A committee of Middletown secondary teachers, administrators and librarians presented a position statement on artificial intelligence to the Board of Education curriculum committee on Sept. 4 that frames district engagement with AI around responsibility, authenticity and equity.

Dan Rauchi, the district’s ELA curriculum supervisor and co-chair of the committee, said the statement is intended as a starting point for a district policy and to inform professional learning rather than as a final directive.

“The broad statement is our engagement with artificial intelligence is guided by the principles of responsibility, authenticity, and equity,” Rauchi said during the presentation, describing the committee’s synthesis of district core values, the instructional vision and external research.

The statement addresses three areas the committee identified as priorities: intentional use and attention to data security and bias (responsibility); transparency about how AI contributes to student work and instruction (authenticity); and ensuring equitable access to district‑approved AI tools if and when they are provided (equity). Committee members underscored that the work so far is exploratory and secondary-focused.

Rauchi explained how the committee grounded its work in district documents and outside research: the team reviewed the district’s portrait of a global citizen, core values and instructional vision; conducted monthly meetings from January 2025; and consulted local institutions such as ACES and Western Connecticut State University to inform the draft.

The draft recommends several next steps: continued research into current AI findings, broader district and board involvement, and designing professional learning for teachers and administrators once the board and district determine an appropriate policy framework.

Board members and staff discussed practical classroom implications, academic integrity, and the balance between using AI as an adaptive classroom tool and preserving students’ independent cognitive development. Board member Deborah Guss and others encouraged wider stakeholder input and faster movement because students are already using AI tools outside school.

“We want to be able to, be sure that kids equally have tools to at their advantage if and when approved,” Rauchi said, summarizing the equity point. Several board members recommended expanding teacher-led pilots and engaging educators who already use AI in instruction.

The committee did not propose a policy or request a formal board vote. Instead, it presented the position statement to the board for review and asked for feedback so that the committee can proceed with drafting policy options and professional learning aligned with the district’s goals.

Next steps cited by the committee include sharing the one‑page position statement with the full board, collecting board feedback, widening committee membership beyond secondary staff, and designing phased professional development once the board provides direction.