Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Artificial Intelligence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Northwestern Lehigh SD presents AI policy, integrity scale and vetting criteria for classroom use
Summary
District technology staff presented an AI philosophy, an "AI integrity scale" for classroom assignments, use guidelines and a K–12 AI skills plan; staff flagged data-privacy vetting and a phased rollout of approved tools.
At a Northwestern Lehigh SD board meeting, district technology staff presented an AI policy package that includes an AI philosophy, an "AI integrity scale" for classroom assignments, districtwide use guidelines and an essential-skills plan to introduce AI literacy from early elementary grades through high school.
District leaders said the materials are intended to ensure AI tools enhance instruction without replacing teacher-led learning. The presentation described a color-coded integrity scale that teachers will use on assignments to indicate whether AI is prohibited (level red), limited (yellow) or broadly permitted for a stated purpose (green), and to communicate required student accountability measures.
Staff told the board the integrity scale and accompanying guidelines were developed after six months of listening sessions, surveys and professional development for teachers. The materials are designed to require teachers to: indicate whether AI is allowed on an assignment; specify the allowed level and purpose of AI use (for example, brainstorming a title or analyzing data); and state any accountability steps such as disclosure of AI use or additional checks by the teacher. At the elementary level (grades 3–5), staff said students may use AI only under direct teacher supervision; at grades 6–12, AI may be used when permitted by the teacher.
The presentation also described a K–12 AI essential-skills plan organized into six categories: understanding what AI is, prompting AI effectively, AI applications, ethics, privacy/safety/security, and societal impact. District staff said library media specialists will deliver early-grade lessons and teachers will reinforce skills in-classroom.
District staff outlined vetting criteria for approving AI tools, with explicit attention to functionality, data privacy and security, compliance with privacy laws (staff cited FERPA and COPPA), content-filtering and teacher access to student interaction logs. The presentation named several educator-focused platforms that staff said meet the district's preliminary vetting criteria: Seminar, Mindful School and SchoolAI; staff said they are considering whether to purchase one platform after gathering more teacher feedback.
Staff described a phased rollout: continued professional development this fall, an AI kickoff at the high school for students, and a target to grant middle and high school students access to a set of approved AI tools on district Chromebooks by the start of the district's second marking period. Presenters emphasized the need for ongoing review and that guidance may change as tools evolve.
No formal board vote was recorded on the AI materials during this meeting; staff said they plan to continue gathering faculty feedback and return with recommendations to the board.
The district identified Kelly Russell as the district technology innovation specialist and credited library media specialists and tech mentors with supporting the work. Staff repeatedly told the board they will continue professional development and adjust implementation as the AI landscape changes.
