POLICY OPTIONS
GENERATIVE AI POLICY STARTER KIT FOR K-12
GENERATIVE AI POLICY STARTER KIT FOR K-12
What policy options do schools and districts have?
In general, school leaders have at least three routes they can take when thinking about school and district policy related to AI:
Practice Guidelines — Though not capital-p "policy", practice guidelines are often the most useful type of policy expression that schools and districts can offer, especially in the face of something like genAI, which is rapidly evolving and difficult to fully define and govern. Because practice guidelines can be customized, if needed, to content areas and grade bands, they can provide the most specific direction to help support teaching and learning. Sometimes, guidelines are introduced first, are tested and refined, and become official policy over time. They can also exist alongside "capital-p policy." Practice guidelines can originate from the central office, school or department.
USEFUL WHEN/IF: Teachers and students are in need of practical support in navigating a range of questions about AI in schools
DOWNFALLS: In the absence of other policy, may be seen as toothless and not followed by all; in the absence of PD/support, may confuse and be followed too rigidly
Amendments to Existing Policies or Guidelines — Schools and districts often have existing policies that, with a bit of additional language, can often provide sufficient guidance to teachers and students about expectations related to genAI. This can also be a temporary measure while more robust guidelines and policies are drafted and considered.
USEFUL WHEN/IF: Existing policies/guidelines are meaningful documents that animate the life of a school and/or when some official statement on some aspects of AI is needed, but the school committee is not ready to assert broader guidance or position of values.
DOWNFALLS: May split AI messaging up into disparate parts, limiting coherence and therefore usefulness.
Stand-Alone District-Level Policy — This is usually the strongest and broadest expression of a district's values around and aspirations about genAI. It can provide heft to school-level guidelines and help ensure a coherent approach across all schools and grade levels. Generative artificial intelligence is relatively new, difficult to clearly define, and changing quickly. Therefore, any stand-alone district policy will need to do the work of powering strong practices while also remaining broad and open enough to withstand the rapid cycles of innovation that the industry is driving, and that the rest of us are somewhat at the mercy of. Grain size should be kept fairly large, and any guidelines kept high-level.
USEFUL WHEN/IF: School committee wants to communicate a strong district-level point of view about AI, and/or want to provide additional heft to school-level guidelines.
DOWNFALLS: AI is new and changing; unless stand-alone policy is sufficiently broad, it will quickly be outdated and useless.
Classroom-Level Policy — Created by teachers, this is usually the most specific and fine-grained policy expression about AI, especially at the secondary level. It may appear in course syllabi or other guiding classroom documents. While classroom policy should be aligned with district policy and/or guidelines, it will likely provide additional and more nuanced guidance. It is likely that classroom policies will vary by teacher, subject and grade level; this variation is appropriate given the many different possible uses of genAI and the technology's variable affordances and limitations which can differ by content or skill area.
USEFUL WHEN/IF: Teachers are ready to assert a strong hand in helping students navigate genAI, and want to provide clarity about their expectations when it comes to its use.
DOWNFALLS: There is no way to foresee the many ways that genAI might be used by students. Also, there are many scenarios where the answer will be “it depends,” so unilateral rules will be hard to institute.