Fairport Central unveils AI framework for classroom use, plans phased rollout

Fairport Central School District officials presented an AI framework at a board workshop outlining how generative artificial intelligence should be introduced and used in classrooms, and described next steps for staff training, tool vetting and a phased implementation schedule.

District staff say the framework is intended to set flexible, districtwide expectations while leaving instructional details to teachers and assignment-level decisions so all students gain exposure. The framework requires teachers to be transparent about how they use AI and asks students to both cite AI sources and explain how they used AI in producing work.

Nate Ruder, a district presenter, said the effort began with a cross‑stakeholder committee and external research: “If we don't teach students AI, who will?” He told the board the committee reviewed other districts' and BOCES models, drafted a flexible guidance document and iterated it with teachers and administrators before bringing it to the board. Ruder said the panel deliberately focused on classroom- and assignment-level application rather than banning or mandating a single tool: at some institutions, he said, “they actually decide how they use AI on the assignment level.”

The framework emphasizes four core areas, according to presenters: defining roles (who does what in instruction and assessment), citation and disclosure (pointing to sources and explaining usage), academic integrity (steps to avoid AI undermining learning) and teacher empowerment through practical strategies and professional learning. Ruder said the committee deliberately built flexibility into the guidance so teachers with different subjects and styles can adapt it while preserving consistent expectations districtwide.

District staff flagged several practical considerations the board will need to address when setting policy. One is student-data privacy and compliance: presenters said tools considered for student use must be Education Law 2-d–compliant (the New York statute addressing student data/privacy). Another is tool selection and vendor behavior; Ruder said the district is strategically avoiding “adopt-the-tool-first” decisions while the industry is still changing. He added the district is leaning toward tools that integrate with the Google Workspace ecosystem it already uses (Ruder cited Gemini as an example of a provider that fits that environment).

Presenters also described planned supports: continued professional learning for teachers, development of classroom-level instructional strategies and parent engagement materials. The district will introduce the framework to administration and staff immediately; Ruder said all buildings’ staff would see the framework by the end of the week and that the district hopes to identify early adopter classrooms and adapt materials for elementary grades next year. He said the district aims for broad classroom use of district‑vetted AI tools in the 2026–27 school year, when specific tools would be selected and formal opt‑in processes put in place.

Presenters discussed equity and accessibility uses for AI as well as risks. Ruder and other staff said assistive uses being explored include supports for students with individualized education programs; the presenters noted BOCES and the Regional Information Center (RIC) are already working on assistive-technology pilots. The committee also intends to include explicit ethics, bias and misinformation lessons in instructional materials and to incorporate environmental and sustainability conversations (for example, resource use associated with some generative-image models) in age‑appropriate ways.

Board members asked about vetting, teacher training and how the district will recommend or limit which AI platforms students may use. Ruder said evaluation would include Education Law 2-d privacy checks and a formal vetting process before classroom use; he also said the district expects teachers to focus on transferable prompting and AI-literacy skills so students can move between platforms. He noted classroom-management platforms that provide teacher visibility into student AI use are available and under review.

The presentation included examples and a short video that district staff said showed AI used to give students immediate, formative feedback while preserving teacher judgment. Staff asked the board for policy direction and said they would return with implementation milestones, recommended tools and professional‑learning plans.

The presentation materials and committee work were developed internally with input from teachers, TOSAs and administrators and reviewed against external district models and vendor tools. Officials requested that the board continue to provide high-level policy direction as staff finalize vetting processes and rollout plans.