Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board members weigh AI and tech training during strategic plan review
Summary
Members of the board discussed updating the district strategic plan to address generative AI and broader technology use, raised privacy and academic‑integrity concerns, identified state and regional training resources, and agreed to schedule follow‑up work (discussed for April).
Members of the board reviewed the strategic plan’s technology goals and discussed adding or refining training for staff and students on generative artificial intelligence and related tools.
The discussion centered on item number 7 in the plan, which calls for AI and ChatGPT training for students and staff; a board member (S3) said the district is “in a good position with the Montana Digital Academy, and also with the state superintendent” to support training. S3 added the item was included in the superintendent’s report so the board could “go over our progress.”
Why it matters: Board members said rapid changes in AI tools affect classroom instruction, student work and staff workflows, and they flagged privacy and legal risks that could arise if districts or staff rely on AI outputs without checks. S1 warned that several vendors and workplace tools submit users’ inputs as training data unless users explicitly opt out, and urged staff to review privacy settings before adopting tools.
Board discussion and concerns S3 emphasized the need to broaden language in the plan from a single product name to more generic terms such as “generative AI” or “large language models,” saying product names have become outmoded as the technology landscape has evolved. S1 described industry use of AI and called the tools “a little creepy” while also saying they can perform useful, junior‑level tasks.
Several board participants raised classroom examples. S4 described a middle‑school math teacher who used an AI tool to create a worksheet but was dissatisfied with the presentation, showing that teachers are already experimenting with AI and may need guidance on appropriate use. On student work, S4 said that when students use AI for papers, the output can still contain errors that make it appear authentic, so teachers must remain alert to academic‑integrity issues.
Privacy, legal and operational risks Board members warned of concrete risks: S4 recounted that lawyers have used AI‑generated text that cited nonexistent cases, resulting in professional consequences, and S1 highlighted that Copilot and similar products may collect user inputs as training data. S3 also noted that meeting platforms may show that other participants are using AI to generate notes, creating privacy exposure beyond a single user.
Training resources and next steps Participants identified the Montana Digital Academy and the state superintendent’s office as primary training resources and suggested directing staff to available cybersecurity and digital‑tool trainings. The board discussed treating the strategic plan as a living document and scheduling “health checks” to keep policies current. S3 said the group had “talked about doing it in April” and suggested coordinating calendars to begin implementation and training next year.
No formal vote was taken during the conversation; board members framed the exchange as direction to review and update plan language, identify training opportunities, and set a timeline for follow‑up.
The board concluded the item by agreeing to continue planning and to bring concrete training recommendations and calendar options to a future meeting.
