Gutiérrez critiques backwards AI guidance process and lack of vision

Thank you, Chair.

I have a few questions, and I was one of the signers on the letter.

At first, I wanted to go through the guidance thoughtfully and was able to meet with some parents, I think some who are here to testify and really listen to their concerns.

I think the first thing about the guidance was that even the process seems backwards, where you put out a guidance, you're collecting feedback, and now you're going to use that feedback for a playbook.

It just feels like...

The process doesn't make sense.

If you wanted to actively use feedback, you would have

called for feedback first and then put together a guidance.

A playbook, I don't know if a playbook equates to the same as guidance.

I just, I want to make sure that like, I don't know, I feel like we're creating something that we don't necessarily need to do at this point.

So I just want to make sure that I raise my concern with the process.

It really feels backwards.

I think in speaking with a lot of parents from my district, from my community, especially for those that are younger, that are in elementary school, there's concern for the fact that

They are kind of being brought to the table months after some of these tools are already being introduced.

The top concern being with these tools being introduced into the classroom.

I'm sure you'll hear from folks that are testifying that today, but bigger picture, I think that we deserve a vision, like a digital literacy vision from the DOE.

I feel that we deserve to know what are the expected outcomes that you all as a governing body of all our public schools expect to have before you start throwing around a guidance or a playbook or mandating vendors.

And I will say from just the day-to-day school.

feedback, I think a lot of principals feel like they're being forced into interacting with these tools.

I think a lot of schools feel like they're not prepared and they're being told from the top, from Tweet, that they have to utilize this.

So a lot of this has been very fragmented.

It has been fragmented from when you put

the guidance out.

It is being fragmented from the way that you're implementing it.

So I would just love for you all to share if there is a bigger picture, what is the desired outcome so that we can tell people here publicly because there are concerns.

So yes, we want a moratorium.

We want to slow it way down.

But I think a lot of that is your fault.

I think a lot of that is

because of how you have laid this out.

So what can you tell me now that's gonna help us feel like we can trust and feel calm about the next four years under this administration and what you guys have laid out since March?

Thank you.

That's really important feedback.

And I think

What I would want to mostly offer here is I don't think we disagree.

You know, the prior administration, you know, hit the gas on go with AI and technology, and we were coming out of the gate.

This was very shortly after Chancellor Samuels came in.

You know, AI has been a moving train.

And so one of his...

First priorities, in fact, I think it was a week after he established his new cabinet.

We started on the 5th.

I think we put out the guidance on the 24th-ish.

And that is because we recognize that this guidance, this train was moving.

And we wanted to put in guardrails.

And back to Councilmember Wong's question, some of the...

Answers to your question are what is in red, what is in yellow?

What is in green?

That answers some of the specifics.

We need to get more specifics, so I want to acknowledge that.

And I think that's why we are also saying today and sharing with others, like, we're not moving fast into this playbook.

We want, you know, Chancellor Samuels.

I'm sorry to interrupt.