Southern York County School Board adopts generative AI policy, directs inventory and parental consent process

The Southern York County School District Board of Education on Aug. 14 approved Policy 8.15.1, governing the district's use of generative artificial intelligence in classrooms and district systems. The vote followed more than two hours of discussion about age restrictions, parental consent, an inventory of tools and how the district will vet AI components added to existing software.

The policy requires administrators to compile an inventory of generative-AI features and tools currently in use across the district and to evaluate each tool for age appropriateness and student-data risk before authorization for use. The policy also directs administrators to obtain prior informed consent from parents or guardians when a tool’s terms of service or the intended classroom use requires it, and to post an approved list of generative-AI tools on the district website.

Personnel and Policy Committee Chair Samantha Hall introduced the policy as a second reading and put the motion to approve. Superintendent Robert Bryson and other district administrators described how the list will be assembled and reviewed by principals, technology staff and instructional leaders. District staff said the process will examine whether tools collect personal student data, what age restrictions the vendors specify, and how a tool would be used in instruction.

Administrators said most AI functionality currently in elementary classrooms is limited and often appears as embedded features inside approved software (for example, image search or slide-generation features inside licensed tools). They said the district will not adopt broad bans on entire categories of software; instead the administration will evaluate tools “tool by tool” and publish the approved list so parents and staff can see what is authorized and how it will be used.

Board members pressed for clarity on several points. Questions included whether vendor age limits would be adopted uniformly, how parental consent would be administered, how often the approved list would be updated, and whether the district had the capacity to vet dozens of apps. Administrators said collecting the inventory is the first step and estimated it could take a few months to reach a stable starting list; they said the list would be maintained as a live resource on the district website and that administration will provide progress updates to the board.

The policy incorporates direction that tools be evaluated for educational purpose and whether a tool would replace student learning tasks that should be done by students (for example, teacher-led instruction or student-developed outlines). Administrators said approved usage will require teachers to supervise and critically evaluate AI outputs in the classroom so that uncertain or incorrect AI-generated material does not replace instructional goals.

The approved policy also references federal privacy standards (including the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act) and calls for an annual or more frequent review of the approved tools; administrators told the board they intend to update the list more frequently than annually and will use staff capacity to publish updates as they complete reviews.

Board members who opposed the motion said the policy was difficult for parents and teachers to read and asked for clearer plain-language summaries for parents and staff. Several board members said they supported adopting the policy now, with planned clarifications and administrative regulations to follow, arguing that the district had no guidelines before and that tools with embedded AI components are already in use.

The motion to approve Policy 8.15.1 was made by Samantha Hall and seconded; the board carried the motion after a roll call vote. Administration said it will begin the inventory and vetting work immediately and expects to return to the board with implementation details and any recommended edits to the policy during the coming policy cycle. The board also scheduled an October workshop to give members hands-on exposure to AI tools and classroom examples.

The policy text approved by the board states that: generative-AI tools used in the district must be authorized for age-appropriateness; administration must obtain prior informed parental consent where applicable; approved tools and brief usage examples will be posted on the district website; and the district will review and update the approved list regularly.

Administration will publish a simpler parent-facing summary and a teacher implementation guidance document, and the board asked staff to return with recommended clarifying edits in the next policy cycle.