Districts should carefully review an AI tool’s terms of use to define data ownership, permitted uses, vendor obligations, and third-party data sharing practices. This review should ensure transparency around responsibilities, liability, and what happens if there is misuse, inaccuracies, or data breaches.
Districts should operate under the principle that all individual-level student data is sensitive and ensure that AI systems comply with all applicable federal and state laws protecting student and educator data, including the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) when required. AI vendors should be permitted to collect, process, or retain only the minimum data necessary to deliver the service, and no student data should be repurposed for unrelated activities without authorization.
Districts should confirm that AI tools meet accessibility standards and support the needs of diverse learners. Evaluation should check whether the tool affects student groups differently and whether safeguards are needed to prevent barriers and unfair outcomes..
Districts should require a “human review” for high-stakes uses (grading, placement, discipline-related decisions, and other high-impact uses). Evaluation should include how the AI tool can help with this requirement.
Data: what is collected, where is it stored, who can access it, what is the retention/deletion policy?
Training: does the vendor use student data to train models?
Security: encryption, breach response, audit logs
Access: ADA/WCAG support, multilingual support
Transparency: user notices, parent communications
In addition to technical and security reviews, districts should evaluate whether AI tools produce measurable outcomes for students.
Districts should examine whether use of the AI tool is associated with improvements in student learning, including positive changes to relevant assessments and the development of targeted skills, like writing and math.
Districts should assess whether use of the AI tool influences student engagement and participation in the classroom.
Districts should evaluate whether the AI tool meaningfully supports instruction, increases personalized learning, and improves classroom practices.
Districts should establish or update policies to define appropriate use of AI. Transparent documentation and communication practices are essential to ensure that students, families, and educators understand when AI is being used, for what purposes, and with what limitations.
Districts should ensure that their use of AI tools is grounded in a commitment to equity and inclusion. AI adoption in the classroom must not deepen digital divides, marginalize under-resourced communities, or create barriers for students with disabilities or multilingual learners.
Districts should ensure that educators have opportunities to participate in professional learning that establishes a baseline understanding of how AI systems work including their limitations and risks. These learning opportunities should support educators in evaluating AI tools, integrating them in appropriate ways, and modeling responsible use.
