Why the CSU treats access to AI for students, staff as an equity issue | Opinion

As artificial intelligence reshapes the way we learn, work and solve problems, higher education cannot stand idly by and allow a new digital divide to emerge. We must ensure we are doing all we can to best prepare today’s students for this new reality, and that starts with access.

In 2025, the California State University launched a systemwide AI strategy to provide equitable access to a technology that was already changing every university community nationwide, including our own.

We wanted all of our 470,000 students and 63,000 faculty and staff to have access to relevant tools, training and research support as they adapt to the realities of teaching and learning, for today and tomorrow.

We also wanted to prevent an AI digital divide.

At the CSU, we see access to technology as an equity issue. We are the most diverse public university system in the United States, with a relatively low tuition rate of approximately $6,800 per year. Many of our students rely on financial aid, and many are the first in their families to attend college. Our AI strategy began with a simple premise: Students at public universities should not have less access to powerful tools than students at other universities.

Our AI efforts have generated healthy debate. Some critics worry that broad access to AI will shortchange learning or enable unethical shortcuts. Others question whether resources would be better directed elsewhere. These concerns deserve serious engagement.

But this much is certain: Limiting access will not make AI disappear. It will simply deepen inequity and make it harder to teach AI’s responsible use.

A recent survey of more than 94,000 students, faculty and staff from across our system confirmed that AI is already integrated into campus life. More than half of students who responded and roughly six in 10 faculty reported regularly using AI tools in their studies and work. A majority also use these tools in their personal lives.

According to the survey findings, faculty respondents are the most engaged and most skeptical group simultaneously, which impacts how students use these tools. For example, more than half of faculty respondents (55%) use AI to develop course materials, and 69% percent of faculty respondents provide students with specific guidance on how to use AI effectively and responsibly. Among those responding, 56% of faculty stated that AI has positively affected their learning/professional experience.

The same survey showed a clear desire for greater AI literacy, especially among the first-generation college students the CSU is so committed to serving.

This level of adoption is not unique to the CSU. The Stanford AI Index 2026 reports that formal education is “lagging behind” AI adoption, even as individuals are “learning AI skills at every stage of life.” More than 80% of U.S. high school and college students now use AI for school-related tasks.

The question for universities is not whether students will use AI, but whether they will be guided to use it effectively, ethically and responsibly. Providing broad, intentional access to AI tools and training helps ensure that students are not forced to acquire these skills on their own.

At the CSU, the use of these tools must be voluntary. But we want to make sure students are not excluded from AI. And we must pair access with the work universities are uniquely positioned to do, such as helping students understand, evaluate, question and responsibly apply new knowledge.

The challenges we must address are numerous. Privacy, academic integrity, bias, misinformation, overreliance and labor disruption all deserve sustained scrutiny. AI cannot replace learning, and faculty should not be told that their courses must be rebuilt around it.

In technology, delayed access often becomes unequal access, and unequal access is exactly what public higher education exists to overcome. At the CSU, we must not stand by as technological change widens opportunity gaps. Instead, we must prepare our students to shape that change.

Ed Clark is the chief information officer for the California State University and teaches information sciences at California State University, Fullerton.

This story was originally published July 7, 2026 at 5:00 AM with the headline "Why the CSU treats access to AI for students, staff as an equity issue | Opinion."