Powell schools are preparing to adapt to a changing technological landscape — generative AI.

The district’s proposed policy provides students and staff guidance on effective and safe use of the new technology while also prohibiting misuse and over reliance.

The policy also lays out in plain terms that generative AI will never replace human teachers in education.

“Teaching is not only about imparting knowledge; it is fundamentally about fostering relationships, understanding emotions, nurturing critical thinking and inspiring personal growth,” the policy reads.

Following its creation by a committee that included board trustees Beau Fulton and Lillian Brazelton, the first draft of Park County School District 1’s GenAI policy was approved by the board during its Nov. 12 meeting.

“Mr. Chairman, one comment  that I thought was just kind of funny … we spent all this time building this policy, and someone asked ChatGPT to make a policy, and I'll be darned if it wasn't about as good as ours,” Superintendent Jay Curtis said.

To be clear, they didn’t use it, he said.

Generative AI, like ChatGPT, creates “human-like content” in various media based on prompts, the policy explains. It has been used to write content and create images and audio among other things. Both Google and Microsoft have incorporated easily accessible AI into their browsers.

“What we were trying to do in the creation of this policy is walk that fine line between embracing innovation while also being really careful with regards to academic integrity, providing our teachers the tools to manage this with students,” Curtis said.

The policy was formed using three existing policies from other districts in the country as templates, with one coming from Wyoming. Not a lot of districts in the state have existing policies, he said. A committee that includes a Powell resident with a doctorate in artificial intelligence then crafted a policy for Powell schools.

“I will say that there were quite a few times when I was more afraid than I am maybe even willing to admit right now, because when you have someone with a Ph.D. in artificial intelligence tell you things like, ‘You know, the people who created this don't even know how it works.’ That's a little spooky,” Curtis said.

But, he noted that many apps and programs people use daily have had artificial intelligence included “without us even knowing it.” They need to be ready, he said, AI is here.

He added he is proud of the committee's work on the first iteration of the policy which will be sent out to the staff and community for input.

“This is kind of a big deal. This is maybe one of the largest paradigm shifts in the potential of technology and education since the advent of the computer itself,” Curtis said. 

Kim Dillivan, the board's chair, asked if the development of AI has already outpaced the district's policy draft. But, Curtis said, it was written “with the future in mind,” avoiding wording that would be obsolete in the short term. He also noted that like many policies it may need revisions after being implemented.

“We might have to come back to it in a year and say, you know what? This is not working,” Curtis said. “We've got to change this, that and 10 other things, or we might find that this group was brilliant and just knocked it out of the park the first time.”

The district's policy is designed to allow integration of generative AI in schools while regulating its use, the policy’s purpose section explains. 

“The introduction of GenAI offers unprecedented opportunities for enhancing teaching methods, expanding learning resources and fostering innovative educational experiences,” the policy reads. “However, GenAI also presents unique risks, challenges and responsibilities, particularly in terms of ethical use, data privacy and security, and the accuracy and integrity of academic work.”

The district's goal is to prepare students and staff for generative AI’s evolution and give them the knowledge to use it wisely and ethically.

The principles of usage address privacy when using AI, safe and effective use for educational purposes and equitable usage for all. It also specifies that open communication will be maintained with stakeholders regarding generative AI. The student usage section outlines the risk of sharing personal information with generative AI, among other items. 

The policy both allows generative AI to be used in school work if the use is acknowledged while also noting generative AI will be “subject to the academic dishonesty policy.”

Generative AI is to be used only for educational purposes, the policy states, and AP and college courses may have more rules regarding its use. 

Staff are also to emphasize academic integrity to students; if plagiarism is suspected a meeting will take place to make sure the student understands acceptable use of generative AI. And generative AI detection tools should not be the only tool used if a teacher suspects plagiarism. 

In a similar vein the staff policy states, among other things, that staff need to make sure their use complies with data and student privacy laws and district policies, their use must also be treated as if it can be attributed to them or the district. Staff should carefully verify generative AI content before it’s used for education or district use and it should not be the primary resource, the policy states.

The policy draft can be viewed in full at: park1public.ic-board.com/attachments/bc3701e2-e4f6-4b09-bf09-a4c7d477f9e6.pdf.