Embedded Files
Illinois Association of School Administrators
Illinois Association of School Administrators
The Intelligent District: Regional AI Workshop Resources
The Intelligent District: Regional AI Workshop Resources
Use the Gemini Gem above to redesign the assignment below.
Use the Gemini Gem above to redesign the assignment below.
Student Assignment: The Dangers of Social Media for Teens
Directions: Choose one format: (1) 3-paragraph response or (2) 6-slide presentation about social media dangers for teens. Explain 2 dangers (like cyberbullying, oversharing, comparison, or fake accounts), how they affect teens, and 3 ways to stay safe online. Include 1 real-life example. Use your own words, be clear, and check spelling/grammar before submitting. End with one strong message to other teens about making smart choices online.
Activity Overview: Jigsaw Expert Groups
Activity Overview: Jigsaw Expert Groups
Objective: Participants will become "experts" on one of OpenAI's 5 Pillars of Teen AI Literacy. They will analyze their assigned section and synthesize their understanding into a Frayer Model—a four-quadrant graphic organizer used to define complex concepts.
The 5 Expert Groups:
Group 1: Empower Teachers to Lead
Group 2: Strengthen Core Knowledge
Group 3: Create Future-Ready Pathways
Group 4: Connect Communities
Group 5: Modernize Infrastructure & Guardrails
The "AI Sandwich" Protocol
The "AI Sandwich" Protocol
The activity follows a three-step process to ensure critical thinking remains central:
Step 1: Human First (Drafting)
Action: Groups read the summary or key excerpts for their assigned Pillar.
Task: Collaboratively draft a preliminary Frayer Model (Definition, Characteristics, Examples, Non-Examples) based on their own professional judgment and initial understanding.
Step 2: Invite AI (Feedback & Expansion)
Action: Participants access the custom "AI Blueprint Expert" Gem.
Task:
Enter their Pillar Number (1-5) to receive a plain-language summary and a concrete analogy (e.g., "Pilot vs. Autopilot" for teachers).
Ask the Gem to "Help complete the Frayer Model" for their specific pillar.
Step 3: Human Last (Refining)
Action: Groups review the AI's output against their original draft.
Task: Synthesize the two sources of information. They decide which AI-generated points are relevant and refine their Frayer Model to create a final, polished version.
Pick a Policy Problem, Draft a First Pass
Pick a Policy Problem, Draft a First Pass
Goal
Goal
Participants use the Gem to begin a policy draft in one high-priority area by walking through the wizard phases.
Step-by-Step Directions
Choose one scenario (from the 5 below).
Open the Gem and type: “Start.”
Answer the Gem’s opening prompt (K-12 or Higher Ed).
Move through the wizard phases and capture decisions in a shared document
Build a 1-page draft policy starter using the Gem’s outputs.
Be prepared to end with a 2-minute share-out.
Scenario 1: Governance & Decision Rights
Scenario 1: Governance & Decision Rights
Scenario: Different departments are adopting AI tools independently, with no common governance.
Policy challenge: Draft a campus AI governance policy that defines an oversight committee, decision authority, membership (academic, IT, legal/compliance, student voice), and review cadence.
Gem starter prompt:
“Help us draft an institutional AI governance charter with roles, approvals, and a quarterly review process.”
Scenario 2: Data Governance, FERPA, and Safe AI Use
Scenario 2: Data Governance, FERPA, and Safe AI Use
Scenario: Staff and faculty are unsure what student/employee data can be entered into AI tools.
Policy challenge: Build a data-handling policy using Public / Restricted / Highly Restricted tiers, including FERPA guardrails, consent rules, approved systems, MFA/encryption requirements, and incident reporting.
Gem starter prompt:
“Draft our AI data governance policy with data tiers, prohibited uses, and FERPA-safe workflow steps.”
Scenario 3: Phased Campus Rollout Plan
Scenario 3: Phased Campus Rollout Plan
Scenario: Leadership wants AI adoption, but departments vary widely in readiness.
Policy challenge: Draft a phased implementation policy (pilot → refine → scale), including AI Champions, training expectations, learning hub support, and communication/update expectations.
Gem starter prompt:
“Help us write a phased, campus-wide AI adoption policy with pilot criteria, AI Champions, and training requirements.”
Scenario 4: Readiness Scorecard, Equity, and Accountability
Scenario 4: Readiness Scorecard, Equity, and Accountability
Scenario: The board asks, “How will we know this is working—and for all learners?”
Policy challenge: Build an annual AI readiness policy requiring measurable indicators: pilot activity, adoption metrics, funding/resource plan, access-and-equity supports, and continuous improvement cycles.
Gem starter prompt:
“Draft a policy requiring annual AI readiness reporting with metrics, equity indicators, and improvement actions.”
Scenario 5: Faculty Incentives and Recognition Policy for AI Adoption
Scenario:
Your college has AI training available, but faculty participation is uneven. Leadership wants a policy that rewards meaningful AI integration without making it feel punitive.
Policy challenge for teams:
Use the Gem to draft a policy that ties AI adoption to:
Evaluation criteria (teaching innovation, service, scholarship)
Recognition pathways (showcase, mentor roles, leadership credit)
Support incentives (PD priority, mini-grants/release support if locally available)
Evidence rules (what counts: course redesign outcomes, workshop leadership, mentoring impact, pilot results)
Gem starter prompt:
“Help us draft a Faculty AI Incentive and Recognition policy for our institution. Include evaluation language, recognition pathways, support structures, required evidence, and annual metrics for adoption.”
Build Your AI Scholar Course/Program
Build Your AI Scholar Course/Program
Goal: By the end of this session, you will produce a draft AI Scholar implementation plan for one course (semester or yearlong), including:
Goal: By the end of this session, you will produce a draft AI Scholar implementation plan for one course (semester or yearlong), including:
A 3-phase AI scaffold (Compliant → Literate → Fluent)
Phase-specific assignments and AI expectations
Transparency/disclosure language
A rubric-based quality check and next steps
The 3-phase structure should follow:
Phase 1 (First Third): AI-Compliant / Guided
Phase 2 (Second Third): AI-Literate / Grounded
Phase 3 (Last Third): AI-Fluent / Graduated
To Get Started, provide the Gem with the following information:
I want to design an AI Scholar pathway for my course.
Course title:
Grade/level:
Length (semester or yearlong):
Major standards/outcomes:
Top 3 priority skills:
Typical student challenges:
Workforce/authentic tasks students should be able to do by the end:
Optional - Upload the current course syllabus
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse