Leaders walk a proposed homework-and-AI-tutor initiative through the lives of ten fictional families, map every barrier they hit, and turn the map into policy.
"Every student has a device" is where most equity conversations end, and where the real digital divide begins. It runs through home connectivity, shared devices, accessibility, home languages, caregivers' schedules, trust, and now the cost of AI tools, where free and paid tiers can give different students very different help. In this session, teams take a fictional district's plan to move homework online and add an AI tutor, then walk it through ten family profiles. Every barrier goes on a wall map, and the map becomes the draft of an equitable-access policy with evidence to watch.
Objectives
Participants will identify barriers to digital learning across at least five dimensions: connectivity, devices, accessibility, language, cost, time, and trust.
Participants will distinguish barriers that a policy can remove from those that require individual outreach.
Participants will draft policy language and strategies that support equitable access to technology and AI tools, each with a measure the team will monitor.
Materials
On paper
Handout A: The Initiative and the District (1 per person)
Handout B: Family Profile Cards (1 set per team, cut apart)
Handout C: Barrier-to-Policy Map (1 per team, enlarged to 11×17 or copied onto chart paper)
Sticky notes in three colors, markers, a long wall space or butcher paper
On screen
Optional: a shared digital whiteboard for the barrier map in virtual sessions
Optional: your district's own technology access survey results, if you have them, for the Transfer step
Before you start
Print Handouts A and C and cut Handout B. Each team gets all ten profile cards.
Label a long wall with seven columns: Connectivity, Devices, Accessibility, Language, Cost, Time and Schedules, Trust and Privacy.
Give each team three sticky-note colors: yellow for barriers, green for a policy fix, pink for barriers that need individual outreach rather than policy.
If you'll use real local data in Transfer, gather it and remove any identifying information.
Step by step
10–7 min
Hook
The confident plan
Everyone reads Handout A. Ask: "On a scale of one to five, how equitable is this plan?" People hold up fingers. Ask a few people at each end to explain. Say: "Let's test it the only way that matters: through the lives of the families who'll live with it."
Facilitator noteThe plan is written to sound thoughtful. It includes devices for all and a free AI tier. Early scores are usually 3 or 4.
27–27 min
Explore
Walk the plan through ten families
Teams divide the ten family cards. For each family, a team member reads the card aloud and the team asks: "Tuesday night, 7 p.m., homework is due at 11:59. What happens?" Every barrier goes on a yellow sticky note in the right column of the wall map, with the family's card number. One family can hit several barriers.
Facilitator noteKeep teams from solving too early. The goal of this step is to see the barriers clearly. Solutions come next.
327–37 min
Debrief
Read the wall
Everyone steps back and reads the whole wall. Ask: "Which column is fullest? Which barrier did the plan's device promise not touch at all? Which families hit the most barriers, and what do they have in common?" Then ask about the AI tutor's free and paid tiers: "If the paid tier gives better help, who gets better help?"
Facilitator noteA common realization: the families with the most barriers are also the least likely to show up in an online survey about the plan. The data you'd normally use would hide them.
437–57 min
Create
From barriers to policy
Each team takes two or three columns. For each barrier, the team decides: can a policy or systemic strategy remove it (green sticky), or does it need individual outreach (pink sticky)? Then teams complete Handout C: the barrier, who it affects, current practice, a policy or strategy, and the evidence we'll watch to know whether it worked.
Facilitator notePush for evidence beyond usage. "Homework completion rates by whether the student has home internet" tells you more than "number of hotspots distributed."
557–69 min
Apply
Revise the plan
Each team rewrites the plan's three most important sentences on chart paper. Teams share in a quick round: read the old sentence, read the new one, name the family card that changed it. Include at least one change about the AI tutor: cost, data privacy, language, or whether it is required.
Facilitator noteWatch for revisions that add alternatives rather than exceptions. "Assignments can be completed on paper or offline" is stronger than "students may request an exception."
669–75 min
Transfer
Your own map
Each person names one real initiative on their campus and the one family profile from today that it might leave out. On an index card, they write one question to add to their next planning meeting, such as "How will this work for a student sharing a phone with two siblings?"
Facilitator noteThis is question 4 of the leaders' five-question check: Who might be left out? Encourage people to add it to every agenda.
Paper or screen
Unplugged
Designed to run entirely on paper: the plan, the family cards, sticky notes on a wall map, and a printed organizer. The physical wall map is the point. Seeing a column fill with sticky notes makes the scale of a barrier visible in a way a list doesn't.
Digital
In a virtual session, build the seven-column wall on a shared digital whiteboard and give each team a color. Share family cards as a slide deck, one family per slide. Teams complete Handout C in a shared document. If you have your district's own access survey data, display it after the Debrief and ask which families from today would likely be missing from it.
Does it need a screen? This one is better unplugged. The empathy work of walking a plan through a family's evening, and the visual impact of a crowded wall map, both land more strongly in the room. A digital whiteboard is a good substitute for remote groups, not an improvement.
Evidence of learning
What you should be able to see or collect if it worked.
The wall map has barriers in at least five of the seven columns, each tagged with a family card number.
Teams distinguish policy fixes from individual outreach rather than treating every barrier the same way.
Handout C lists a specific evidence measure for each strategy, not just the number of devices or hotspots distributed.
The revised plan addresses the cost gap between free and paid AI tiers and offers non-digital alternatives.
Adaptations
Higher Ed
Replace family cards with student profiles: a commuter who studies on the bus, a student parent, a veteran using disability services, an international student with limited data, a student who can't afford paid AI tools a course recommends.
Campus staff (front office, counselors)
Add a step where staff role-play the phone call or front-desk conversation with two of the families, practicing how to offer help without making families explain their circumstances publicly.
Short on time (45 min)
Use five family cards (1, 3, 5, 7, 9), skip the Apply step, and have teams complete only three rows of Handout C.
Standards connections
Teams walk a homework-and-AI-tutor plan through family profiles to find access barriers, so every student can use the tools a lesson requires.
What steps am I taking to create an inclusive and positive digital learning culture? (Leader ELE 4.0)
Which families in our community would be least likely to tell us a plan isn't working for them, and how would we find out?
When an AI tool has free and paid tiers, what is our responsibility to students whose families can't pay?
Which of our current policies assume every student has the same evening, device, and connection?
Take it to your students
Before your next technology decision, bring three family profiles from today to the planning meeting and walk the plan through them. Add "Who might be left out?" as a standing agenda item, and choose one measure from Handout C to begin tracking this semester.
Leaders write the success story and the failure story of their own AI or tech initiative three years out, then run a pre-mortem on the failure so they can build guardrails before launch.
Leadership teams role-play the planning meeting for a campus-wide platform rollout and discover that the questions that matter most come after "should we buy it?"
Educators put fictional AI uses in grading, proctoring, detection, and monitoring on trial, then issue rulings with conditions that could become real policy.