District publishes AI‑tools inventory and advances parental‑permission approach for generative AI

At the personnel and policy portion of the meeting, Dr. Kim Hughes (S4) and Dr. Reppert (S5) updated the board on the district’s AI work. The presentation described a multi‑step vetting process—teacher request, principal review, administrative evaluation, technology review for COPPA compliance, curriculum alignment review, professional development planning, and public posting of approved tools.

The administration demonstrated a new AI/technology inventory on the district website: each listed app or tool includes a short description, the type of AI it uses (for example, descriptive versus generative), age‑appropriate guidance and examples of classroom use. Dr. Hughes emphasized the district currently uses descriptive and diagnostic tools for coaching and assessment; she stated explicitly that the district has no student‑accessible generative AI tools at present.

Administrators described a planned ‘‘AI stoplight’’ rubric (green/yellow/red) to indicate whether a particular assignment allows use of generative AI, requires teacher permission, or prohibits it. They also said the district will require parental permission for any generative‑AI tool that might be made available to students and will publish parent and teacher one‑pagers explaining the policy and procedures.

The item was a first reading of the AI policy; the board was told the policy would go out for public review and return for a second read and vote at the November meeting.