Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Artificial Intelligence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Easton School Committee reviews AI roadmap emphasizing equity, privacy and staff training
Summary
District technology leaders presented a year‑one AI implementation plan focused on staff training, student supports and data safeguards; committee members and students urged clear policies on equity, privacy and curriculum integration.
The Easton School Committee on March 26 heard a detailed presentation from the district technology team outlining a multi‑year plan to integrate artificial intelligence tools into classrooms while building staff capacity and safeguards.
Livia Ramos, Easton Public Schools’ director of instructional technology, told the committee the district completed an AI readiness self‑evaluation and is prioritizing leadership, foundational policies and professional development so the district can reach a “developing” readiness level by the end of 2026. “It really isn’t (about replacing teachers). It’s a tool that we have at our disposal,” Ramos said, describing goals to use AI for personalized instruction, assessment analysis and curriculum supports.
Jessica Garbowski, the district’s technology specialist teacher, highlighted equity risks. “The truth is… AI in and of itself has what’s called algorithmic bias,” Garbowski said, arguing the district must train staff and students to recognize and mitigate bias and plan for a digital divide that could widen opportunity gaps. She described a recent classroom use of Notebook LM inside the district’s Google suite to create an audio overview and simplified graphic‑novel format of civics material in a student’s home language.
Matt Augger, chair of the history and social studies department, and other presenters described planned safeguards including districtwide guidelines on data use, a communications tool for teacher–student interactions and a pilot rollout in year two that would bring parents into training once the district establishes common language and protocols.
Students and committee members pressed for student voice and practical safeguards. A student representative described mixed effects of AI on learning, saying it helped study preparation but also “AI’s definitely had a negative impact” on writing expectations in some classes. Committee members requested clearer policy language that can evolve as tools change and signaled the policy subcommittee will review the technology team’s drafted guidelines ahead of a formal policy vote.
Next steps set by the presenters include drafting formal guidelines for the policy subcommittee, dedicating an upcoming professional development day to AI instruction, piloting tools this year, and expanding parent engagement and training in year two.
The presentation and the questions that followed moved the committee toward a policy development path; no final policy vote was taken at the meeting.
