When generative AI first emerged, administrators in Indian Prairie held a “crisis meeting” to decide whether to block or allow it.
But the decisions surrounding this new technology have since become much deeper and more complex, administrators told school board members during their most recent meeting.
Instead of simply deciding whether students should have permission to use generative AI tools, the district has been pondering questions of privacy, equity, verification, authorship, human thinking, “and so much more,” said Nader Najjar, assistant superintendent of equity and innovation.
“A block or unblock question only answers access,” Najjar said. “It doesn’t answer learning.”
AI Playbook guiding technology use across IPSD
To answer learning-related questions about AI, the district has developed an AI Playbook, which conveys, in short, the philosophy that “learning comes first, expectations are transparent and AI use must match the purpose of the task.”
The playbook is posted on the AI in 204 webpage, which further outlines the district’s stance about this new suite of tools.
“The most important phrase for us is that AI should enhance — not replace — human connection,” Najjar said. “That’s our guard rail.”
AI use Google-centric, starts in middle school
Google Gemini is the district’s chosen generative AI system, in part because Indian Prairie already operates largely in the Google ecosystem for online tools, said Brian Giovanini, director of innovation.
Elementary students are not using AI “as part of student-facing classroom work,” according to the AI Playbook. But Giovanini said digital citizenship and media literacy lessons they receive from library directors serve as a “strong foundational component” for AI competency.
Middle school students learn what AI is and how to use it; while in high school, decisions about when and how to use AI tools are made on a department-by-department basis.
One relevant analogy is that of a calculator, administrators said. Sometimes, math teachers require students to show their own work and prove their numeracy — without a calculator. In other cases, a calculator is the appropriate tool.
“AI requires the same intentional decision-making, but at a higher level,” Najjar said.
School board members praised the intentional thinking of administrators in rolling out the AI Playbook to ensure human skills remain central.
“I think the calculator analogy is a great one, and hopefully can help people understand why AI is so important for us to make sure that we embrace,” school board member Susan Demming said.
‘The student remains the thinker’
The district is now working on capacity-building around its AI playbook through professional development for educators and parent university sessions for the community, helping move AI guidance “from theory to practice,” Najjar said.
Board members complemented this progress and emphasized the importance of ensuring teachers, students and the community understand the uses — and shortcomings — of AI. One example board member Allison Fosdick cited: AI can help students quickly create work with a polished look and feel. But depth still counts.
“The difference between actual quality work and better-looking work is an important differentiation,” Fosdick said.
When the AI Playbook is followed, Najjar said, students build their capacity for learning and creation, working toward the goals in the district’s Portrait of a Graduate framework around adaptability, critical thinking, problem solving and innovation.
“In every case,” he said, “the student remains the thinker, the verifier, the decision-maker and the owner of the final work.”
If you have a story idea, we want to hear from you!
