The Brief

A few months ago, a high school English teacher in Los Angeles Unified noticed something different about his students’ tests. Students who had struggled all semester were suddenly getting A’s. He suspected some were cheating, but he couldn’t figure out how.

Until a student showed him the latest version of Google Lens.

Google had recently made the visual search tool easier to use on the company’s Chrome browser. When users click on an icon hidden in the tool bar, a moveable bubble pops up. Wherever the bubble is placed, a sidebar appears with an artificial intelligence answer, description, explanation or interpretation of whatever is inside the bubble. For students, it provides an easy way to cheat on digital tests without typing in a prompt, or even leaving the page. All they have to do is click.

“I couldn’t believe it,” said teacher Dustin Stevenson. “It’s hard enough to teach in the age of AI, and now we have to navigate this?”

Keeping up with students’ methods of cheating has always been a cat-and-mouse game for teachers. But some now say that AI tools, particularly Lens, have made it impossible to enforce academic integrity in the classroom — with potentially harmful long-term effects on students’ learning.

‘A terrible idea’

Lens has been around for nearly a decade. It’s the camera technology that scans QR codes or identifies objects in photos. But as AI has evolved, its uses have expanded, and Google has made it more available to users, especially those using Chrome, the Google browser.

During the COVID school closures, most school districts in California gave students Chromebook laptops to do remote work. Thousands of those laptops were actually donated by Google. After schools reopened for in-person learning, schools kept using the Chromebooks, making them an integral part of classroom instruction.

Millions of California’s 5.8 million K-12 students use Chromebooks, making it by far the most popular laptop option in schools.

For William Heuisler, a high school ethnic studies teacher in Los Angeles, the ubiquity of Chromebooks was the first red flag.

“After COVID-19, it was clear that Chromebooks were a terrible idea in my classroom,” Heuisler said. Students used the laptops to play games during class, watch soccer matches and otherwise focus on anything but the lesson plan.

Then came AI, with its immense potential to enhance education — and facilitate cheating. That’s when Heuisler decided to ditch technology altogether in his classroom and return to the basics: pencil and paper. Tests, homework and in-class assignments are all on paper. The school already bans cell phones.

It’s more work for him, but worth it, he said.

“We want teenagers to think independently, voice their opinions, learn to think critically,” Heuisler said. “But if we give them a tool that allows them to not develop those skills, I’m not sure we’re actually helping them. Can you get by in life not knowing how to write, how to express yourself? I don’t know, but I hope not.”

AI and cognitive activity

Heuisler is not alone, according to research from the Center for Democracy and Technology. In a recent nationwide survey, the organization found that more than 70% of teachers say that because of AI, they have concerns about whether students’ work is actually their own. Nearly 75% of teachers say they worry students aren’t learning important skills like writing, research and reading comprehension.

The impact on students’ learning appears to be real, according to a recent study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The study, “Your Brain on ChatGPT,” found that students who use AI for help writing essays showed significantly less cognitive activity than those who didn’t, and often couldn't remember details from essays they had just written. The essays themselves were also of poorer quality, with limited ideas, sentence structures and vocabulary compared to the essays written by students who didn’t rely on AI.

Nonetheless, about 85% of teachers and students use AI in the classroom, the Center for Democracy and Technology found. Teachers use it to organize lesson plans and grade papers, and students use it to do things like research and brainstorming.

Lack of consistent rules

But rules related to its use vary widely. The California Department of Education offers extensive guidance on how teachers can use AI in the classroom, but no strict requirements — even regarding students who use AI to cheat. One video urges teachers not to punish students caught using AI to write an essay. Instead, the video encourages teachers to come up with essay assignments that can’t be easily written by a machine, or require students to provide their notes and cite AI just like they would cite any other source for an essay.

Even within schools, teachers have different AI rules. Some encourage students to incorporate AI into their work, while others ban it outright. A recent survey by RAND research organization found only 34% of teachers said their school or district had consistent policies related to AI and cheating, and 80% of students said their teachers haven't provided guidance on how to use AI for schoolwork.

That confusion is the crux of the problem, said Alix Gallagher, a director at Policy Analysis for California Education who has studied AI use in schools. Because there are few clear rules about AI use, students and teachers tend to have “significantly” different views about what constitutes cheating, according to a recent report by the education nonprofit Project Tomorrow.

“Because adults aren’t clear, it’s actually not surprising that kids aren’t clear,” Gallagher said. “It’s adults’ responsibility to fix that, and if adults don’t get on the same page they will make it harder for kids who actually want to do the ‘right’ thing.”

Districts need to provide high-quality training for teachers and consistent policies for AI use in the classroom, so everyone knows what the rules are and teachers know how to navigate the new technology, she said.

Unsustainable?

In Hillary Freeman’s government class at Piedmont High School near Oakland, AI is all but forbidden. If students use AI to write a paper, they get a zero. She only allows students to use AI to summarize complex concepts, write practice questions for a self-assessment or when Freeman explicitly permits it for a specific task.

She appreciates that AI can sometimes be useful, but she worries that it’s too easy for students to use it as a crutch.

“Reasoning, logic, problem-solving, writing — these are skills that students need,” Freeman said. “I fear that we’re going to have a generation with huge cognitive gaps in critical thinking skills. … It’s really concerning to me. I want their futures to be bright.”

Detecting students’ use of AI is another obstacle, she said. It means spending time digging through version histories of students’ work, or using AI plagiarism screeners, which are sometimes inaccurate and more likely to flag English learners.

“It’s a huge ‘add’ to my job, and it doesn’t seem sustainable,” Freeman said.

Digital literacy and academic integrity

Google, meanwhile, so far has no plans to remove Lens from its Chrome browsers, even on school-issued laptops, although it is continuing to test various levels of accessibility. It recently paused a “homework help” Lens shortcut button, in response to feedback from users. 

The tech giant encourages students and teachers to learn more about positive and ethical uses of AI and how it can enhance learning. It’s also invested more than $40 million in AI literacy for students and teachers over the past few years.

“Students have told us they value tools that help them learn and understand things visually, so we have been running tests offering an easier way to access Lens while browsing,” said Google spokesman Craig Ewer. “We continue to work closely with educators and partners to improve the helpfulness of our tools that support the learning process.”

School administrators also have the option of disabling Lens on district-issued Chromebooks.

Los Angeles Unified has decided to keep Lens on its student laptops, at least for now, because the tool has plenty of positive uses that students should have the opportunity to explore the technology, a district spokesperson said.

But the district has instituted some guardrails: the tool is only available to students who have completed a lesson on digital literacy, and students and teachers must comply with the district’s academic integrity and responsible-use-of-technology rules. Those rules include bans on plagiarism and cheating.

“As new digital tools evolve, we continuously evaluate how they are used within our schools. When certain technologies or features may present concerns, we carefully analyze the risks, benefits, and overall impact on the learning environment,” a district spokesperson said.

This isn’t the district’s first challenge with AI technology. In 2024 Superintendent Alberto Carvalho unveiled a nearly $3 million chatbot called Ed, only to shelve it three months later when the company laid off half its staff.

Meanwhile, Stevenson said Lens vanished from his students’ Chromebooks last week after he alerted the district that some students were using it to cheat.

“It’s encouraging, but it also reveals how haphazard the introduction of AI has been,” Stevenson said. “Teachers and school leaders spend countless hours considering each detail of the learning experience, then Google totally undermines it with the click of a button. This isn’t how education is supposed to work.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Los Angeles’ regional homelessness agency is working to find ways to keep thousands of people in their homes, while complying with new federal funding restrictions on permanent housing.

The governing board for the L.A. Homeless Services Authority voted Monday to start the process of reallocating about $130 million in federal funding currently being spent on permanent housing to other projects meant to serve unhoused Angelenos.

Because of new funding restrictions from the U.S. Office of Housing and Urban Development, known as HUD, about 5,000 households in the county will lose their rental subsidies, according to several LAHSA officials who spoke at a commission meeting Monday.

Those changes, along with state and county funding shortfalls for homeless services, threaten to drastically worsen the region’s homelessness crisis, they said.

"The fact of the matter is there’s going to be a tremendous and terrible impact on people, on agencies, on landlords,” said Nathaniel VerGow, LAHSA’s chief program officer.

Officials said they’re scrambling to maximize federal funding under the new guidelines while also advocating against the new HUD policy.

“It is a cliff and it feels catastrophic, but I think it forces us as a region to figure out how to save ourselves,” LAHSA Commission Chair Amber Sheikh said.

The funding challenge

Most federal homelessness dollars flow into the L.A. region through the Continuum of Care program, managed by HUD.

The Los Angeles region is eligible for more than $260 million in federal funding under that program in the coming fiscal year, including $217 million for existing projects.

But no more than 30% of those funds can go toward permanent housing projects, according to a “notice of funding opportunity” HUD issued last month.

That’s a challenge for L.A. County, because 90% of regional HUD funds currently cover people’s rent, according to LASHA officials.

Instead, L.A. and other cities and counties must spend the bulk of their federal funds on other interventions, including transitional housing and street outreach.

HUD officials have said the policy is meant to encourage self-sufficiency.

At Monday’s meeting, Commissioner Justin Szlasa urged his colleagues to consider larger funding trends.

“ There's actually a 23% increase in available funding from HUD, the federal government,” he said. “It just doesn't work with the way that we normally have done things here.”

“We need to find, in this crisis, a way to be constructive about this,” Szlasa added.

HUD policy changes

HUD released its new notice of funding opportunity last month and rescinded a previous two-year funding agreement.

Opponents have concerns with the federal housing department’s move away from “housing first” approaches. They also said HUD rolled out the changes without providing enough time to prepare service providers and clients for disruptions.

Last week, 21 states, including California, sued HUD, claiming the new federal policies “essentially guarantee that tens of thousands of formerly homeless individuals and families will be evicted back into homelessness.”

This week, a group of cities and homelessness organizations also sued over the changes. Plaintiffs include the city and county of San Francisco. The Continuum of Care for San Francisco was awarded $56 million in federal funding for Fiscal Year 2024.

Approximately 91% of that funding supports permanent housing projects, according to the complaint.

What’s next?

The LAHSA Commission voted Monday to approve its request for applications for existing and new projects.

Providers must submit applications to LAHSA over the next two weeks, and LAHSA has until Jan. 14 to craft and submit a new application to HUD.

The agency is now talking with 130 contractors about the transition.

LAHSA is also working with some permanent supportive housing providers to convert their programs to transitional housing instead, officials said.

People who were in permanent housing projects aren’t eligible for transitional housing under HUD’s guidelines because they're not considered unhoused, VerGow said.

The commission also reviewed a policy for ranking project applications and prioritizing them for federal funding. Officials said that policy has to be approved at a LAHSA Commission subcommittee on Dec. 10.

Funds are expected to be awarded in May 2026.

LOS ANGELES — As the season of Advent begins, many Christians turn toward quiet reflection and preparation for Christmas. But in several Southern California congregations with large immigrant communities, that sacred anticipation is shadowed by a looming sense of fear.

For worshippers like Mike, an Iranian asylum-seeker who attends a West Los Angeles church, the weeks leading up to Christmas feel less like a spiritual refuge and more like a time of apprehension. He asked that only the anglicized version of his Farsi name be used because he fears speaking publicly could affect his immigration case. He fled Iran after converting to Christianity.

"I kept this secret, my faith as a secret, for like 12 years," he said.

Mike arrived in Los Angeles 18 months ago and says he has tried to build a life rooted in community and respect for his new home. But a series of immigration enforcement actions in the region — including the June arrests of two men outside a nearby church with a large Iranian membership — has shaken him.

"Even church is not safe because it's a public place," he said. "They can get there and catch you."

The Department of Homeland Security says enforcement actions at churches require secondary approval and are expected to be rare. Still, the concern is real inside Mike's congregation, where church leaders asked that the name of the church not be published.

A significant number of Iranian parishioners worship there, and the pastor often invites them to pray in Farsi during services. Lately, fewer take her up on the offer.

"It's part of the heartbreak of these days," the pastor said. "They feel like they have to be apprehensive about it — not even wanting to speak in their own language here."

She said the fear is especially painful during Advent, a season she describes as a time to prepare to "give thanks for this God we have who wants to be with us."

Room at the inn, despite fears

East of Los Angeles, at Baldwin Park United Methodist Church, Pastor Toña Rios unzips a red tent pitched in the middle of the sanctuary. For years, the church took in newly arrived immigrants, providing a place to sleep while they looked for work and housing.

The tent remains as a reminder of that welcome — and of the fears many congregants now carry. Rios estimates that about 80% of her church members are immigrants and says many don't have legal status.

"A lot of them say, 'Don't open the door. Just close the door,'" she said.

Rios urges a different posture, especially during Advent. She uses the tent to help her congregation imagine being the ones who offer shelter, not shut others out.

"It is very hard," she said. "But Jesus is going to be born in our heart. That's why we need to be prepared."

For longtime church member Royi Lopez, the sense of vulnerability goes beyond immigration status. Lopez is a U.S. citizen but says she often feels targeted because she is Latina. Many of her relatives are undocumented, and she worries constantly about them.

"What if on my way to church, they catch us?" she said. "On a daily basis, we're scared of going to the school, to work, to church, to even the grocery store."

Lopez says that during Advent, these fears remind her of the Christmas story itself — of Mary and Joseph searching for somewhere to stay, turned away again and again until somebody finally took them in.

"Even though so many doors were closed, somebody opened a door," she said.

That theme of welcome runs through the hymn chosen for every Sunday of Advent at Baldwin Park United Methodist Church, "All Earth is Hopeful." Its lyrics speak of a world longing for liberation, where people labor to "see how God's truth and justice set everybody free."
Copyright 2025 NPR

The Supreme Court today is hearing a billion-dollar case about whether internet providers can be liable for their users' committing copyright violations using their services.

The legal battle pits the music entertainment industry against Cox Communications, which provides internet to over 6 million residences and business.

A coalition of music labels, which represent artists such as Sabrina Carpenter, Givēon and Doechii, sued Cox alleging that company should be responsible for the copyright violations of internet users that Cox had been warned were serial copyright abusers.

The coalition argues Cox was sent numerous notices of specific IP addresses repeatedly violating music copyrights and that Cox's failure to terminate those IP addresses from internet access means that Cox should face the music.

In its briefs, the coalition argued many of Cox's anti-infringement measurements seem superficial and the company willingly overlooked violations.

The coalition points out that Cox had a 13-strike policy for potentially terminating infringing customers, under which Cox acted against a customer based on how many complaints it received about a particular user. The Cox manager who oversaw the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the law at issue in this case, told his team to "F the dmca!!!"

"Cox made a deliberate and egregious decision to elevate its own profits over compliance with the law," the coalition asserts.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and a jury agreed with the coalition, with the jury awarding the coalition more than a billion dollars in damages.

Cox argues it should not be liable for its customers' actions as it never encouraged the copyright infringements, its terms of service prohibit illegal activities, and it does not make additional money when customers use its internet to infringe on copyrights.

In its briefs, Cox specified that less than 1% of its users infringe on music copyrights and that its internal compliance measures "got 95% of that less than 1% to stop." It asserts that if the Supreme Court does not side with them, then "that means terminating entire households, coffee shops, hospitals, universities and even regional internet service providers (ISPs) — the internet lifeline for tens of thousands of homes and businesses — merely because some unidentified person was previously alleged to have used the connection to infringe."

A decision in the case is expected this summer.

Copyright 2025 NPR