Rescue Union trustees debate AI guardrails for staff and students

Superintendent Jim Shoemake opened a study-session discussion Wednesday night saying the district has no AI policy and is not adopting one at this meeting, but wants direction from the board. “We do not have any AI policy. We're not going to adopt 1 tonight,” Shoemake said, describing the item as an opportunity for trustees to “listen” and shape what staff will return for formal consideration.

Trustees and staff spent the session outlining benefits and risks of classroom and administrative use. The board repeatedly cited gains in staff efficiency — for example, automated assessment generation and streamlined communications — while raising concerns about student privacy, academic integrity and possible erosion of students’ communication and reasoning skills.

Shoemake told trustees the district already has many staff users and emphasized the privacy stakes. “We have staff that right now we've got 440 staff members, and they are using it,” he said, underscoring why the board should set guardrails before usage grows. Matt, the district’s director of technology services, described how school‑focused AI products can be configured as closed systems and noted vendor agreements that protect student data. “You can use these. We will sign the data privacy agreements. We will adhere to all the laws,” Matt said when explaining why district‑licensed platforms matter.

Board members, several of whom said they use AI tools themselves in different ways, divided their concerns by audience. Trustee Michael Flaherty framed the technology as rapidly evolving and “more exciting, than not,” and described classroom applications he’s tried, including assessment creation and Google Classroom integration. Other trustees flagged student learning and social‑emotional impacts. Trustee Michelle warned about students relying on AI for communication and reasoning, saying the district should be wary of “losing that skill… the skill of being able to put together a reason.”

Trustees and staff discussed specific platform names used in district classrooms and offices — including Magic School (Magic Classroom), Google’s Gemini/Notebook LM, ChatGPT and other vendor products — and practical constraints such as vendor licensing fees and interoperability with Google Classroom. Matt said some vendors require per‑student licensing and that districts typically pay for the privacy contractual terms: “You are paying for the service. You are paying for them to say, we are gonna adhere to privacy guidelines.” He and others suggested that products that integrate with district systems present fewer workflow and data‑control problems.

Panelists also raised enforcement and detection questions. Teachers reported encountering AI‑generated student writing and said detection tools sometimes return inconclusive results (one staff member referenced a detection report that estimated “75% of this is AI generated”). Trustees discussed classroom practices — in‑class writing, locked Chromebook quizzes and grade‑appropriate expectations — as complementary ways to limit misuse.

No formal motion or vote was taken on AI policy. Instead, trustees signaled a preference to start with staff guidance and stronger data‑privacy controls before moving to more detailed, grade‑level student rules. Shoemake summarized that the near‑term focus will be “providing some guardrails for staff use and some very overarching ones for student use, but not getting super granular” and that staff will return with a draft policy tailored to the board’s direction.

Next steps mentioned in the meeting include staff: (1) reviewing sample board policy language (the packet included a sample “F3” policy); (2) vetting district‑level AI vendors for data privacy agreements; (3) prescribing what kinds of student or staff data may not be uploaded to open AI services; and (4) offering training for staff on safe inputs and tool selection. Trustees identified training, vendor‑vetting and clearer language about prohibited data uploads (FERPA/PII) as priorities.