Professional learning · Leaders, Faculty, Coaches · 75 minutes
From Values to Guidance: Drafting a Campus AI Statement
Leadership teams start with what they value, sort draft clauses, and write a one-page generative AI guidance statement that people can actually follow.
Many campuses have AI guidance that is either a ban nobody enforces or a list of tools nobody reads. This session builds guidance the other way around: teams choose the values that matter most for learning on their campus, sort a deck of draft clauses to find which ones are clear, fair, and enforceable, and then draft a one-page statement covering acceptable use, disclosure, privacy, and equity. Along the way they critique an AI-generated draft, which models the same judgment the guidance asks of students and staff.
In this packet
- Handout A: Values Cards (cut-apart cards)
- Handout B: Clause Sort (card sort)
- Handout C: Guidance Statement Drafting Frame (worksheet)
- Facilitator key (last page)
TCEA ELE indicators
- L1.1 I know how to create and communicate a compelling vision for technology integration in the school.
- AI2.1 I know how to apply ethical principles when using or developing AI for education.
- AI2.3 I am aware of the importance of transparency and accountability in AI systems.
- L4.1 I know how to create a positive and inclusive digital learning climate.
Full facilitator guide: mglearn.github.io/eles/activities/ai-guidance-from-values.html
Handout A for From Values to Guidance: Drafting a Campus AI Statement
Values Cards
Cut apart. Each person dots three; each team keeps four. The backs suggest what each value might sound like in guidance.
Sheet 1 of 2
Value
Honesty. We are open about how work was made, including when and how AI helped.
Value
Curiosity. We want students and staff to explore new tools and ask better questions.
Value
Privacy. Personal information belongs to the people it describes.
Value
Equity. No student is advantaged or left behind because of what their family can afford or how they learn.
Value
Human judgment. People, not software, make decisions that affect students.
Value
Transparency. People affected by a tool can find out how it's used and what it does with their data.
Value
Safety. Students are protected from harmful content, contact, and manipulation.
Value
Creativity. Students' own voices and ideas remain at the center of their work.
Handout A for From Values to Guidance: Drafting a Campus AI Statement
Values Cards
Cut apart. Each person dots three; each team keeps four. The backs suggest what each value might sound like in guidance.
Sheet 2 of 2
Value
Belonging. Everyone in our community is treated with respect online and off.
Value
Integrity. Grades and credentials reflect what a learner actually knows and can do.
Value
Stewardship. We spend time, money, and attention on what improves learning.
Value
Growth. Guidance should help people learn, not only tell them what they can't do.
Handout B for From Values to Guidance: Drafting a Campus AI Statement
Clause Sort
Sort each draft clause into the area it belongs to. Then mark any clause that is vague, unenforceable, or unfair, and try rewriting one.
Acceptable Use
Disclosure
Privacy
Equity and Access
Handout B for From Values to Guidance: Drafting a Campus AI Statement
Clause Sort: cards to sort
Cut apart the strips. Sort each one onto the mat and be ready to explain why.
Sheet 1 of 2
Students may use approved AI tools to brainstorm, get feedback, or practice, unless a teacher states otherwise for a specific assignment.
AI may not be used for schoolwork.
Each assignment will state its AI expectation: no AI, AI for specific steps, or AI allowed with disclosure.
AI tools may inform, but may not decide, grades, discipline, placement, or academic integrity findings.
When AI helped with your work, add a short note saying which tool you used, what you asked it, and what you changed.
Students must be honest about AI use.
Staff who use AI to draft family communications, feedback, or reports will review every word and remain responsible for the content.
AI detection software will be used to identify cheating.
Do not enter student names, grades, health information, or plan details into any AI tool that is not on the district-approved list.
Be careful with personal data.
Tools are approved only after the district confirms a data privacy agreement covering how student data is stored, used, and deleted.
Creating or sharing AI-generated images, audio, or video of a real student or staff member without consent is prohibited and will be handled under the student code of conduct.
Handout B for From Values to Guidance: Drafting a Campus AI Statement
Clause Sort: cards to sort
Cut apart the strips. Sort each one onto the mat and be ready to explain why.
Sheet 2 of 2
No assignment will require a paid AI tool or a personal account.
Students who need AI-based supports as accommodations (such as text-to-speech or speech-to-text) may always use them.
Students without home internet should find a way to complete AI-assisted work.
Families will receive this guidance in the languages spoken at home, with a chance to ask questions at a family event.
Handout C for From Values to Guidance: Drafting a Campus AI Statement
Guidance Statement Drafting Frame
Keep it to one page. Every clause should trace to one of your four values. Use plain language a student and a parent could explain back to you.
Our four values, and what each means on our campus:
Acceptable Use: when and how students and staff may use generative AI (and which value this protects):
Disclosure: what students and staff say about AI help, and how (value):
Privacy: what data never goes into AI tools, and how tools get approved (value):
Equity and Access: cost, access, accommodations, and language (value):
Test it: what does our draft tell each of the three people from the opening scenarios, and the student in the gallery-walk scenario?
How students, staff, and families will learn about this guidance (when, how, in what languages):
Who reviews this next, and when will we revisit it?
Facilitator only for From Values to Guidance: Drafting a Campus AI Statement
Answer key and notes
Handout A: Values Cards
- Value
- Sounds like: disclosure clauses, citation of AI assistance, clear expectations per assignment.
- Value
- Sounds like: permission to experiment in defined spaces, prompting as inquiry, sharing what didn't work.
- Value
- Sounds like: no student names, grades, health, or plan details in unapproved AI tools; approved-tool lists tied to data agreements.
- Value
- Sounds like: no required paid tools, school-provided access, accommodations honored, alternatives offered.
- Value
- Sounds like: AI may inform but not decide grades, discipline, placement, or integrity findings.
- Value
- Sounds like: public list of approved tools, plain-language summaries for families, staff disclosure of AI use in communications.
- Value
- Sounds like: age-appropriate access, reporting paths for harmful AI output, guidance on synthetic images of real people.
- Value
- Sounds like: AI as brainstorming partner or critic, not ghostwriter; assignments that value process.
- Value
- Sounds like: clauses on AI-generated images or audio of classmates and staff, and consequences for synthetic harassment.
- Value
- Sounds like: assessment redesign, process evidence, conversations rather than detector scores.
- Value
- Sounds like: pilots with evidence criteria before adoption, periodic review of tools in use.
- Value
- Sounds like: training commitments, teachable moments over punishment for first missteps, annual review.
Handout B: Clause Sort
| Item | Sort | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Students may use approved AI tools to brainstorm, get feedback, or practice, unless a teacher states otherwise for a specific assignment. | Acceptable Use | Clear default plus teacher discretion. A strong clause. |
| AI may not be used for schoolwork. | Acceptable Use | Weak: unenforceable, and it blocks accommodations and legitimate uses like text-to-speech. |
| Each assignment will state its AI expectation: no AI, AI for specific steps, or AI allowed with disclosure. | Acceptable Use | Strong: moves the decision to the task, where it belongs. |
| AI tools may inform, but may not decide, grades, discipline, placement, or academic integrity findings. | Acceptable Use | Strong: keeps human judgment in high-stakes decisions. |
| When AI helped with your work, add a short note saying which tool you used, what you asked it, and what you changed. | Disclosure | Strong: specific and teachable; it also produces evidence of the student's thinking. |
| Students must be honest about AI use. | Disclosure | Weak: a value, not guidance. It doesn't say what honest disclosure looks like. |
| Staff who use AI to draft family communications, feedback, or reports will review every word and remain responsible for the content. | Disclosure | Strong: holds adults to the same standard as students. |
| AI detection software will be used to identify cheating. | Disclosure | Weak and risky: detectors can falsely flag students, including multilingual writers. Use conversation and process evidence instead. |
| Do not enter student names, grades, health information, or plan details into any AI tool that is not on the district-approved list. | Privacy | Strong: specific data types and a clear boundary. |
| Be careful with personal data. | Privacy | Weak: no one can act on it. Which data? Careful how? |
| Tools are approved only after the district confirms a data privacy agreement covering how student data is stored, used, and deleted. | Privacy | Strong: ties approval to FERPA and COPPA obligations and a real review process. |
| Creating or sharing AI-generated images, audio, or video of a real student or staff member without consent is prohibited and will be handled under the student code of conduct. | Privacy | Strong: addresses synthetic media harms directly and connects to existing consequences. |
| No assignment will require a paid AI tool or a personal account. | Equity and Access | Strong: removes a cost barrier families shouldn't carry. |
| Students who need AI-based supports as accommodations (such as text-to-speech or speech-to-text) may always use them. | Equity and Access | Strong: protects accommodations from blanket restrictions. |
| Students without home internet should find a way to complete AI-assisted work. | Equity and Access | Weak and inequitable: puts the burden on the student. Offer in-school time or non-AI alternatives. |
| Families will receive this guidance in the languages spoken at home, with a chance to ask questions at a family event. | Equity and Access | Strong: answers "How will families understand the change?" |