Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Technology Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Morton CUSD 709 hears technology task‑force recommendations, including an AI plan and tighter cell‑phone rules
Summary
A district task force recommended an AI policy, keyboard cases for grades 7–12, restricted direct YouTube access and an adjusted high‑school cell‑phone policy; parents and teachers urged a bell‑to‑bell approach during lengthy public comment.
The Morton CUSD 709 school board heard a detailed report from the district’s technology task force on recommended changes to device use, artificial‑intelligence guidance and digital‑literacy education.
Kate Wyman, who presented the task‑force findings, said the team identified core values and six priorities for the coming school year and recommended an AI plan that treats generative tools as an aid rather than a replacement. “Technology can amplify great teaching, but great technology will never replace the basic hard work of learning,” she said, and the task force suggested an “AI sandwich” approach in which AI supplies drafts that educators refine and approve.
The task force urged several operational steps: provide keyboard cases for iPads in grades 7–12 to support lengthier writing; limit direct student access to YouTube by embedding teacher‑selected videos into sanctioned platforms; develop grade‑level technology guidelines; and update high‑school handbook language so phones are silent and stored in a teacher‑designated location during class periods.
Parents and staff who testified urged stricter limits. Jordan Spickelmeyer, a parent and former counselor, cited a parent survey and national examples, saying many families support a bell‑to‑bell policy and reduced iPad use. “I hope you will also consider the voices from the 55 more families who responded to the survey,” she said.
Don Sturm, the district’s technology integration specialist, told the board the district’s approach is intended to support teachers rather than supplant them: “My job is not to put more technology in front of students. That’s not what drives my work,” he said. Administrators said professional development and an instructional coaching team would support any change.
Board members pressed staff on implementation details. Questions centered on whether AI guidance would become a routine lesson‑planning tool, how younger grades use one‑to‑one devices and whether caregivers could opt out of district device programs. Staff said the 80/20 guidance for AI—where AI can supply up to 80% of an initial draft and teachers provide the critical 20% of review and tailoring—was common practice and professional development would be emphasized.
The task force recommended further review and that any changes to handbooks follow the district’s established handbook‑committee process. Administrators and board members agreed to return to the cell‑phone and handbook items for additional refinement and for high‑school administration to clarify exceptions and enforcement before a final vote.
The board did not take a formal vote on the task‑force recommendations at the meeting; members asked staff to revise high‑school handbook language and to bring more specifics for implementation and measurement at a future meeting.
