The contractor is OpenAI. The customers are the Trustees of the California State University. And the money transferring hands amounts to nearly $17 million.
What is the service? ChatGPT Education.
ChatGPT Edu is a large language model developed for universities. In early February, the Chancellor’s Office announced an initiative to — among other things — provide this service to the 23 CSU campuses from January 2025 to June 2026, with the option to renew the contract.
As of September, more than 140,000 ChatGPT Edu accounts were activated systemwide, and just over 5,000 Chico State students, faculty and staff have signed up as of August.
The introduction of ChatGPT Edu to 460,000 students and 63,000 faculty and staff free-of-charge is part of a wider artificial intelligence technology initiative that also involves the companies Adobe, Alphabet (Google), Amazon Web Services, IBM, Instructure, Intel, LinkedIn, Microsoft and NVIDIA, and the office of California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The CSU was seeing a digital divide in the area of AI, according to Amy Bentley-Smith, director of Media Relations and Public Affairs at the Chancellor’s Office. So, the CSU system decided to take this approach to ensure equitable access to AI tools, training and resources.
“Among our students we knew that some were paying for their own AI subscriptions, while others were using the free version,” Bentley-Smith wrote in an email. “This was also true for our faculty and staff. And we also knew that some campuses were negotiating contracts with AI tools while others were not.”
James Frazee, the vice president for information technology and chief information officer at
San Diego State University, said in an EDUCAUSE podcast that data helped show the need to democratize access to ChatGPT.
“The number of students, faculty and staff who signed up for the free ChatGPT and paid versions of ChatGPT with their SDSU email — which, but the way, we say don’t do that, use your personal email address — but because they did that, we had visibility into who was paying for it, who was not paying for it,” Frazee said. “And we saw a dramatic difference in that kind of haves and have-nots in terms of the pro version of the tool.”
CSU data also revealed differences in AI use between groups, according to Frazee, such as male students being “dramatically more comfortable” with AI than female students.
Other AI tools listed in CSU AI Commons — an online hub of AI tools and information for the CSU community — include Zoom AI Companion, Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, LumenGPT and NRP Nautilus, though availability for some tools varies by campus.
ChatGPT Edu is a closed environment which protects student and faculty intellectual property, Bentley-Smith wrote, and this version of the tool is providing privacy protections that are not found in the public version.
Under the agreement, “OpenAI will not use any customer content, including but not limited to audio, video, text, screen sharing, attachments, customer input or ChatGPT output, to train OpenAI or third-party artificial intelligence models.”
“Neither Chico State nor the CSU will be actively monitoring user interactions or conversations within ChatGPT,” Monique Sendze, vice president for the division of information technology and chief information officer, wrote in an email. “However, like with other technology, such as email, that the university provides, the university can access detailed use data which can be accessed under specific circumstances.”
Such circumstances include complying with legal obligations, investigating violations of university policies or laws and ensuring system security and integrity, Sendze wrote. Users would be notified, unless the notice compromises an investigation or other substantial university interest.
From the onset of the announcement earlier this year, the California Faculty Association — a union of 29,000 faculty members across the CSU system — has raised concerns over the AI initiative, including the potential impacts on employment and faculty intellectual property.
The CSU’s AI strategy does not set directives or requirements to adopt AI in the classroom, according to Bentley-Smith, and the choice remains with individual faculty members.
“To develop its AI strategy, CSU engaged in consultation with faculty members, rather than the union, since faculty’s use of AI is voluntary and does not constitute a change in terms and conditions of employment,” Bentley-Smith wrote. “The CSU believes strongly in working closely with faculty to navigate this new terrain for the benefit of our students and the broader academic community.”
The CSU has no plans to replace faculty with AI, according to Bentley-Smith, as they are the subject matter experts.
Robin Averbeck, the membership and organizing chair of the Chico chapter of the CFA, said a majority of faculty were unaware of the initiative until it was announced, and that faculty control could help address some of the concerns.
“I think that would have to look like individual departments having control over whether or not AI tools are made available to their students, which in turn would require that the administration doesn’t make these sweeping multimillion-dollar deals with Silicon Valley,” said Averbeck, adding that faculty control could also include the CFA and each campus’ Academic Senate having a chance to vote on the matter.
To read Part 2 of this story, please check back soon at theorion.com.
Raquel Frohlich can be reached at [email protected]
