with the State Board of Education, to convene a working group, composed as provided, for the purpose of evaluating artificial intelligence-enabled teaching and learning practices, as specified. The bill would require the working group to report its findings and recommendations to the Legislature.

Digest Key

Vote: MAJORITY   Appropriation: NO   Fiscal Committee: YES   Local Program: NO  

---

Bill Text

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.

 (a) The Legislature finds and declares that there is an urgent need for expanded state guidance and locally adopted policies regarding the safe and effective use of artificial intelligence in education to benefit and protect pupils and educators.

(b) It is the intent of the Legislature to ensure that the use of artificial intelligence technology-enabled teaching and learning practices are in coordination with, rather than a replacement of, educators.

SEC. 2.

 Section 33328.5 is added to the Education Code, immediately following Section 33328, to read:

33328.5.

 (a) For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:

(1) “Educator” means a certificated or classified employee of a local educational agency or charter school.

(2) “Local educational agency” means a school district or county office of education.

(b) The Superintendent, in consultation with the state board, shall convene a working group for all of the following purposes:

(1) Identifying specific uses of artificial intelligence that negatively impact pupil development, jeopardize pupil data security, or risk the jobs of educators, and developing recommendations on how to best protect pupils and educators from these types of artificial intelligence.

(2) Expanding guidance on safe, responsible, and strategic uses of artificial intelligence in education, where educators deem artificial intelligence to be appropriate.

(3) Developing a model policy, reflecting evidence-based research, for local educational agencies and charter schools regarding the safe and effective use of artificial intelligence in ways that benefit, and do not negatively impact, educational quality, pupil critical thinking and writing skills, creativity, and the essential work of educators.

(4) Identifying other ways in which the state can protect pupils and educators from any potential negative impacts of artificial intelligence while supporting educators in creating effective practices.

(c) The working group shall include all of the following:

(1) Current, credentialed public school teachers serving in elementary and secondary teaching positions.

(2) Classified public school staff.

(3) Schoolsite administrators.

(4) School district or county office of education administrators.

(5) University and community college faculty.

(6) Representatives of private sector business or industry.

(7) Pupils enrolled in public school.

(d) The working group shall do all of the following:

(1) (A) Assess the current and future state of artificial intelligence use in education, including both of the following:

(i) The current state of artificial intelligence used by local educational agencies and charter schools, including all of the following:

(I) Technologies most commonly in use.

(II) The typical cost of those technologies.

(III) The ownership structure of those technologies.

(IV) The ownership structure of pupil- and employee-created materials.

(V) The licensing agreements for those technologies.

(VI) The ability to access source code for those technologies.

(VII) The degree to which educators were involved in the decision to use artificial intelligence.

(VIII) Artificial intelligence as a topic of instruction in developing class content.

(ii) Anticipated and potential developments in artificial intelligence technology in education.

(B) Conduct at least six public meetings to incorporate feedback from pupils, families, and relevant stakeholders into the assessment required by subparagraph (A).

(2) (A) Detail current uses of artificial intelligence in education settings and recommend action based on this research, in such a way that best protects pupils and educators from the potential negative impacts of artificial intelligence including through the identification of all of the following:

(i) Examples of human-centered artificial intelligence that aid, further, and improve the education process and the work of educators.

(ii) Examples of human replacement artificial intelligence that could negatively impact pupil development, jeopardize pupil data security, or risk the jobs of educators.

(iii) Strategies to ensure that the collective opportunity to offer meaningful feedback before any given form of artificial intelligence is introduced to pupils or educators.

(B) In performing the work required by this subdivision, the working group shall solicit input from educators and pupils on their experience using the technologies identified in subparagraph (A).

(3) On or before January 1, 2026, develop guidance for local educational agencies and charter schools on the safe use of artificial intelligence in education that addresses all of the following:

(A) Academic integrity and plagiarism.

(B) Acceptable and unacceptable uses of artificial intelligence for pupils and educators.

(C) Pupil and educator data privacy and data security.

(D) Parent and guardian access to information that pupils enter into artificial intelligence systems.

(E) Procurement of software that ensures the safety and privacy of pupils and educators, and the protection of their data.

(4) On or before July 1, 2026, develop a model policy for local educational agencies and charter schools regarding the safe and effective use of artificial intelligence in ways that benefit, and do not negatively impact, pupils and educators. This policy shall include all of the following topics:

(A) Academic integrity and plagiarism.

(B) Acceptable and unacceptable uses of artificial intelligence for pupils and educators.

(C) Pupil and educator data privacy and data security.

(D) Parent and guardian access to pupil information.

(E) Procurement of software that ensures the safety and privacy of pupils and educators and their data.

(F) Effective use of artificial intelligence to support, and avoid risk to, teaching and learning.

(G) Effective practices to support, and avoid risk to, educators and pupils.

(H) Strategies to ensure that artificial intelligence does not exacerbate existing inequities in the education system.

(I) Professional development strategies for educators on the use of artificial intelligence.

(5) Identify other ways in which the state can support educators in developing and sharing effective practices that minimize risk and maximize benefits to pupils and educators, including, but not limited to, establishing communities of practice on the use of artificial intelligence in education.

(6) On or before January 1, 2027, submit a report to the Legislature, in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code, presenting the assessment required by paragraph (1) and any findings or recommendations related to the assessment.

(e) The department shall post on its internet website the guidance developed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) and the model policy for local educational agencies and charter schools developed pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d).

(f) The working group shall be subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).

(g) The working group shall be dissolved upon submission of the report required by paragraph (6) of subdivision (d) to the Legislature.

(h) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2031, and as of that date is repealed.

SECTION 1.Section 33329 is added to the Education Code, immediately following 33328, to read:

33329.

(a)The Superintendent, in consultation with the state board, shall convene a working group for the purpose of evaluating artificial intelligence-enabled teaching and learning practices.

(b)The working group shall, at a minimum, include all of the following:

(1)A Member of the Assembly appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly.

(2)A Member of the Senate appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules.

(3)A public member appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly.

(4)A public member appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules.

(5)An expert in integrative professional learning technology appointed by the Governor.

(6)A public member appointed by the state board.

(7)A public member appointed by the Department of Technology.

(8)At least one representative each from additional stakeholders including organized labor unions.

(c)The working group shall do all of the following:

(1)Evaluate educator preparedness related to artificial intelligence-enabled instruction, including, but not limited to, curriculum, student engagement, and innovative practices aimed to ensure equitable outcomes for students and families. In making this evaluation, the working group shall consider all of the following:

(A)The status of artificial intelligence-related teaching and learning prior to the 2023–2024 school year, including an assessment of need and quality of that teaching and learning.

(B)The transition schools have made since the 2023–2024 school year to provide artificial intelligence-enabled teaching and learning.

(C)The outcomes of artificial intelligence-enabled teaching and learning on students and families and whether those student outcomes were equitable across student subgroups, demographics, and geographic locations.

(D)The role of external stakeholders in facilitating the transition to artificial intelligence-enabled teaching and learning.

(E)Best practices pertaining to artificial intelligence-enabled teaching and learning, and how school districts can adapt existing and emerging education technologies to include artificial intelligence-enabled teaching and learning practices.

(F)Workers’ rights and employer responsibilities regarding existing and emerging education technologies, ensuring that the use of artificial intelligence-enabled teaching and learning practices are in coordination with, rather than a replacement of, workers.

(G)Any other matters related to technology-enabled and artificial intelligence teaching and learning as determined by the working group.

(2)Conduct at least six public meetings to incorporate feedback from students, families, and relevant stakeholders into the evaluation required by paragraph (1).

(3)(A)On or before January 1, 2026, submit a report to the Legislature, in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code, presenting the evaluation required by paragraph (1) and any findings or recommendations related to the evaluation.

(B)The requirement for submitting a report imposed under subparagraph (A) is inoperative on January 1, 2030, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code.

(d)The working group shall be subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).