Responsibilities for AI Use

Ethical and Responsible Use

As role models, it is imperative that our staff exemplify ethical and responsible usage of GenAI tools. This includes maintaining transparency by appropriately citing or disclosing the use of GenAI and ensuring the content generated is suitable for educational purposes. Additionally, staff must not enter confidential data into GenAI tools, including but not limited to student record information, confidential employee information, and any identifying information. As a further precaution, staff are advised to turn off chat history and data training in the settings of any GenAI tool used in their professional practice.

Tool Approval and Use

Staff members are required to use only GenAI tools that have been vetted and approved by CPS, as reflected in the CPS Ed Tech Catalog. A tool’s approval within the Ed Tech Catalog reflects that it meets the district’s standards for privacy, security, and confidentiality in compliance with all applicable state and federal laws. However, it does not reflect that the tool meets the district’s academic standards for verification, bias, or fairness. Educators and staff should refer to the badges associated with each tool to understand when a tool may not meet these standards. This policy ensures that the tools align with our educational goals and adhere to our rigorous data privacy and security standards.

Age Appropriate Usage

GenAI tools, whether publicly available or subscription based, typically set age restrictions in their Privacy Policy or Terms and Conditions. Before encouraging your students to interact with any tools, make sure to review the terms to ensure compliance with them. Below is a list of mainstream tools and their respective restrictions for your awareness.

Monitoring Student Use

Staff using GenAI tools with students are responsible for ensuring that students engage with these tools responsibly, maintaining an awareness of age limitations and permissions, and clearly communicating expectations to students and families. School staff should report instances of misuse to their principal or designee, and be prepared to develop alternate activities that do not require the use of GenAI for students who lose the privilege of GenAI access or whose families do not consent.

GenAI detection software can be a tool to identify potential plagiarism or AI-generated work, but staff and administrators are encouraged to use it with caution and with awareness of its limitations. These tools are not foolproof and can frequently produce false positives, incorrectly flagging student work. For example, current AI detection software can disproportionately flag work completed by English Learners (ELs) due to linguistic differences or patterns that the software misinterprets as AI-generated content. Overreliance on these tools could lead to unfounded accusations of academic dishonesty, erode trust between teachers and students, and unfairly penalize certain groups of students. It is recommended instead to prioritize a holistic assessment of student work, considering multiple factors like the writing process, individual student progress, and direct conversations, rather than relying solely on GenAI detection software in an effort to ensure that students are maintaining academic integrity.