California Education Code Amended to Require Human Staff and Contractors
California has amended its education code to ensure that all staff and contractors in public schools are "natural people," a move interpreted as a measure against the use of AI in education.
New York, NY, July 16, 2026 —
California has updated its education code, enacting a change that specifies all individuals serving as staff or contractors in public schools must be “natural people.” This legislative amendment has been widely interpreted as a proactive measure to address the growing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in educational settings.
The amendment to the education code, the specific chapter and section of which were not provided in the summary, aims to clarify the employment and contractual requirements for personnel within California’s public school system. By defining these individuals as “natural people,” the state appears to be drawing a distinction between human beings and non-human entities, such as AI systems.
While the exact implications and the specific catalysts for this change were not detailed, the timing suggests a response to the increasing capabilities and deployment of AI technologies in various sectors, including education. Educational institutions are exploring AI for tasks ranging from administrative functions and personalized learning platforms to student assessment and content generation. This legislative action signals a potential regulatory approach to ensure human oversight and direct human interaction remain central to the educational process.
The focus on “natural people” could be a method to prevent the delegation of certain duties or roles to AI, particularly those involving direct interaction with students, sensitive data handling, or decision-making processes that traditionally require human judgment and ethical considerations. The potential for AI to perform tasks currently handled by human educators or administrative staff has raised questions about job displacement, data privacy, and the quality of education.
Further details regarding the scope of the amendment, such as whether it applies to all types of school districts, specific roles, or the timeline for full implementation, were not specified. The interpretation of this amendment as a direct measure against AI in education comes from the inherent definition of “natural people” and the current discourse surrounding AI’s role in professional environments.
As educational institutions continue to navigate the integration of new technologies, this legislative move by California sets a precedent for how states might approach the regulation of AI in public services, particularly in sectors as critical as education. The long-term impact on technology adoption, staffing, and educational delivery within the state remains to be seen.
Story summarized from the original created by Sheetal Banchariya on nypost.com, see more information here.
Media gallery
