Citizen Portal

Effingham CUSD 40 board approves district AI plan for 2026–27 school year

Effingham CUSD 40 Board of Education · January 13, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Effingham CUSD 40 Board approved a district Artificial Intelligence plan to begin with the 2026–27 school year, outlining teacher-led use for younger students, restrictions on AI for final grading, an approval process for new tools and privacy safeguards referencing SOPA, FERPA and COPPA.

The Effingham CUSD 40 Board approved a district Artificial Intelligence plan on a motion from board member Chad with a second from Erica Roloff, setting implementation for the start of the 2026–27 school year.

The plan, presented by Stephanie Mitchell, lays out a staged approach that emphasizes AI literacy, teacher oversight and student privacy. Mitchell said the goal is "to prepare students for a world where [AI] is a piece of what they're going to be doing," while ensuring "teachers are still in charge" and that final grading will not rely on AI tools. She told the board: "We don't want them using it for final grading."

Mitchell described limits and approvals for tools: initial recommended platforms include Gemini (because of Google integration) and an AI feature within Canva for design work. She said requests for new tools would be routed to her for vetting to check "privacy, security, and educational value" and that approvals could be limited to a single class, building or districtwide use depending on the purpose. Mitchell emphasized avoiding the inclusion of student names, pictures or other private data in AI systems and noted the plan will require annual review and staff training.

Board members raised questions about devices and privacy. Mitchell flagged MetaGlasses as an emerging concern—"They have the ability to video, take pictures, record audio"—and said legal staff were consulted about device-specific policies. On detecting AI-generated work, Mitchell noted common plagiarism and detection tools used in dual-credit courses: "Turnitin...compares [papers] to other papers that have been submitted," but cautioned that some AI-detection approaches can inadvertently flag lower-level or English‑learner students.

The board discussed who decides classroom usage. Mitchell said teacher discretion will guide in-class use, with more targeted, teacher-led implementations for lower grades. She described teacher and staff training plans and said the district will review the policy annually and adjust as needed.

The motion to adopt the plan carried after roll-call affirmation from board members recorded in the meeting.