Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oakdale trustees take first readings on AI guidance and updated reading instruction policy
Summary
District staff presented first readings recommending revisions to technology and reading policies: updates to include artificial intelligence guidance across existing policies, and an overhaul of reading/language-arts policy to add risk screening for reading difficulties and grade-span specificity.
The Oakdale Joint Unified School District board heard two first readings from staff on policy changes intended to update how the district addresses artificial intelligence and reading instruction.
Gillian Wegner presented CSBA-recommended revisions to existing board policy to incorporate artificial intelligence guidance across a set of existing policies rather than creating a separate AI policy. Wegner said the California School Boards Association “recommends revising existing board policy to include policy on artificial intelligence, rather than creating an entire separate new policy because AI affects many different areas of our existing board policy.” She identified BP 4040 (Employee Use of Technology) as the primary location for those revisions and pointed to related policies (academic honesty, homework and makeup work, and student assessment) that would be updated for consistency.
In a separate first reading, Wegner said BP 6142.9 (Reading/Language Arts Instruction) was last updated in 2010 and the proposed revision streamlines the policy into grade-span specific guidance for K–3 and 4–12. The revision adds substantial information on screening for reading difficulties, and Wegner said the board will see the revised language again when it returns for action.
Board members asked clarifying questions about homework late-work parameters and consistent language across student and employee technology policies; Wegner said teachers determine late parameters and staff will make written policies more explicit where needed. No votes were taken; both items were introduced for later board consideration.
