Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Instructional Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EdTech specialists outline K–12 instructional technology curriculum and AI plans
Summary
District instructional-technology specialists presented a K–12 technology curriculum, described classroom projects and professional development, and outlined a cautious approach to classroom AI tied to instructional framework and managed accounts.
Six instructional-technology specialists and district staff gave a detailed presentation on K–12 instructional technology, classroom projects and the district’s approach to introducing artificial intelligence.
Cassie Roberts opened the presentation by introducing herself: "I am Cassie Roberts. I am the EdTech specialist at Prairie Elementary, and I'm also one of the co-chairs of our department." Presenters from each building summarized classroom rotations, typical lesson topics and representative projects. The specialists identified recurring elementary topics as digital citizenship, Google Workspace skills, introductory AI lessons, stop-motion animation, 3-D design and coding; they said the K–5 program cycles annually to match incoming cohorts’ skill levels.
Staff said intermediate and secondary work includes Chromebook use, Google Workspace, Schoology (the LMS), Infinite Campus data work, FlexiSched for flexible scheduling, and more project-based assignments such as podcasts, green-screen videos, and Minecraft-based STEM projects. The team described building-level and districtwide supports: coaching for teachers, push-in lessons, monthly after-school "genius hours," support for test administration and makeups, and a student SWAT (Students Working to Advance Technology) team that helps produce videos and other media.
On AI, staff described three constraints before broad classroom rollout: an instructional framework that defines appropriate use; permissions and account-management questions tied to student age; and technology-management choices that affect which AI tools are available (for example, differences among three Google Workspace tiers). Staff said the district is considering a Google Classroom pilot as part of a larger review of whether purchasing upgraded Google Education features would simplify management and enable safer, managed access to AI (staff mentioned Google’s upcoming education AI offerings as a factor). They cautioned that many general-purpose AI tools restrict users under specific ages, so the district is prioritizing managed, age-appropriate access tied to instruction.
Specialists also described operational items: rollout of Boxlight interactive displays, a new PaperCut printing system, GoGuardian configuration and a parent-side management option for devices used off campus, and a field trip arranged through a district parent who works at Google. Multiple speakers noted staff shortages for building-level technical assistance and said tech-assistant positions are routinely part time.
Board members praised the team’s work and asked when students begin using AI in classroom work; staff said AI is already embedded in small, teacher-controlled activities at elementary levels and will be expanded with instructional guardrails and account management as the district finalizes policy and platform choices.
No formal vote was taken on the presentation. Staff asked committee members to contact them with follow-up questions and offered to provide dates for public drop-in demonstrations of training sessions.
