Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Artificial‑intelligence‑education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears AI update; administration outlines training, curricular use and classroom controls
Summary
USD 383 technology and curriculum staff described district guidance, professional development and classroom controls for artificial intelligence, while board members pressed for age‑appropriate limits and clearer classroom policies.
District technology and curriculum leaders updated the Manhattan‑Ogden USD 383 Board of Education on Oct. 1 about the district’s approach to artificial intelligence in classrooms, outlining teacher professional development, curricular pilots and classroom‑level controls.
Why it matters: Board members said they want clear, grade‑by‑grade guidance to prevent younger students from depending on AI for learning tasks while allowing educators to use AI tools safely to support instruction.
Dr. Bridal (technology lead) summarized a multi‑year effort dating to 2022 and said the district’s updated technology handbook now includes an AI chapter and references existing student handbook language. He reported that TIES team staffer Jenny Carr and district partners have run at least 11 AI‑related professional development sessions for teachers and students, covering AI literacy, ethical use and instruction‑specific tools such as tutoring components built into new curricular platforms.
Curriculum director Ms. Tidi said AI can “do so many amazing things,” and described how an AI component in the district’s new high‑school math curriculum can identify missing skills and deliver targeted practice to students. She said the district will continue to teach digital citizenship alongside AI skills.
Board members asked specific questions about classroom implementation and safeguards. Katie Allen asked whether lessons addressed environmental trade‑offs and whether the district had concrete rules about when and at what age students can use AI. Administrators said classroom‑management tools (for example, Apple Classroom and study‑app controls) can limit student access during lessons, and that teachers will need to design assessments that verify individual student learning. Several board members urged grade‑level guidance rather than leaving access policies “willy‑nilly.”
Administration emphasized the need to train teachers first and to give staff tools to manage devices and lessons. The board heard that higher education institutions are already reverting in some cases to handwritten exams to detect AI use; administrators said local practice may need to evolve to include demonstrations of learning beyond machine‑produced outputs.
The board did not vote on new AI policy on Oct. 1; administrators said work will continue with teachers, TIES and curriculum staff to refine grade‑level guidance and classroom protocols.
