Small win today. I chair the policy committee on our local school board. It’s a political role. You have to balance things out.
We’re working through AI in education, with a blanket policy recomm...
Getting the inventory first is the right order. Legal templates tend to describe a tool landscape that stopped existing before the policy was signed.
One thing worth writing into the local version: an AI detector is a probability, never a witness. They misfire hardest on non-native English writers, on formulaic essays and on heavily edited drafts, the exact population your schools contain. A US professor once failed an entire class after ChatGPT answered that it had written their papers; the university had to reverse it.
So the real question is what evidence may establish misuse. If the answer is a detector score, the district hands disciplinary power to a model nobody audited.
One thing worth writing into the local version: an AI detector is a probability, never a witness. They misfire hardest on non-native English writers, on formulaic essays and on heavily edited drafts, the exact population your schools contain. A US professor once failed an entire class after ChatGPT answered that it had written their papers; the university had to reverse it.
So the real question is what evidence may establish misuse. If the answer is a detector score, the district hands disciplinary power to a model nobody audited.
💯1