Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Artificial Intelligence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
FCPS committee begins drafting AI policy; staff to form advisory collaborative and pilot controlled tools
Summary
The policy committee discussed a new artificial intelligence policy, emphasizing clear definitions, student‑centered aims, data privacy, teacher training and controlled pilot tools; staff said MSDE guidance is pending and proposed forming a local AI advisory collaborative.
Frederick County Public Schools staff told the policy committee they will draft an artificial intelligence (AI) policy that aligns with anticipated state guidance and the board’s interests, and recommended the district form a local advisory collaborative to guide implementation.
Staff noted that the state 'Artificial Intelligence Ready Schools Act' will require local education agencies to adopt policies within 120 days of MSDE guidance; staff said MSDE guidance had not definitively triggered that clock but recommended preparing a draft nevertheless. "We can develop the policy consistent with their guidance and also with what the board's interests are," the staff presenter said.
Why it matters: the policy will affect classroom instruction, administrative uses, data privacy, and teacher training — all areas the committee stressed should be student‑centered and flexible enough to adapt to rapid technological change.
Committee discussion focused on definitions and scope. Members urged clear definitions distinguishing different kinds of AI (closed, curriculum‑specific models versus open large language models), strong protections for data privacy and academic integrity, and a focus on digital and information literacy. One committee member asked whether the district blocks ChatGPT; staff replied the district blocks ChatGPT for students on its network and can control Google‑based tools (e.g., Gemini, BookLM) within the FCPS ecosystem.
Staff described plans to pilot controlled AI tools for teachers and students and to roll out classroom experiences at the start of the school year. Staff also proposed creating a local AI advisory collaborative composed of teachers, subject matter experts, district leaders, families and students to craft guidance that will frequently be updated as technologies change.
Next steps: staff will draft the policy for committee review and seek input from the planned advisory collaborative; the committee plans to discuss the draft at future meetings with a target of bringing a policy for information/discussion/action at an upcoming policy meeting.
Notes: Committee members cautioned the policy should be broad enough to withstand rapid changes in AI tools and recommended scheduled reviews during the policy’s early years to adapt to new developments.
