Applicants to Arizona State University’s (ASU) law school may have to take their admissions test on their own, but they won’t have to do their own applications.
ASU Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law will now allow applicants to use generative artificial intelligence (AI) to complete their applications. In a press release at the end of last month, the law school stated that generative AI will be a necessary tool for upcoming lawyers.
“In our mission to educate and prepare the next generation of lawyers and leaders, law schools also need to embrace the use of technology such as AI with a comprehensive approach,” stated the school.
Stacy Leeds, Willard H. Pedrick Dean and Regents Professor of Law, added that generative AI also allowed for more equitable admissions.
“Our law school is driven by an innovative mindset. By embracing emerging technologies, and teaching students the ethical responsibilities associated with technology, we will enhance legal education and break down barriers that may exist for prospective students,” said Leeds. “By incorporating generative AI into our curriculum, we prepare students for their future careers across all disciplines.”
Generative AI consists of large language model (LLM) tools: one of the most popular models is ChatGPT.
Last month, two New York lawyers were sanctioned for relying on a ChatGPT-generated brief that cited fake cases. The judge punished the pair for not conducting a proper review of the AI brief and for insisting that the fake cases cited were real, not for relying on generative AI in the first place.
The pair paid $5,000 for their oversight. The lawyers stated that they didn’t know that ChatGPT could create fake cases. However, the lawyers’ firm issued a statement disagreeing that the use of generative AI constituted bad faith.
“We made a good faith mistake in failing to believe that a piece of technology could be making up cases out of whole cloth,” stated the firm.
The New York lawyers may well become a case study at ASU. ASU’s law school also offers courses through its Center for Law, Science, and Innovation (LSI) on the legal questions of AI use, especially within the legal field.
One of LSI’s AI-centered projects, the Soft Law Governance of Artificial Intelligence, proposes using “soft law” governance for AI rather than existing legal frameworks. Soft law is a blanket term for recommendations or guidelines, rather than law. The project is funded by the Charles Koch Foundation.
ASU’s law school began allowing AI-generated applications this month.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
One of Arizona’s most-influential organizations is bringing facts to the conversation surrounding the state’s historic school choice expansion program.
Last month, the Director of Education Policy for the Goldwater Institute, Matt Beienburg, responded to the latest political attacks against Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESA) program, releasing a comprehensive fact-check to promote the truth.
Beienburg’s fact-check came after the Governor’s Office issued a memo, which targeted the ESA program, showing that it “could cost the state over $943 million, with over 53% of all new K-12 education spending going towards only 8% of Arizona students.” In conjunction with the release of that memo, Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs said, “The universal school voucher program is unsustainable. Unaccountable school vouchers do not save taxpayer money, and they do not provide a better education for Arizona students. We must bring transparency and accountability to this program to ensure school vouchers don’t bankrupt our state. I’m committed to reforming universal vouchers to protect taxpayer money and give all Arizona students the education they deserve.”
The fact-check from the Goldwater Institute refuted three claims made against the ESA program. First, that “spending on ESA vouchers could account for 53.25% of all new K-12 education spending in the FY2024 budget going towards only 8% of Arizona students.” Beienburg put forward three facts in opposition to the claim: that “total spending on universal ESA students makes up just 2% of total Arizona K-12 spending,” that “Arizona public school districts are projected to receive over 60% (more than $570 million) of all new K-12 funding in FY 2024, despite making up 0% of the growth in students served this upcoming year,” and that “even under the Arizona Department of Education’s (ADE) highest projections, the ESA program would be funding the education of roughly 8% of Arizona’s students (including a disproportionately high percentage of students with severe disabilities) for less than 6% of the total taxpayer cost of educating Arizona’s students.”
The second claim refuted by Goldwater was that “there is an increased cost to the State when a student leaves a public district school and enrolls in the ESA voucher program. This occurs because the ESA award amount is based on the state funding provided to charter school students, which is higher than the state funding provided to district school students.” Goldwater issued one fact in opposition to this claim – that “the average savings per ESA student is even higher when including other (non-formula) spending on public school students. In total, JLBC reports over $3 billion (roughly $3,000 per student on average) of additional spending by state and local taxpayers per public school student outside the basic funding formula. ESA students receive none of this funding.”
The third – and final – claim refuted by Goldwater was that “new estimates indicate the ESA voucher program may cost taxpayers up to $943,795,600 annually, resulting in a potential $319,795,600 General Fund shortfall in FY 2024.” Goldwater issued four facts in opposition to this claim, including that “Gov. Hobbs’ office itself does not believe the report that it is using as the basis for these figures;” that “Gov. Hobbs’ office mistakes the cost ESA awards by thousands of dollars per student;” that “the nonpartisan JLBC continues to project ESA costs in line with the state budget; “ and that “even if the higher enrollments and total ESA award amounts estimated by ADE do materialize, they would not represent the net cost to taxpayers of the program.”
Beienburg closed his fact-check, writing, “Arizona’s ESA program now offers tens of thousands of families an opportunity to pursue the best education possible for their children at a lower cost than traditional public schooling. The governor and her budget office owe it to parents and the public to provide the facts about ESAs free of manipulation.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona’s schools’ chief is laser focused on protecting children in their places of education.
On Wednesday, Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne announced that he had “convened the first School Safety Task Force with a focus on getting more armed officers in schools in concert with social workers to protect (the state’s) schoolchildren, educators, and staff.”
Superintendent Horne formed a bipartisan school safety task force that is focused on finding solutions that keep our students safe. Protecting the lives of students is Superintendent Horne's top priority. #EducationForAllpic.twitter.com/VngcTDbwFW
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) August 2, 2023
After the meeting, Horne released a statement, saying, “Protecting the lives of our children is one of the most important issues we face. We hope that the School Safety Task Force will work to increase the number of law enforcement officers and social workers in schools as well as using our role in Career and Technical Education to encourage more people to consider law enforcement as a profession. I am grateful for all of the educators, law enforcement professionals, community leaders and both Democrat and Republican elected officials who have come together in this vital, bipartisan effort.”
Freshman Republican Representative Matthew Gress, one of the participants in the meeting, added his thoughts on Twitter, writing, “As parents send their children to school, they have every right to expect they will come home safely. With experience as a former schoolteacher and school board member, I look forward to this opportunity to productively contribute to this very important conversation.”
As parents send their children to school, they have every right to expect they will come home safely.
With experience as a former school teacher and school board member, I look forward to this opportunity to productively contribute to this very important conversation. https://t.co/EsZwb0odr9
Gress announced earlier this week that he had “accepted an invitation from Horne to serve on the Task Force recently established by the Arizona Department of Education. He noted that he had “particular interest in identifying how public schools can use available one-time funding to improve the capital facilities on campuses to improve school safety” and in “focusing attention on law enforcement response times to schools and bolstering the School Resource Officer program.”
✅FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE✅ State Representative @MatthewGress Joins @azedschools’s School Safety Task Force
“Safeguarding our schools continues to be a top concern for parents in Legislative District 4 and there is strong interest in the community to be doing more. As parents… pic.twitter.com/8j6pWx3bOm
— Arizona House Republicans (@AZHouseGOP) August 1, 2023
The Arizona Department of Education highlighted that “in the meeting, department staff reported that funding for School Resource Officers (SROs) has been utilized to expand the number of SROs from 190 in the previous administration to 301 currently.” Additionally, the Department forecasted that “the group will explore ways to integrate counselors and social workers into an effective School Safety Program, expand the definition of an SRO in accordance with state certification requirements so the applicant pool can be enlarged; and consider allowing schools to hire School Safety Officers (SSOs), review training models, and review Law Related Education.”
In May, Superintendent Horne’s school safety recommendations were approved by the Arizona State Board of Education, giving the Department of Education approximately $100 million from a combination of federal and state grants. Horne said at the time, “I have been asking the schools to prioritize school resource officers. The nightmare is that a maniac gets into a school, kills 20 children, and the parents find out that the school could have had a school resource officer to defend the students, but the school did not do so. Imagine how the parents would feel about those decision makers?”
Horne isn’t the only elected official in Arizona concentrating on bolstering safety in schools across the state. Last month, Peoria Mayor Jason Beck announced that, in keeping his promises to his constituents, there would be a police presence at all Peoria Unified School District schools during the 2023-2024 year. Beck highlighted that there would be four new SLO’s (School Liaison Officers) and rotating SLO’s at every school; that this presence would be expanded to all elementary schools; that there would be 22 Peoria schools with police coverage and an increase in SLO salary.
The mayor said, “It’s the fact that we are trying to take care of our kids. Our first priority as a city is to take care of the residents. Safety and wellbeing is our first priority.”
Earlier this year, Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne and the Arizona Department of Education released the findings of a poll, which found that “81% of Arizona Public School parents support having a police officer” and “78% of Arizona Public School parents think that safety at schools is VERY IMPORTANT.”
Protecting Arizona's children shouldn't be a partisan issue, and parents agree. School resource officers are specially trained and provide more than just protection for our students. We encourage all schools to apply for the school safety grant here: https://t.co/63Uy6DQJZPpic.twitter.com/jFaLIx5wmJ
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) April 13, 2023
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Up to 62 percent of Arizona’s public-school districts and charters have no written plan for maintaining current operations once relief monies run out next September.
Most districts’ lack of preparedness was revealed in an auditor general special report issued last week. 55 percent of those districts and charters revealed the absence of a plan in an auditor general report, with another seven percent failing to respond to the auditor general’s request for a written plan.
The COVID-19 relief funds presented an overall boon to public school districts and charters: from 2020 onward, district fund balances increased by 34 percent ($1.13 billion) and charter fund balances increased by 115 percent ($310 million).
However, the true amount of funding spent or remaining remains a mystery for over one-third of the schools. 213 districts and charters (36 percent) reported relief monies contradicting their reported fund balance.
The auditor general specifically named Gilbert Unified School District (GUSD) and Portable Practice Education Preparation (PPEP) for reporting to have spent all $41.5 million and $4.8 million of their relief funds, respectively. However, the auditor general found that GUSD had used $30.4 million for continuing costs, $24.7 million for salaries and benefits, and a fund balance increase. The auditor general also found that PPEP had only reported $2 million spent for employment retention salaries and benefits with student count declines, and a fund balance increase.
Due to the lack of transparency, the auditor general promised to add additional fund balance/reserve reporting to district and charter fiscal year 2023 annual financial reports and fiscal year 2025 budget forms.
Additionally, 9 districts and 16 charters haven’t corrected their cited noncompliance with statutory reporting requirements. In January, that number was 21 districts and 64 charters. 27 districts and 26 charters didn’t submit required follow-up reporting.
Districts and charters reported spending $2.2 billion of the $4.6 billion in relief funding through last June. The Arizona Department of Education (ADE) only spent 21 percent of its discretionary relief funding as of last June, leaving a remainder of $322 million (79 percent).
The district that received the most relief funding was Mesa Unified School District at $291.6 million, followed by Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) at $289.15 million, Phoenix Union High School District at $182.21 million, Cartwright Elementary School District at $124.76 million, Washington Elementary School District at $119.51 million, and Alhambra Elementary School District at $103.74 million.
Details on school expenditures using COVID relief funds remain murky at best. While the auditor general successfully categorized a number of expenditure types for schools — maintaining operations, mental and medical health, personal protective equipment, technology, school facilities, and food service — there remained the “miscellaneous” or “other” category of expenditures, totaling nearly $121.4 million already spent and over $196.45 million planned for future use.
“Miscellaneous” spending on classroom salaries and benefits totaled $21.66 million, and $23.63 million for other classroom spending. Non-classroom salaries and benefits classified as “miscellaneous” totaled $4.77 million, and $70.8 million for other “miscellaneous” non-classroom expenditures.
As AZ Free News reported last year, districts like Mesa Public Schools (MPS) refused to divulge how millions were issued in expenditures behind labels like “indirect costs,” “other,” and “etc.” MPS claimed it couldn’t produce records that didn’t exist.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona’s Republican Legislative leaders are continuing to defend the integrity of women’s sports in federal court.
On Tuesday, Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed an emergency motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit after a federal district judge blocked the ‘Save Women’s Sports Act’ from going into effect.
In their motion, the legislators wrote, “Under the district court’s preliminary injunction order, ‘the [Save Women’s Sports] Act shall not prevent Plaintiffs from participating in girls’ sports’ and ‘Plaintiffs shall be allowed to play girls’ sports at their respective schools.’ Any success by Plaintiffs in try-outs and meets will displace biological girls from making a team, getting playing time, and succeeding in final results. Biological girls will be irreparably harmed if they are displaced by, forced to compete against, or risk injury from Plaintiffs.”
Petersen released the following statement to accompany the announcement of his latest action in court over this issue: “Not only science, but common sense clearly supports the fact that in general, boys are bigger and stronger than girls at all stages of life. Expecting them to compete against each other in athletic competition is reckless, irresponsible and will subject girls to increased risk for injury. It’s unfortunate young girls in our public schools will face these heightened dangers while participating in sports competition against boys and lose out on athletic opportunities because this law is on hold. What’s even more disheartening is our Attorney General has no desire to protect our female athletes, prompting myself and Speaker Toma to do her job for her. I’m confident our judicial system will agree with the protections we’re fighting for so that all young women and girls in Arizona will have the opportunity to compete on an even playing field.”
Speaker Ben Toma issued a short comment on Twitter, posting, “We filed an emergency motion asking the 9th Circuit to allow Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act to remain in effect pending appeal & the Court set an expedited schedule. The district court’s ruling is wrong; it has harmful, real-world consequences for female athletes.”
We filed an emergency motion asking the 9th Circuit to allow Arizona‘s Save Women’s Sports Act to remain in effect pending appeal & the Court set an expedited schedule. The district court’s ruling is wrong; it has harmful, real-world consequences for female athletes. @AZHouseGOPpic.twitter.com/NtT6YFje5K
Last month, Judge Jennifer Zipps granted a preliminary injunction against SB 1165, the Save Women’s Sports Act, which blocked the law from going into effect. Arizona’s Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, the defendant in the case, promised to appeal the ruling, saying, “This will ultimately be decided by the United States Supreme Court, and they will rule in our favor. The Plaintiffs in this case claimed that this only involves pre-pubescent boys, but we presented peer-reviewed studies that show pre-pubescent boys have an advantage over girls in sports. The only expert presented by the Plaintiffs was a medical doctor who makes his money doing sex transition treatments on children and who has exactly zero peer-reviewed studies to support his opinion.”
One of the representatives of the plaintiffs, Justin R. Rassi from Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, lauded the judge’s ruling, writing, “The Court’s well-reasoned decision exposes the lack of any legitimate justification for this discriminatory law, which inflicts severe and irreparable harm on transgender girls like Megan and Jane. We are very happy that, as a result of this ruling, Jane and Megan will be immediately able to resume playing sports with their friends.”
The latest Motion from Petersen and Toma follows a series of actions they have taken in this legal matter occurring in federal court. Earlier this year, they filed a Motion to Intervene, highlighting that because “Attorney General Kris Mayes is not defending the constitutionality of the law,” they were taking this step. Petersen said at the time, “We’re looking forward to fighting for the rights of female athletes across Arizona, as well as for the Court making it clear Arizona’s law protecting women and girls should be enforced.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona State University (ASU) faculty behind a campaign against the now-dissolved T.W. Lewis Center asked to be added to a watchlist of professors who discriminate against conservative students, emails reveal. Those faculty members later cried foul for their inclusion on the watchlist.
In emails shared with Arizona Sun Times, a Barrett Honors College faculty member requested his addition to the professor watchlist, a product of the Phoenix-based conservative advocacy organization Turning Point USA (TPUSA). That faculty member, professor Mike Stanford, emailed former T.W. Lewis Center executive director Ann Atkinson to request that she forward his request to TPUSA.
“I thought, ‘Why should my colleagues get all the glory? What am I, chopped liver?’ I even filed a ‘tip’ about myself on the website. Yet to no date, no joy,” stated Stanford. “I respectfully request that you direct your minions to add me to the Watchlist. It seems only fair.”
ASU closed the Lewis Center following the principal funder’s decision to withdraw his backing over the “left-wing hostility and activism” of a majority of Barrett Honors College faculty. The faculty launched a campaign with a letter to oppose the invitation of the three conservative speakers at the event: Charlie Kirk, founder and president of TPUSA; Dennis Prager, radio talk show host and founder of conservative educational group PragerU; and Robert Kiyosaki, author and PragerU presenter.
Since then, several of those involved in the controversial event have come forward alleging retaliation for their involvement. The Arizona legislature ordered an investigation into the ordeal, specifically to review whether free speech violations had occurred.
The leaders of the Barrett faculty's condemnation campaign were not communicating effectively. While several Barrett faculty members endeavored to add faculty to @TPUSA's Professor Watchlist, others claimed inclusion in it led to ongoing attacks. https://t.co/32Molgk4Uwpic.twitter.com/VNLIDSbwOh
Stanford received further endorsement for inclusion on the anti-conservative watchlist from another signatory, professor Michael Ostling. Ostling’s role in the campaign against the Lewis Center event resulted in his inclusion on the professor watchlist. Ostling called the watchlist an “honor” for him and his colleagues.
“It is thus only fair that he should be honored, along with his colleagues, as a Professor in need of Watching,” wrote Ostling.
Yet, Ostling and fellow Barrett signatories Jenny Brian and Alex Young alleged months later in an Arizona Republic opinion piece that their inclusion on the watchlist resulted in threats of violence. The three professors also argued that those who reject inclusivity were a threat to debate and, therefore, should be barred from public discourse.
Another leader of the faculty's condemnation campaign publicly claimed that inclusion on the Professor Watchlist led to harassment and violent threats. Again, this contradicts the faculty's private requests to be added to the list. pic.twitter.com/iXVzGrFx5Z
Democratic Sen. Christine Marsh (LD04) further claimed that it was faculty members’ fear over the Professor Watchlist that caused them to decline to testify at last month’s state legislature’s joint committee hearing on allegations of free speech violations at ASU.
ASU has 42 faculty members listed on the Professor Watchlist. Among those 42 are the 39 of 47 Barrett faculty members who signed onto the letter opposing the Lewis Center event: Abby Loebenberg, Abby Wheatley, Adam Rigoni, Alex Young, April Miller, Benjamin Fong, Christiane Fontinha de Alcantara, Dagmar Van Engen, David Agruss, Don Fette, Elizabeth Meloy, Gabriella Soto, Georgette Briggs, Irina Levin, Jacquie Scott, Jennifer Brian, John Lynch, Joseph Foy, Joseph O’Neil, Laura Jakubczak, Laurie Stoff, Lisa Barca, Mathew Sandoval, Matthew Voorhees, Michael Ostling, Mina Suk, Nilanjana Bhattacharjya, Peter Schmidt, Phillip Cortes, Rachel Fedlock, Rebecca Soares, Robert Mack, Sarah Graff, and Taylor Hines.
The University of Arizona has nine faculty members included on TPUSA’s watchlist, and Northern Arizona University has two.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
