This is a research prototype. The data and analyses are preliminary and not yet validated — we'd welcome your .
Official name: California AB-1170, SEC. 46 (AI in Education Working Group 2025)
Requires the Superintendent to convene a working group to develop AI usage guidelines for educational settings. Instructs the group to assess AI use in schools, develop model policies, and report findings by 2027. Specifies transparency, privacy, and academic integrity provisions.
Analysis summaries, actor details, and coverage mappings were LLM-classified and may contain errors.
This is a binding California state statute (Education Code amendment) with mandatory language requiring the Superintendent to convene a working group, develop guidance and model policies, and submit reports to the Legislature by specified deadlines.
The document has minimal to good coverage of approximately 6-8 subdomains, with primary focus on privacy (2.1), academic integrity concerns related to misinformation (3.1), fraud/plagiarism (4.3), overreliance (5.1), inequality (6.2), and lack of transparency (7.4). Coverage is concentrated in educational context risks including data privacy, academic integrity, and equitable access.
This document primarily governs the Educational Services sector, specifically addressing AI use in K-12 public education including school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools. It also has minimal coverage of Public Administration through the Superintendent's role and legislative reporting requirements.
The document addresses multiple AI lifecycle stages with primary focus on deployment and operational monitoring in educational settings. It covers planning through requirements for developing guidance and policies, and emphasizes ongoing monitoring through assessment of current AI use and development of effective practices.
The document explicitly defines and covers artificial intelligence broadly as 'an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy.' It does not distinguish between specific AI types (frontier, general purpose, task-specific, generative, predictive) or mention compute thresholds or open-weight models. The focus is on AI systems and technologies deployed in educational settings.
California State Legislature; The People of the State of California
This is a California state statute enacted by the state legislature, as indicated by the opening phrase 'THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS' and the amendment to the Education Code.
California Department of Education; Superintendent of Public Instruction; California State Legislature (oversight)
The Superintendent and Department of Education are responsible for implementing the statute's requirements. The Legislature exercises oversight through mandatory reporting requirements and the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act applies.
California State Legislature; Appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature
The Legislature monitors implementation through mandatory reporting requirements. The working group must submit a comprehensive report by January 1, 2027, presenting assessments, findings, and recommendations.
Superintendent of Public Instruction; Local educational agencies (school districts and county offices of education); Charter schools; Working group members
The statute directly mandates actions by the Superintendent and creates obligations for a working group. The guidance and model policies developed will target local educational agencies and charter schools that deploy AI in educational settings.
11 subdomains (2 Good, 9 Minimal)
