Board orders review of digital, social‑media and AI policies as new state rules loom
Loading...
Summary
Board asked staff to review and align district digital policies — including media release forms, social‑media guidance and forthcoming AI rules under HB 273 — and requested clearer language on parental notice, monetization, and administrator responsibilities before staff returns recommendations.
The Jordan School District Board directed staff to review and align several administrative policies related to digital media, social‑media posting, and the emerging statutory requirements for artificial intelligence after board members raised questions about clarity and enforcement.
Suzanne Wood told the board she had “found that I had a few questions that weren't or didn't appear to be addressed in policy” and asked for board approval to propose updates and clarifications to social‑media guidelines and the media release form. She highlighted a need to clarify whether photos and videos are treated equivalently, how parental notice should work and whether monetized teacher accounts represent a district resource.
Board context: Members debated using firm language ("must") versus guidance ("should") in the policies, and several asked that administrators be explicitly responsible for social‑media content published under a school’s banner. The board also noted a new state requirement (H.B. 273) that will require districts to adopt AI‑use policies and recognized a USBE model policy due by Dec. 1 with a local adoption deadline of July 1, 2027.
Administration’s approach: Dr. Anderson and staff recommended a staff led review in consultation with the district’s working group on digital citizenship, with the working group and additional stakeholders providing input. The superintendent’s office said the district is partnering with the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) on digital‑citizenship standards and that a model policy from USBE will help shape local adoption.
Board direction and next steps: Board members agreed staff should review the policies and return recommendations to the full board. Several trustees asked for an identified contact person so board members can submit concerns and suggested edits to a single point of contact. The board also discussed whether the policy committee should shepherd the work or whether staff should work directly with the working group and bring proposals back to the full board.
Why it matters: The review touches on parental permissions, student privacy, monetization rules, and how schools document consent. With state deadlines for AI policy guidance approaching, the board emphasized a careful review to align district rules with state law while protecting students and guiding staff.
