Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community voices caution on AI in classrooms; board and staff say replacement of teachers is not planned
Summary
A parent and former teacher warned the Ithaca school board that artificial intelligence can hallucinate and should not be used to replace teachers; trustees and staff responded that the district has no plans to replace teachers with AI and announced a community screening and panel on technology in schools.
Murali Siduraman, a former computer‑science teacher and community member, told the Ithaca City School District Board of Education that artificial intelligence is not a substitute for human teachers and warned about AI errors and "hallucinations." "If you put just artificial intelligence systems to replace teachers in schools ... students, once they are frustrated, they are not coming back," Siduraman said.
Siduraman described AI as a sophisticated automated answering system that can be helpful in limited circumstances but said it sometimes produces incorrect or misleading responses (so‑called "hallucinations"). He urged parents and the community to be watchful as private investment pushes AI into education.
Board members and staff responded during board remarks. A trustee who also teaches in a preservice program at Ithaca College said bluntly, "Under no circumstance, is this board considering replacing any teacher with artificial intelligence," and added that the district does not have plans to replace educators with technology. Superintendent Brown and other trustees reiterated that policy would follow concrete, well‑defined uses of technology rather than hypothetical scenarios.
As a next step, the district scheduled a public screening and discussion of the film Screenagers for the following evening at 6:30 p.m. in the district board room to inform community conversation about technology use in schools. Trustees also referenced an anticipated state requirement for districts to adopt a cell‑phone policy (the so‑called "bell‑to‑bell" policy) by the fall and said the district will discuss that in the June policy committee meeting.
Why it matters: public concern about AI in classrooms intersects with policy choices on instructional methods, staff roles and district technology rules. Trustees sought to reassure speakers and the community that the district is not pursuing wholesale replacement of educators and that any technology policy would be developed with caution.
Next steps: district staff will host the screening and panel, continue discussions about AI and technology policy, and address required cell‑phone policy work at the June policy committee meeting.
