The Brief

When California State University paid OpenAI $17 million last year to give campuses unlimited access to a high-powered educational version of ChatGPT, the goal was to help students learn to use artificial intelligence for their education and future careers. However, the announcement came as a surprise to faculty and students, who were left on their own to figure out how to use AI ethically.

Afraid students would use ChatGPT Edu to cheat, many professors turned to in-class tests using bluebooks and scantrons, or employed faulty AI detectors like TurnItIn to catch AI-generated work. Meanwhile, other faculty have embraced ChatGPT and made it part of their curriculum. This all has left students confused over the use of AI in their courses.

A recent Cal State survey of over 94,000 students and university employees found 52% of faculty reported AI having a negative effect on their teaching and 67% of students felt their professors don’t teach them how to use AI effectively.

Now, as Cal State approaches the end of its 18-month contract with OpenAI this July, the university system has not announced whether it will renew the deal. Some faculty at San Francisco State University have begun a petition calling on Cal State Chancellor Mildred Garcia to end the partnership.

The Cal State Chancellor’s office points out that the AI survey found 64% of students, faculty and staff said AI has affected their learning experience at their university positively, and 63% said they’ve seen more opportunities on their campus to learn about AI.

“Our systemwide AI survey results reflect what we are seeing across our universities — widespread engagement with AI tools and technologies,” wrote Cal State spokesperson Amy Bentley-Smith in an email.

The university system left it up to campuses to dictate the proper uses of the chatbot while offering tools and training on a website called AI Commons. But students and faculty say those resources have not been enough. As of April, only 0.7% of students and 16% of faculty have completed the voluntary training, based on data provided by Bentley-Smith.

Assemblymember Mike Fong introduced Assembly Bill 2392 in February, which would require Cal State and California Community Colleges, as well as request University of California schools, to provide training on any AI product deployed on campuses.

Last fall, Fong and the Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education questioned Cal State officials about planning around the AI initiative.

“During the joint hearing on higher education and privacy, discussions revealed that California State University campuses have adopted AI tools without consistent guidance or training, raising concerns around data privacy, academic integrity, and equitable use,” said Fong in an email to CalMatters.

While a few students and faculty testified at the hearing, others have continued to echo those issues.

“I’m not sure [Cal State] realized how much new work it would require, how much revision to the old way of doing things it would require,” said Ryan Jenkins, the chair of the AI Task Force for Cal Poly San Luis Obispo’s faculty union chapter.

Students want to be a part of AI decisions

Cal State Northridge communications major Katie Karroum was shocked when she saw the announcement about ChatGPT Edu last year. As the vice president of systemwide affairs for the Cal State Student Association, she would have expected the chancellor’s office to meet with the student organization that represents over 470,000 students throughout the state.

“We were not consulted when the contract was signed, and we weren’t even given a heads up,” Karroum said.

Cal State chose OpenAI as the least-costly option, according to assistant vice chancellor of academic technology services Leslie Kennedy. The contract aimed to give everyone free access to ChatGPT Edu across all 22 campuses. Previously, campuses and individuals were paying for their own upgraded ChatGPT accounts that allow users to generate content like images and research reports without the limitations of the free version.

The contract with OpenAI was signed in January 2025, revealed later that month at a Board of Trustees meeting, and formally announced through a systemwide press release in February 2025, which is how Karroum found out.

In a meeting of the Cal State Student Association last October, student representatives from each campus told Karroum that they saw a lack of justice for students accused of using generative AI to cheat, and that they were concerned about the data collected from the chatbot being shared.

ChatGPT Edu at Cal State is defaulted to not use data for training models, but users can opt to allow their data to be shared, according to testing by CalMatters.

Students have also complained about the absence of a consistent AI policy in their classes, according to an open letter published by Karroum. At most campuses, professors get to decide their classroom policies, including about AI.

Yagmur Wernimont, a sophomore at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, said that although AI is used for automation and robotics in her intended agriculture field, she still does not use the technology herself because she thinks “it’s making us dumber” and doesn’t promote learning. She also watched herself fall behind while a classmate used ChatGPT to get a 100% on an assignment.

While her professor verbally told the class at the beginning of the quarter not to use AI, the rule was not on the syllabus, nor was a clear consequence for using AI. Wernimont said this may have given students a loophole for using it.

At Cal State Bakersfield, Emily Callahan, dean of students for academic integrity, said there has been a steady uptick of students reported for improper use of AI. She said students are using the chatbot to gain an unfair advantage over others.

Wernimont has also witnessed a divide between professors over AI. While one of her professors required the use of Google NotebookLM, an AI-powered note-taking app, an English teacher told Wernimont’s class that she was sad students would be using AI for writing, but shared a presentation on ways to cite the tool anyway.

“They’re all having different ways and ideas how to do it,” she said. “And it’s kind of conflicting as a student.”

Kennedy said the university system hasn’t excluded anybody from the discussion around AI. The Chancellor’s Office started a generative AI committee in 2024 that includes students and faculty.

“It was the committee’s recommendations that served as the basis for the CSU to identify, evaluate, and negotiate with multiple companies who at the time offered plans designed specifically to help bring AI tools to higher education institutions,” said Cal State’s chief information officer Ed Clark in an email. “Their assessment and feedback have been and continue to be essential to how the CSU implements its AI strategy that is both cost-effective and secure.”

A new board formed after the implementation of ChatGPT Edu focuses on California’s workforce by including representatives from technology companies. Cal State Student Association President Tara Al-Rehani said that while she is part of that board, it makes no final policy or guidance decisions on AI use.

Karroum said although students need to learn how to use AI, she doesn’t like feeling part of an experiment.

“I think that we’re being treated as, like, test rats right now because there’s no policy and there’s no guidance,” Karroum said.

Faculty introduce new classroom policies on AI 

Faculty leaders said they also were caught off guard with the ChatGPT deal. According to the Cal State survey, 59% of faculty regularly use AI in teaching and research, and 68% said they include an explicit statement on AI use.

According to a repository of more than 200 AI syllabus policies housed on Cal Poly San Luis Obispo’s website, one criminal justice professor from Cal State Fullerton describes in the syllabus when, why and how students should use AI. The professor also includes an example of a good AI disclosure statement from a student who outlined their use of ChatGPT for an assignment.

The AI Commons website states that faculty ultimately decide how they want to implement generative AI into their curriculum,taking into consideration whether it might improve teaching and learning in their classroom like any new technology.

Jenkins, who teaches philosophy at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, gives exams in class using blue books and scantrons to avoid any potential for students to cheat with AI. When ChatGPT was first released in 2022, Jenkins tested the chatbot by giving it a reading quiz. It gave all the right answers, alarming Jenkins that his students might use the technology while taking tests online. Today, Jenkins tells his students to treat AI like any other source when using its outputs for an assignment, but still proctors exams in-class.

“The bread and butter of philosophy is reflecting on your own ideas and trying to sort out what you believe and why,” Jenkins said. “If you have a tool that does that for you, then you’re being denied an opportunity to practice that skill.”

Jenkins said he does not have an AI statement in his syllabus because neither the department nor Cal Poly has provided one to use. On its website, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo links to the AI Commons as well as an AI statement builder from Pepperdine University for faculty to use. But the university does not require any specific statement from professors.

At Cal State Fullerton, Shelli Wynants helps faculty decide how to use AI in their classrooms through her role in the university’s faculty development center. She also teaches students in her child and adolescent studies courses to critically review AI output, and make sure they are remaining “the thinker and the decision maker” in the process.

Wynant said she refers to AI as an “assistant” or “teammate,” but emphasizes it should never replace human judgment. She has found that many of her students who plan careers in teaching want to learn how to use AI responsibly for the sake of their future students. “These students need to get up to speed because they’re going to be the ones teaching students digital literacy,” she said.

In August 2025, the Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education questioned Cal State officials about planning around the AI initiative. Representatives of the Academic Senate, Cal State Student Association, California Faculty Association and Cal State Employees Union spoke to the Assembly committee about their discontent over the contract with OpenAI.

“We understand all these criticisms and concerns, and they’re valid,” said Cal State’s chief information officer Ed Clark at the meeting. “The best way to deal with those concerns is to have our universities participate in helping to shape the future of these technologies. We can’t just sit back and let it go by.”

Students still need support, even with AI chatbots   

Staff at university tutoring centers are struggling to advise students who say faculty are blaming them for cheating by using the very AI tools the university system wants them to learn to use. According to the Cal State AI survey, 78% of students, faculty and staff said the ethical use of AI is a major concern.

Seher Vora, the coordinator for San Jose State University’s writing center, created an AI Writer Toolbox after conversations with tutors about students who were being penalized by professors for using AI. The toolbox helps students work with AI responsibly, including how to properly cite AI use and not using the chatbot for generating work that is not their own.

The toolbox also includes a disclosure tool that allows students to fill out a form outlining their use of AI for an assignment. The form generates a certificate for students to submit with their work.

The writing center at San Jose State advises students to check with their professors if they are unsure what uses of AI they accept. Vora hopes her work with the toolbox will encourage education around AI, for both students and faculty.

“We have to stay on top of it,” she said. “It’s changing every day.”

Angel Corzo is a contributor with the College Journalism Network, a collaboration between CalMatters and student journalists from across California. CalMatters higher education coverage is supported by a grant from the College Futures Foundation.

Southern California was built on radio.

"I can still hear the jingle KFWB News 98,” wrote  Taline in Los Feliz, during a recent conversation on LAist's daily news show, AirTalk, which airs on 89.3 FM. “I grew up hearing that in my dad's minivan on the way to and from school. It has a special place in my heart.”

Back in April, broadcast company Audacy announced KNX News — one of the last-remaining all-news FM stations — was leaving the FM dial where it had simulcast on 97.1 FM since 2021. The station, which is also one of the oldest in L.A., is not budging from 1070 AM where it has been on the air for more than 100 years. The move away from FM officially happened in May to make way for a new sports talk station, which Audacy officials called an area of growth for advertisers in today’s media landscape.

The move is one in a long line of changes for radio and a reminder that before podcasts, playlists and algorithms, many Southern Californians built their days around radio broadcasts.

Radio, a daily ritual

The construction of KNX

(

Herman J. Schultheis

/

Los Angeles Public Library

)

Michael Jackson, a well-known KNX, personality

(

Los Angeles Public Library

)

Larry Mantle, now in his 41st year hosting AirTalk, remembers being a kid and dreaming of what it might be like to be behind the mic at one of these radio stations.

“ I grew up with KNX," he said. “My dream job as a kid was to be an anchor on KNX or KFWB, the two local all-news radio stations, 'cause there was nothing like hosting AirTalk that even existed at that point.”

Mantle opened up the phone lines on a recent show to hear from his fellow SoCal radio lovers about the shows they miss and the memories they have. Here's what they had to say:

A love for radio, then and now  

A pilot of KMPC's traffic alert helicopter pictured with his daughter and grandson.

(

Los Angeles Public Library

)

A 1963 picture of Valley State College (now Los Angeles Valley College) preparing to launch KVCM

(

Larry Leach

/

Los Angeles Public Library

)

“When you'd walk down Hollywood Boulevard where the station was, you could hear it playing as you went down the street,” said  Olivia in Glendale about KLAC 570 with Al Jarvis.

 Larry in Yorba Linda shouted out KBCA Jazz for its 24-hour jazz, saying “When I first moved out here in '68 from Phoenix, which had like an hour a week, it was a real wonder.”

 Mark in Glassell Park emailed that he loves KCRW’s Henry Rollins, writing, “I used to bristle at his unique DJ persona, but over time, I came to love him and his crazy eclectic playlists. I find his knowledge in history and punk rock fascinating. He's a gem and a legend."

"I'd like to give a shout-out to all the DJs working at KXLU, the college station at Loyola Marymount University, said  Jeremy in Culver City in an email. “That station's been on the air for nearly 60 years. I believe it's one of the best examples of what's possible with radio."

"KFWB and KRLA back in the day when they were rock music stations —  Dr. Demento, one of my favorite on-air personalities, also had eclectic music taste," said  Carrie in Desert Edge.

“ Dr. Demento was must listening when I was a kid in junior high school at Le Conte Junior High in Hollywood,” Mantle added. “Every Sunday night on KMET, we would make sure we were listening to Dr. Demento and his funny records.”

The question remains…

An 11-year-old winning a car in a KMPC contest in 1963.

(

Los Angeles Public Library

)

Listener support is vital to any radio station, and it’s clear KNX has many lifelong fans. AirTalk listeners highlighted their support for household KNX names over the decades like Bill Keene, Melinda Lee, Mike Roy and Jackie Olden.

As KNX makes changes, many are watching closely and thinking about the future of radio.

Listeners like Tommy in La Quinta are left wondering if the radio dial will be the same…

“I’m a hardcore listener, but I don't know about casual listeners [and] if they'll tune to AM,” he said.

After months of hand-wringing, Los Angeles and LA28 have come to a tentative agreement on how Olympics organizers will reimburse the city for its expenses for the 2028 Summer Games.

According to the deal, the private Olympic organizing committee will pay upfront for the estimated cost of services that are not eligible for federal reimbursement, like trash pick-up and traffic control. Under another proposal, the city would also be able to tap an LA28 contingency fund if it isn't fully repaid by the federal government for policing costs at Olympic venues.

The agreement is nearly nine months overdue and still needs approval by Mayor Karen Bass and the City Council.

The 2028 Olympics are intended to be privately financed, and an existing city agreement with LA28 states that the Olympics organizers, not L.A., will pay for extra costs for public services in support of the Games. But L.A. is the financial back-stop for the Olympics, meaning if LA28 goes in the red, taxpayers will pick up the bill.

Beyond that, the city services agreement presents another area where L.A. could incur additional unexpected expenses for hosting the Games. L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez warned LA28 CEO Reynold Hoover earlier this year that a bad deal could "bankrupt" the city.

Jacie Prieto Lopez, an LA28 spokesperson, and Paul Krekorian, who leads the city's office of major events, said in statements that the freshly inked agreement would help deliver a fiscally responsible Games.

"Mayor Bass’ priority is that the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games be fiscally responsible, protect taxpayers, and benefit Angelenos for decades to come. This agreement helps deliver that commitment," Krekorian said.

But the contract between the two parties doesn't fully resolve one of the biggest areas of financial risk for the city: the enormous cost of security for an event as extensive and high-profile as the summer Olympics and Paralympics.

Organizers are counting on the federal government to pay for public safety at Olympic venues that are considered part of a "national special security event." That includes costs for LAPD staffing. LA28 has not included security costs in its $7.1 billion budget — a fact that City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto criticized earlier this year.

The federal government has so far allocated $1 billion for security costs for the Olympics. Exactly where those federal funds will go has not yet been determined, and there's no guarantee they will cover all of L.A.'s policing costs.

To address this, city officials have also proposed an amendment to a 2021 agreement between the city and LA28. That amendment would establish that if L.A. is not reimbursed by the federal government for all its eligible expenses, it could dip into LA28's contingency fund of $270 million before the private organizing committee could use those funds for any legacy projects.

But that bucket of money will first be used for any costs that Olympics organizers still owe if they run out of revenue — meaning if the Olympics don't turn a profit, the city's access to that money will depend on how much is left for the taking.

Civil rights attorney Connie Rice, who has been tracking the city's negotiations with LA28, told LAist the agreement was a "PR document" not a deal. She pointed out that if the federal government does not pay up for security spending as expected, L.A. could be in trouble.

" It leaves the taxpayers with a GoFundMe strategy," she said.

The city services agreement lays the groundwork for more negotiations between LA28 and the city. Each venue will require its own agreement, to be negotiated by July 1, 2027. Venues in the city of L.A. include Dodger Stadium, the L.A. Convention Center, L.A. Memorial Coliseum and the Venice Beach Boardwalk.

The City Council's ad-hoc committee on the 2028 Games will meet Tuesday afternoon to vote on the agreement.