Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law requires the board of governors to adopt regulations to establish and maintain the minimum qualifications for service as a faculty member teaching credit instruction or a faculty member teaching noncredit instruction. Existing law requires the board of governors to adopt regulations authorizing local governing boards to employ faculty members and educational administrators who do not meet the specified minimum qualifications, subject to alternative minimum qualifications.

This bill would explicitly require the instructor of record for a course of instruction to be a person who meets the above-described minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member teaching credit instruction or a faculty member teaching noncredit instruction, or the alternative minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member.

Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law requires the board of governors to adopt regulations to establish and maintain the minimum qualifications for service as a faculty member teaching credit instruction or a faculty member teaching noncredit instruction. Existing law requires the board of governors to adopt regulations authorizing local governing boards to employ faculty members and educational administrators who do not meet the specified minimum qualifications, subject to alternative minimum qualifications.

This bill would explicitly require the instructor of record for a course of instruction to be a person who meets the above-described minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member teaching credit instruction or a faculty member teaching noncredit instruction, or the alternative minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member.

Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law establishes the California Online Community College, under the administration of the board of governors, for specified purposes, and requires the college to develop a Research and Development Unit to, among other things, focus on using technology, data science, behavioral science, machine learning, and artificial intelligence to build out student supports. Existing law requires the board of governors to adopt regulations to establish and maintain the minimum qualifications for service as a faculty member teaching credit instruction or a faculty member teaching noncredit instruction. Existing law requires the board of governors to adopt regulations authorizing local governing boards to employ faculty members and educational administrators who do not meet the specified minimum qualifications, subject to alternative minimum qualifications.

Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law establishes the California Online Community College, under the administration of the board of governors, for specified purposes, and requires the college to develop a Research and Development Unit to, among other things, focus on using technology, data science, behavioral science, machine learning, and artificial intelligence to build out student supports.

This bill would prohibit artificial intelligence from being used to replace community college faculty for purposes of providing academic instruction to, and regular interaction with, students in a course of instruction, and would authorize artificial intelligence to only be used as a peripheral tool to support faculty in carrying out those tasks for uses such as course development, assessment, and tutoring.

 CONSENT  

Bill No: AB 2370

Author: Cervantes (D)

Amended: 4/17/24 in Assembly

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/5/24

AYES: Newman, Jones, Cortese, Glazer, Gonzalez, Smallwood-Cuevas, Wilk

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0, 5/2/24 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Community colleges: faculty: instructor of record: qualifications

SOURCE: Faculty Association of California Community Colleges

DIGEST:

This bill requires that the instructor of record for a community college course be a person who meets the specified minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member teaching noncredit or credit instruction.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors (BOG), as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in California. The California Community College system shall be comprised of community college districts. (Education Code (EC) § 70900)
2. Authorizes the California Community Colleges BOG to adopt regulations to establish and maintain the minimum qualifications for service as a faculty member teaching credit instruction, a faculty member teaching noncredit instruction, a librarian, a counselor, an educational administrator, an extended opportunity programs and services worker, a disabled students programs and services worker, an apprenticeship instructor, and a supervisor of health. (EC § 87356)
3. Authorizes the California Community Colleges BOG to adopt regulations to employ faculty members and educational administrators who do not meet the applicable minimum qualifications specified in the regulations adopted by the BOG pursuant to Section 87356. It further, establishes a process by which the regulations will be adopted. (EC § 87359)

This bill requires the instructor of record for a course of instruction at a community college be a person who meets the specified minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member teaching credit or noncredit instruction.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, “The rapid development of new technology in recent years has had a massive effect not only on our society generally, but on public policy in particular. One of the most pressing issues faced by the growing use of new technology tools has been the possible effects on human workers, particularly the threat of AI, that human workers could be replaced wholesale by artificial intelligence. In the May 2023 edition of the California Community Colleges’ ‘Digital Futures’ newsletter, an article entitled ‘Transforming Education: The Rise of AI in the California Community Colleges’ described the potential pedagogical use of AI in community colleges. It stated that ‘AI could provide excellent opportunities for more individualized instruction, tutoring, and class reviews. Faculty members might use AI to create lesson plans…’ While certainly there is room for such technology tools to contribute on community college classrooms in California, human faculty are still necessary and best suited to teach human students. Assembly Bill 2370 will help provide guardrails on the integration of new technology tools into community college classrooms by ensuring that the instructor of record in community college courses, for both credit and non-credit courses, must meet the minimum qualifications set by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges.”
2. What is the extent of the problem? As described by the Little Hoover Commission in their 2018 report on Artificial Intelligence: A Roadmap for California, Artificial Intelligence refers to a quality of any computer program (algorithms, data structures, and data) that can sense reason, act, and adapt like humans. Whenever a computer program’s performance gains near-humanlike abilities, or better than human abilities, to sense, reason, or act, we then call that AI. The California Faculty Association states that, “the rapid development of AI and other technologies has significantly impacted various sectors, including education. While these technologies offer valuable tools for enhancing instructional practices, it is imperative to safeguard the roles of human instructors in community colleges.” Staff is unaware of a situation in which AI technology has been implemented on a community college campus, specifically to replace human faculty with non-human instructors who assume direct instruction. However, fear regarding the potential replacement of jobs by AI technology is a growing concern across many sectors. Current law authorizes the BOG to establish minimum qualifications for service as a faculty member or in other educator positions, including librarians. These qualifications outline degree obtainment requirements for those positions. Presumably, only a person would acquire that degree. However, this bill explicitly deems a person as having to meet those minimum qualifications to serve as faculty.
3. The pandemic accelerated virtual instruction. Instruction modalities (in-person, online, asynchronous, hybrid models) changed rapidly as the share of community college courses delivered through online instruction as a result of the pandemic significantly increased from 20 percent in the 2019-20 academic year to over 60 percent in the 2020-2021 academic year and approximately 50 percent in the 2022-2023 academic year. Arguably, this rapid growth stimulated the use of AI technologies to support students, especially in virtual settings. Online instruction has remained a popular option for students who want more flexibility in accessing their education, particularly those who are place-bound and have work and family obligations. The provisions of this bill would apply to faculty teaching noncredit and credit courses, whether those are in-person, online, or hybrid.
4. Maintains the role of human instructors. Postsecondary educational institutions are called on to assure success in educational programs, and with that comes a personal element to effectively educate and foster personal growth among individuals. Human faculty members have the ability to simulate critical and creative thinking, inspire, cultivate empathy and moral conviction, and respond to unexpected situations. The Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, the sponsor of this measure, asserts, “Teaching is a profound human endeavor that requires nuanced interpersonal skills, subject matter expertise, and the ability to engage students in ways that machines cannot replicate… AI, while useful for certain supplementary functions, lacks the cognitive and emotional intelligence to truly replace human faculty. Allowing AI to take over direct instruction could severely compromise education quality.” It is commonly argued that when establishing policies regarding the integration of AI, the Legislature should strive to strike a balance that fosters innovation while minimizing adverse consequences in other aspects of civic life. The same principle applies to education. AI can provide numerous benefits in augmenting traditional methods of learning and instruction. Examples of this capability include offering interactive simulations, virtual reality experiences, and intelligent tutoring systems, as well as improving accessibility for students with disabilities with text-to-speech and speech-to-text technology. This bill aims to strike the appropriate balance in preserving human instructors’ role in academia without prohibiting the integration of AI technology to enhance instructional practices.

Related/Prior Legislation

SB 1235 (Gonzalez, 2024) would have required the California State University, Long Beach (CSULB), in consultation with other public institutions of higher education, to establish the AI and Deepfake Working Group and annually report to the Legislature on its research and findings. It further authorizes CSULB to develop a scoping plan in the first year to establish the topics that may be evaluated by, and the stakeholders that may be included in, the working group. SB 1235 was held by the author in this committee.

SB 1288 (Becker, 2024) requires the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, in consultation with the State Board of Education, to convene a working group, as specified, for the purpose of evaluating AI-enabled teaching and learning practices. SB 1288 is pending in the Assembly Education Committee.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 6/5/24)

Faculty Association of California Community Colleges (source)

California Community College Independents

California Faculty Association

Student Senate for California Community Colleges

The San Fernando Valley Young Democrats

OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/5/24)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0, 5/2/24

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur

NO VOTE RECORDED: Calderon, Megan Dahle, Flora, Low, Mathis, Weber, Robert Rivas

Prepared by: Olgalilia Ramirez / ED. / (916) 651-4105

6/6/24 10:46:01

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Josh Newman, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Bill No: Hearing Date: June 5, 2024

Subject: .

SUMMARY

This bill requires that the instructor of record for a community college course be taught by a person who meets the specified minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member teaching noncredit or credit instruction.

BACKGROUND

Existing law:

1) Establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the

Board of Governors (BOG), as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in California. The California Community College system shall be comprised of community college districts. (Education Code (EC) § 70900)

2) Authorizes the California Community Colleges BOG to adopt regulations to establish and maintain the minimum qualifications for service as a faculty member teaching credit instruction, a faculty member teaching noncredit instruction, a librarian, a counselor, an educational administrator, an extended opportunity programs and services worker, a disabled students programs and services worker, an apprenticeship instructor, and a supervisor of health. (EC § 87356)

3) Authorizes the California Community Colleges BOG to adopt regulations to employ faculty members and educational administrators who do not meet the applicable minimum qualifications specified in the regulations adopted by the BOG pursuant to Section 87356. It further, establishes a process by which the regulations will be adopted. (EC § 87359)

ANALYSIS

1. This bill requires the instructor of record for a course of instruction at a community college to be a person who meets the specified minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member teaching credit or noncredit instruction.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, “The rapid development of new technology in recent years has had a massive effect not only on our society generally, but on public policy in particular. One of the most pressing issues faced by the growing use of new technology tools has been the possible effects on human workers, particularly the threat of AI, that human workers could be replaced wholesale by artificial intelligence. In the May 2023 edition of the California Community Colleges’ ‘Digital Futures’ newsletter, an article entitled ‘Transforming Education: The Rise of AI in the California Community Colleges’ described the potential pedagogical use of AI in community colleges. It stated that ‘AI could provide excellent opportunities for more individualized instruction, tutoring, and class reviews. Faculty members might use AI to create lesson plans…’ While certainly there is room for such technology tools to contribute on community college classrooms in California, human faculty are still necessary and best suited to teach human students. Assembly Bill 2370 will help provide guardrails on the integration of new technology tools into community college classrooms by ensuring that the instructor of record in community college courses, for both credit and non-credit courses, must meet the minimum qualifications set by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges.”
2. What is the extent of the problem? As described by the Little Hoover Commission in their 2018 report on Artificial Intelligence: A Roadmap for California, Artificial Intelligence refers to a quality of any computer program (algorithms, data structures, and data) that can sense reason, act, and adapt like humans. Whenever a computer program’s performance gains near-humanlike abilities, or better than human abilities, to sense, reason, or act, we then call that AI. The California Faculty Association states that, “the rapid development of AI and other technologies has significantly impacted various sectors, including education. While these technologies offer valuable tools for enhancing instructional practices, it is imperative to safeguard the roles of human instructors in community colleges.” Staff is unaware of a situation in which AI technology has been implemented on a community college campus, specifically to replace human faculty with non-human instructors who assume direct instruction. However, fear regarding the potential replacement of jobs by AI technology is a growing concern across many sectors. Current law authorizes the BOG to establish minimum qualifications for service as a faculty member or in other educator positions, including librarians. These qualifications outline degree obtainment requirements for those positions. Presumably, only a person would acquire that degree. However, this bill explicitly deems a person as having to meet those minimum qualifications to serve as faculty.
3. The pandemic accelerated virtual instruction. Instruction modalities (in-person, online, asynchronous, hybrid models) changed rapidly as the share of community college courses delivered through online instruction as a result of the pandemic significantly increased from 20 percent in the 2019-20 academic year to over 60 percent in the 2020-2021 academic year and approximately 50 percent in the 2022-2023 academic year. Arguably, this rapid growth stimulated the use of AI technologies to support students, especially in virtual settings. Online instruction has remained a popular option for students who want more flexibility in accessing their education, particularly those who are place-bound and have work and family obligations. The provisions of this bill would apply to faculty teaching noncredit and credit courses, whether those are in-person, online, or hybrid.
4. Maintains the role of human instructors. Postsecondary educational institutions are called on to assure success in educational programs, and with that comes a personal element to effectively educate and foster personal growth among individuals. Human faculty members have the ability to simulate critical and creative thinking, inspire them, cultivate empathy and moral conviction, and respond to unexpected situations. The Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, the sponsor of this measure, asserts, “Teaching is a profound human endeavor that requires nuanced interpersonal skills, subject matter expertise, and the ability to engage students in ways that machines cannot replicate… AI, while useful for certain supplementary functions, lacks the cognitive and emotional intelligence to truly replace human faculty. Allowing AI to take over direct instruction could severely compromise education quality.” It is commonly argued that when establishing policies regarding the integration of AI, the Legislature should strive to strike a balance that fosters innovation while minimizing adverse consequences in other aspects of civic life. The same principle applies to education. AI can provide numerous benefits in augmenting traditional methods of learning and instruction. Examples of this capability include offering interactive simulations, virtual reality experiences, and intelligent tutoring systems, as well as improving accessibility for students with disabilities with text-to-speech and speech-to-text technology. This bill aims to strike the appropriate balance in preserving human instructors’ role in academia without prohibiting the integration of AI technology to enhance instructional practices.
5. Related legislation.

SB 1235 (Gonzalez, 2024) would have required the California State University, Long Beach (CSULB), in consultation with other public institutions of higher education, to establish the AI and Deepfake Working Group and annually report to the Legislature on its research and findings. It further authorizes CSULB to develop a scoping plan in the first year to establish the topics that may be evaluated by, and the stakeholders that may be included in, the working group.SB 1235 was held by the author in this committee.

SB 1288 (Becker, 2024) would require the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, in consultation with the State Board of Education, to convene a working group, as specified, for the purpose of evaluating AI-enabled teaching and learning practices. SB 1288 is pending referral in the Assembly.

SUPPORT

Faculty Association of California Community Colleges (Sponsor)

California Community College Independents

California Faculty Association

Student Senate for California Community Colleges

The San Fernando Valley Young Democrats

OPPOSITION

None received

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2370

Author:(Cervantes)

As Amended Ver:April 17, 2024

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Requires the instructor of record for a course of instruction at a California Community College (CCC) to be taught by a person who meets the minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member teaching a credit course or a noncredit course, as specified.

Major Provisions

Requires the instructor of record for a course of instruction at a CCC to be taught by a person who meets the minimum qualifications, pursuant to Education Code (EDC) Section 87356 or Section 87359, to serve as a faculty member who is teaching either a credit or noncredit course.

COMMENTS

Minimum qualifications for faculty. As noted in the existing law section above, EDC Sections 87356 and 87359 bestow the authority of establishing the minimum qualifications for faculty to the Board of Governors of the CCC. The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 5, Division 6, Chapter 6, Subchapter 5, includes the minimum qualifications for employees of the CCC as adopted by the Board of Governors. This bill seeks to augment the minimum qualifications by adding the term "person" as part of the minimum qualifications for those who are teaching (faculty) in noncredit and credit courses. The current minimum qualifications for those teaching credit according to CCR Section 53410 is a master's degree or for some courses where a master's degree is not generally expected, a bachelor's degree with varying years of experience.

For noncredit courses, the instructors qualifications vary depending upon the noncredit course being taught; however, the minimum degree qualifications is the same; either a bachelor's degree or an associate degree with varying years of experience in the given field. In both cases, for non- and for-credit courses, the minimum qualifications are mute as to whether the "faculty" or "instructor" is a person or another entity yet to be established.

Every few years, in consultation with the Academic Senate of the CCC, the Chancellor's Office of the CCC publishes a report on the "Minimum Qualifications for Faculty and Administrators in California Community Colleges." The last edition was published in June of 2022 and contained every discipline taught at the CCC and the discipline's minimum qualifications for the faculty who teach the course. The 88 page report divides the disciplines into three types: disciplines which require a master's degree (89 different disciplines), those that require a bachelor's degree or an associate degree (17 different disciplines), and those that require an associate degree with experience (roughly 144 different vocational disciplines).

Diversity of faculty at the CCC. In 2018, the Legislature established the first fully online community college and in codifying the statues for Albright, declared the following: "California recognizes the dedication of every faculty member, classified staff member, manager, and administrator in the Community College system toward supporting the success of California's community college students. As dedicated leaders, innovators, and educators, faculty will be integral to the success of the California Online Community College and improving the economic prosperity of numerous Californians." However, even this section of code does not delineate whether faculty are specifically "persons" as in homos sapiens. One may assume the California Legislature in establishing a fully online forum for education would have sought to establish a definition of faculty that was more prescriptive to avoid confusion; however, the conversations never took place.

The CCC is home to 1.9 million students and is often heralded as the largest and most diverse two-year college system in the nation with over 48% of the student population identifying as Hispanic, 10.9% as Asian, 23.16% as White, and 5.49% as African American. The fall 2023, the CCC employed 18,079 faculty (academic tenured/tenure track) with 19.97% identifying as Hispanic, 10.80% as Asian, 53.71% as White, and 6.08% as African American. In recent years, the Legislature has provided additional funding to the CCC to diversify faculty specifically to increase student retention, reduce likelihood of biases, and to increase faculty's ability to teach in a manner that reflects the intersectionality of the student population. The intention of the Legislature is to increase diversity of faculty to better reflect the population of the students the faculty serve; therefore, since the students are people, one could assume the faculty should also identify as people.

Concerns regarding the replacement of faculty. The Author mentions a newsletter produced by California Community College "Digital Futures" from May 2023. The newsletter highlighted the discussions faculty at Lake Tahoe Community College were having regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the impacts it may have on teaching and professional life. The newsletter does talk about the use of AI in pedagogy, but it also says the following:

"Like their counterparts in the CCCs, LTCC faculty members have initiated important discussions about the potential effects of AI on teaching and professional life. Ironically, in terms of the fears expressed by many faculty members regarding AI, Chat GPT itself perhaps best summed it up by stating, 'It's important to note that while AI has the potential to enhance classroom teaching, it should not replace human teachers. Teachers play a crucial role in guiding students, providing mentorship, and creating a supportive learning environment. AI should be seen as a tool to augment and enhance their instructional practices, rather than replace them.'"^[1]

A recent article in Inside Higher Education discussed the clash between Boston University and its faculty regarding the use of artificial intelligence. Concerns were sparked by a memo which stated faculty could use AI as a tool to help in the interim as the graduate students and teaching assistances were striking due to ongoing bargaining negotiations. Many saw this memo as an initial step towards replacing faculty with AI.

The California Faculty Association is quoted in the article saying, "'I think job replacement is a valid concern and I think [faculty and staff] could understandably be nervous about it,' said Kevin Wehr, bargaining team chair for the California Faculty Association. 'Am I in a panic? No. Should others be? No, I don't think they should think the sky is falling. We have a lot of issues facing higher ed and this is just one of many."'^[2]

According to the Author

The rapid development of new technology in recent years has had a massive effect not only on our society generally, but on public policy in particular. One of the most pressing issues faced by the growing use of new technology tools has been the possible effects on human workers, particularly the threat of AI, that human workers could be replaced wholesale by artificial intelligence. In the May 2023 edition of the California Community Colleges 'Digital Futures' newsletter, an article entitled 'Transforming Education: The Rise of AI in the California Community Colleges' described the potential pedagogical use of AI in community colleges. It stated that 'AI could provide excellent opportunities for more individualized instruction, tutoring, and class reviews. Faculty members might use AI to create lesson plans…' While certainly there is room for such technology tools to contribute on community college classrooms in California, human faculty are still necessary and best suited to teach human students. Assembly Bill 2370 will help provide guardrails on the integration of new technology tools into community college classrooms by ensuring that the instructor of record in community college courses, for both credit and non-credit courses, must meet the minimum qualifications set by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. According to the California Community College Chancellor's Office Management System, in fall of 2023, they reported a total faculty and staff count of 84,911 people. Of those faculty and staff members, around 48.67% identify as being part of marginalized communities with Hispanic (24.19%) and African American (11.32%) being the biggest groups. This bill seeks to protect all faculty jobs in the California community college system, but especially those who represent underserved communities in the higher education system.

Arguments in Support

The Faculty Association of California Community Colleges (FACCC), the sponsor of the bill explained the need for the measure as, "FACCC proudly sponsors AB 2370, as it safeguards the vital role of personal instructors in community college classrooms. From the faculty perspective, teaching is a profoundly human endeavor that requires nuanced interpersonal skills, subject matter expertise, and the ability to engage students in ways that machines cannot replicate."

"The personal connections formed between professors and students are fundamental to effective learning. Artificial intelligence, while useful for certain supplementary functions, lacks the cognitive and emotional intelligence to truly replace human faculty. Allowing AI to take over direct instruction could severely compromise educational quality."

"Moreover, tenure, academic freedom, and fair compensation are core tenets that faculty fight to uphold. The wholesale replacement of professors by Al instruction could represent an existential threat to the professoriate. It could enable cost-cutting that undercuts fair wages, employee protections, and the autonomy of faculty over curriculum and teaching methods. By restricting Al solely to a supporting role, AB 2370 upholds the primacy of human expertise and the professional rights of community college instructors."

"This bill is intended to address the increasing capabilities and adoption of artificial intelligence technologies, including their potential to automate various tasks typically performed by human faculty. While Al can boost productivity in some sectors, its use in education to completely automate teaching raises concerns over educational quality, student engagement, and threats to human employment in academia."

Arguments in Opposition

None on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by Legislative Counsel.

VOTES

ASM HIGHER EDUCATION: 10-0-1

YES: Mike Fong, Ta, Arambula, Boerner, Chen, Essayli, Irwin, Jackson, Low, Muratsuchi

ABS, ABST OR NV: Quirk-Silva

UPDATED

VERSION: April 17, 2024

CONSULTANT: Ellen Cesaretti-Monroy / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0002776

1. https://digitalfutures.cccco.edu/transforming-education-the-rise-of-ai-in-the-california-community-colleges/ ↑

2. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/tech-innovation/artificial-intelligence/2024/04/18/faculty-unions-seek-ai-guidelines-contracts ↑

Date of Hearing: April 23, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION

Mike Fong, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2370 (

Author:Cervantes) – As Amended Ver:April 17, 2024

SUBJECT: Community colleges: faculty: instructor of record: qualifications

SUMMARY: Requires the instructor of record for a course of instruction at a California Community College (CCC) to be taught by a person who meets the minimum qualifications to serve as a faculty member teaching a credit course or a noncredit course, as specified.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the CCC under the administration of the Board of Governors (BOG) of the CCC, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in California. The CCC shall be comprised of community college districts (Education Code (EDC) Section 70900).
2. Authorizes the CCC BOG to adopt regulations to establish and maintain the minimum qualifications for service as a faculty member teaching credit instruction, a faculty member teaching noncredit instruction, a librarian, a counselor, an educational administrator, an extended opportunity programs and service worker, a disabled students programs and service worker, an apprenticeship instructor, and a supervisor of health (EDC Section 87356).
3. Authorizes the CCC BOG to adopt regulations to employ faculty members and educational administrators who do not meet the applicable who do not meet the applicable minimum qualifications specified in the regulations adopted by the BOG pursuant to Section 87356. Establishes a process by which the regulations will be adopted (EDC Section 87359).

FISCAL EFFECT: This measure is keyed non-fiscal by Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS: Purpose. As depicted by the Author, “the rapid development of new technology in recent years has had a massive effect not only on our society generally, but on public policy in particular. One of the most pressing issues faced by the growing use of new technology tools has been the possible effects on human workers, particularly the threat of AI, that human workers could be replaced wholesale by artificial intelligence. In the May 2023 edition of the California Community Colleges ‘Digital Futures’ newsletter, an article entitled ‘Transforming Education: The Rise of AI in the California Community Colleges’ described the potential pedagogical use of AI in community colleges. It stated that ‘AI could provide excellent opportunities for more individualized instruction, tutoring, and class reviews. Faculty members might use AI to create lesson plans…’ While certainly there is room for such technology tools to contribute on community college classrooms in California, human faculty are still necessary and best suited to teach human students. Assembly Bill 2370 will help provide guardrails on the integration of new technology tools into community college classrooms by ensuring that the instructor of record in community college courses, for both credit and non-credit courses, must meet the minimum qualifications set by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges.”

The author further contends the need for the measure, as “according to the California Community College Chancellor’s Office Management System, in fall of 2023, they reported a total faculty and staff count of 84,911 people. Of those faculty and staff members, around 48.67% identify as being part of marginalized communities with Hispanic (24.19%) and African American (11.32%) being the biggest groups. This bill seeks to protect all faculty jobs in the California community college system, but especially those who represent underserved communities in the higher education system.”

Minimum qualifications for faculty. As noted in the existing law section above, EDC Sections 87356 and 87359 bestow the authority of establishing the minimum qualifications for faculty to the Board of Governors of the CCC. The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 5, Division 6, Chapter 6, Subchapter 5, includes the minimum qualifications for employees of the CCC as adopted by the Board of Governors. AB 2370 (Cervantes) seeks to augment the minimum qualifications by adding the term “person” as part of the minimum qualifications for those who are teaching (faculty) in noncredit and credit courses. The current minimum qualifications for those teaching credit pursuant to CCR Section 53410:

For noncredit courses, the instructors qualifications vary depending upon the noncredit course being taught; however, the minimum degree qualifications is the same; either a bachelor’s degree or an associate degree with varying years of experience in the given field. In both cases, for non- and for-credit courses, the minimum qualifications are mute as to whether the “faculty” or “instructor” is a person or another entity yet to be established.

Every few years, in consultation with the Academic Senate of the CCC, the Chancellor’s Office of the CCC publishes a report on the “Minimum Qualifications for Faculty and Administrators in California Community Colleges.” The last edition was published in June of 2022 and contained every discipline taught at the CCC and the discipline’s minimum qualifications for the faculty who teach the course. The 88 page report divides the disciplines into three types: disciplines which require a master’s degree (89 different disciplines), those that require a bachelor’s degree or an associate degree (17 different disciplines), and those that require an associate degree with experience (roughly 144 different vocational disciplines).

Diversity of faculty at the CCC. In 2018, the Legislature established the first fully online community college and in codifying the statues for Albright, declared the following: “California recognizes the dedication of every faculty member, classified staff member, manager, and administrator in the Community College system toward supporting the success of California’s community college students. As dedicated leaders, innovators, and educators, faculty will be integral to the success of the California Online Community College and improving the economic prosperity of numerous Californians.” However, even this section of code does not delineate whether faculty are specifically “persons” as in homos sapiens. One may assume the California Legislature in establishing a fully online forum for education would have sought to establish a definition of faculty that was more prescriptive to avoid confusion; however, the conversations never took place.

The CCC is home to 1.9 million students and is often heralded as the largest and most diverse two-year college system in the nation with over 48% of the student population identifying as Hispanic, 10.9% as Asian, 23.16% as White, and 5.49% as African American. The fall 2023, the CCC employed 18,079 faculty (academic tenured/tenure track) with 19.97% identifying as Hispanic, 10.80% as Asian, 53.71% as White, and 6.08% as African American. In recent years, the Legislature has provided additional funding to the CCC to diversify faculty specifically to increase student retention, reduce likelihood of biases, and to increase faculty’s ability to teach in a manner that reflects the intersectionality of the student population. The intention of the Legislature is to increase diversity of faculty to better reflect the population of the students the faculty serve; therefore, since the students are people, one could assume the faculty should also identify as people.

Arguments in support. The Faculty Association of California Community Colleges (FACCC), the sponsor of the bill explained the need for the measure as, “FACCC proudly sponsors AB 2370, as it safeguards the vital role of personal instructors in community college classrooms. From the faculty perspective, teaching is a profoundly human endeavor that requires nuanced interpersonal skills, subject matter expertise, and the ability to engage students in ways that machines cannot replicate.”

“The personal connections formed between professors and students are fundamental to effective learning. Artificial intelligence, while useful for certain supplementary functions, lacks the cognitive and emotional intelligence to truly replace human faculty. Allowing AI to take over direct instruction could severely compromise educational quality.”

“Moreover, tenure, academic freedom, and fair compensation are core tenets that faculty fight to uphold. The wholesale replacement of professors by Al instruction could represent an existential threat to the professoriate. It could enable cost-cutting that undercuts fair wages, employee protections, and the autonomy of faculty over curriculum and teaching methods. By restricting Al solely to a supporting role, AB 2370 upholds the primacy of human expertise and the professional rights of community college instructors.”

“This bill is intended to address the increasing capabilities and adoption of artificial intelligence technologies, including their potential to automate various tasks typically performed by human faculty. While Al can boost productivity in some sectors, its use in education to completely automate teaching raises concerns over educational quality, student engagement, and threats to human employment in academia.”

Concerns regarding the replacement of faculty. The Author mentions a newsletter produced by California Community College “Digital Futures” from May 2023. The newsletter highlighted the discussions faculty at Lake Tahoe Community College were having regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the impacts it may have on teaching and professional life. The newsletter does talk about the use of AI in pedagogy, but it also says the following:

“Like their counterparts in the CCCs, LTCC faculty members have initiated important discussions about the potential effects of AI on teaching and professional life. Ironically, in terms of the fears expressed by many faculty members regarding AI, Chat GPT itself perhaps best summed it up by stating, ‘It’s important to note that while AI has the potential to enhance classroom teaching, it should not replace human teachers. Teachers play a crucial role in guiding students, providing mentorship, and creating a supportive learning environment. AI should be seen as a tool to augment and enhance their instructional practices, rather than replace them.’”^[1]

A recent article in Inside Higher Education discussed the clash between Boston University and its faculty regarding the use of artificial intelligence. Concerns were sparked by a memo which stated faculty could use AI as a tool to help in the interim as the graduate students and teaching assistances were striking due to ongoing bargaining negotiations. Many saw this memo as an initial step towards replacing faculty with AI.

The California Faculty Association is quoted in the article saying, “‘I think job replacement is a valid concern and I think [faculty and staff] could understandably be nervous about it,’ said Kevin Wehr, bargaining team chair for the California Faculty Association. ‘Am I in a panic? No. Should others be? No, I don’t think they should think the sky is falling. We have a lot of issues facing higher ed and this is just one of many.”’^[2]

While seemingly innocuous, AB 2370 (Cervantes) does raise policy concerns regarding the future of technology in higher education. Specifically,

1. Should the “person” description of faculty be placed into the Education Codee or should the institutions and their systemwide governing boards be permitted to adopt minimum standards, including whether humans should have specific positions?
2. Should the Legislature opine on the role of AI, including predictive analytics, and the role it has in higher education? Should we be limiting a tool that could be used to help students obtain greater success?
3. Should the use and role of AI be collectively bargained at the local level and not at the state level?
4. Does defining faculty as “person” set a precedence by which we need to define every iterance of what was previously assumed to be human in code?

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation & Dance
California Federation of Teachers Afl-cio
California Labor Federation, Afl-cio
Faculty Association of California Community Colleges (SPONSOR)

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Ellen Cesaretti-Monroy / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960

1. https://digitalfutures.cccco.edu/transforming-education-the-rise-of-ai-in-the-california-community-colleges/ ↑

2. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/tech-innovation/artificial-intelligence/2024/04/18/faculty-unions-seek-ai-guidelines-contracts ↑