Wong on AI licensing and quality comparison across tools
Wong presses on whether DOE has compared quality of results across different AI engines and whether commercial licenses are needed. DOE officials say Microsoft and Google products have free and paid versions, both approved, and emphasize human judgment and fact-checking are expected with all AI use.
And
That is based on existing licenses you have with Microsoft and Google?
Correct.
But no one really looked into the engine.
Is this giving me the correct results?
Or, I mean, anyone ever looked at that?
Because the quality of these AI engines vary.
Anybody look at that and say, Gemini may give us better results than chat GBT?
It's like comparing.
I mean, our full expectation is that these are very limited use cases and that human judgment always has to be a core part of this, particularly when it comes to instruction.
We want to make sure that it is always aligned to the curriculum and the standards that we expect and that there are much more trusted sources that educators and teachers should be using for those purposes.
We do know that there are some cases where administratively, for efficiency sakes, where they can be useful, but even in those cases, it is absolutely critical.
That all the adults that are using those tools are fact-checking and ensuring that everything that is being produced is accurate.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Council Member.
Council Member Hanif.