Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables proposed pilot of AI writing tool, seeks districtwide policy and privacy safeguards
Summary
Trustees paused approval of a proposed contract with Loomi (StoryAI/Lumi) after members and teachers raised concerns about student-data privacy, research on effectiveness and the absence of a district AI policy. The board directed staff to let the planned AI working group review the proposal and report back.
The San Mateo‑Foster City School District Board of Trustees on Dec. 11 removed a proposed contract with Loomi’s StoryAI from the consent agenda and voted to table formal approval pending further work by a newly formed AI working group.
Trustees said they support pilot programs when they are carefully designed, but several members and teachers told the board they want clearer policies and privacy protections before authorizing classroom use. "I really wanted to approach this carefully," the board president said, adding concerns about screen use, student privacy and the district’s current lack of a comprehensive AI policy.
District staff told trustees the company was identified at education conferences, followed by staff due diligence, and that the proposed pilot would be limited to five community schools and could include classroom and after‑school use. "We particularly like the supports for the storytelling aspect of student writing," a staff presenter said, describing why the district found the tool promising for narrative writing.
Andrea Benitez, a fourth‑grade teacher at Fiesta Gardens who spoke during public comment, urged caution about piloting the tool specifically in community schools where students sometimes need additional foundational supports. "When hearing about this proposal, I find myself very, like, worried," Benitez said, citing classroom experience that suggests younger students benefit from hand‑writing and direct instruction.
Trustees asked staff what measures would be used to evaluate success, how teachers were involved in selection and whether the district would protect student data. Staff said an AI working group — planned to begin work in January — will develop policy recommendations, professional development and criteria for pilot evaluation.
After deliberation, a trustee moved to table the item to a future meeting so the working group could develop guardrails and report back. The motion passed by voice vote; no contract was authorized.
Next steps: staff will convene the AI working group, develop an evaluation rubric and return with recommendations for any pilot scope, privacy protections and teacher engagement before resubmitting the contract for board consideration.
