Penfield Artificial Intelligence Hub
Artificial Intelligence Framework
Penfield aims to prepare students to be adaptable, ethical, collaborative, and critical thinkers who thrive in a technology-rich world. Artificial Intelligence (AI) can help achieve these goals when integrated responsibly. This Framework sets clear expectations for AI use, aligned with NYS Computer Science & Digital Fluency Standards, the NYS Portrait of a Graduate, our Code of Conduct, and academic integrity principles.
-
Purpose: To provide clear, age appropriate, ethical, and practical guidance for the use of AI in teaching and learning, within the school community—so AI enhances, not replaces human judgment, relationships, and learning.
Vision: AI is a valuable assistant that can support creativity, differentiation, accessibility, and efficiency when used responsibly, transparently, and in compliance with student data privacy laws. The policy anchors AI use with New York State’s Portrait of a Graduate competencies (i.e., critical thinker, creative communicator, ethical citizen) and aligns with the NYS Computer Science and Digital Fluency standards for K-12 students and educators. AI adoption remains flexible and iterative given the pace of change, while maintaining “human in the loop” oversight.
-
- Educational Purpose: AI supports learning goals, teacher effectiveness, accessibility, and operational efficiency.
- Ethical Use: AI users must understand generated content may contain bias and/or inaccuracies, while keeping human judgment central.
- Privacy & Safety: Comply with NYS Ed Law 2D, FERPA, COPPA; prohibit entry of Personally Identifiable Information into non-approved tools and approved tools.
- Transparency & Attribution: Disclose when AI assists thinking, wording, or products; cite AI use appropriately.
- Academic Integrity: AI must not compromise authentic learning or misrepresent authorship.
- Human in the Loop: AI augments and generates but never replaces critical thinking, creativity, and responsible decisions.
-
Scope: Applies to students, educators, staff, and administrators interacting with AI tools across instruction, administration, and operations. By defining roles and responsibilities, all stakeholder groups are ensured equitable access.
Roles & Responsibilities:
-
Teachers/Staff/Admin: Set expectations for AI use for coursework, evaluate AI outputs; protect data; model transparency and ethical practice; know the Code of Conduct and PCSD AI Framework.
-
Technology/Privacy Team/Admin: Maintains Approved AI Tools list; vets tools for Ed Law 2D/FERPA/COPPA compliance; provides professional learning for stakeholders; monitors and improves implementation.
-
Students: Use AI as permitted and evaluate output; attribute assistance; protect privacy; demonstrate original understanding; follow Code of Conduct.
-
Caregivers: Support your student(s)’ responsible use of AI, as it pertains to their learning so that it enhances, not replaces their thinking.
-
-
Appropriate Use: Students and staff may use District‑approved AI tools only (insert online link). AI assistance must be cited when it influences ideas, organization, wording, problem‑solving, or media. All users are responsible for protecting data privacy and must not enter Personally Identifiable or confidential Information into AI tools. Teachers should include AI Use Levels in each course syllabus. Students and staff should reference the AI Use Levels to clarify what is permitted for each assignment.
Examples of Appropriate Use:
-
Students: Brainstorm topics, outline ideas, clarify concepts, generate study questions, practice languages, explore solution pathways (math) with transparent reflection and citation.
-
Staff: Draft lesson outlines, differentiate materials, create prompts, summarize documents, analyze deidentified data, draft communications—with human review and data privacy compliance.
Prohibited Use: AI assistance is not permitted when it interferes with the learning/assessment objective, or beyond what is allowed by the instructor. Supports, responses, and/or interventions will align with the PCSD Code of Conduct for academic dishonesty.
Examples of Prohibited Use for Student and Staff:
- Submitting AI generated content as original work (e.g., writing the entire essay or solving assessed problems)
- Generating harmful/deceptive media.
- Entering Personally Identifiable Information
- Using unapproved tools.
- Relying on AI as sole grader or decision-maker.
-
AI Usage Levels
Purpose of the AI Use Levels Chart: The chart establishes clear expectations for how AI may be used in learning and professional tasks. Educators identify and communicate the appropriate level for an assignment; students and staff are responsible for following that level and transparently disclosing AI use. The chart supports ethical and responsible AI use while keeping human judgment at the center.
|
Level of AI Use |
Examples of What Is Allowed |
Disclosure Requirements |
|
|
0 |
No AI Use |
Assignments and assessment is completed entirely without AI assistance. Students rely solely on their background knowledge, understanding, and skills. |
Not required. |
|
1 |
AI for Ideas |
No AI content is allowed in final submission. AI can be used for brainstorming, outlining, or concept clarifying only. |
The teacher provides a reflection prompt, and the student provides a brief statement of how AI was used. Reflections could include a checklist including but not limited to the following:
|
|
2 |
AI for Editing/Feedback |
No new content can be created using AI. AI can be used for surface-level clarity edits or suggestions. |
|
|
3 |
Partial AI Use |
AI permitted for specified parts (e.g., example generation) with human oversight. |
|
|
4 |
Full AI Support with Human Oversight |
AI supports multiple stages to enhance human creativity. Human judgment remains central, and the final product is owned by the student/staff member. |
|
Students should follow either the APA or MLA guidelines for citing AI-generated content: You can find more infomation from Purdue's site.
AI Misuse Within Penfield’s Code of Conduct
- Tier 1: First-Time or Minor AI Misuse (page 27)
- Inappropriate AI use is typically addressed as a Tier 1 behavior when it is a first incident or unintentional, instructional in nature. Tier 1 behaviors include: Plagiarism, use or misuse of internet-enabled devices.
- Common Tier 1 responses include: Reviewing expectations, student reflection, teacher-student reflection, teacher-student conference, restorative conversation or check-in, family communication when appropriate
- Tier 2: Repeated or More Serious AI Misuse (page 28-29)
- AI misuse may escalate to Tier 2 when the behavior is repeated, intentional, or involves clear academic deception. Tier 2 behaviors include: academic dishonesty, repeated misuse of internet-enabled devices.
- Possible Tier 2 responses include: MTSS referral, family or school-based team conference, loss of classroom privileges, confiscation of devices, short-term administrative consequences, including in-school or out-of-school suspension (up to two days).
- Tier 3: Serious or Egregious AI Misuse (page 29-30)
- AI‑related behavior may be addressed as a Tier 3 violation when it is severe in nature, involves significant deception or harm, or occurs after Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions have been implemented. AI misuse alone does not automatically result in Tier 3 consequences; escalation occurs when AI use is part of a broader, serious violation of the Code of Conduct. It is important to note that most AI‑related concerns are appropriately addressed through Tier 1 or Tier 2 instructional and restorative responses.
- Possible Tier 3 responses include: Engage in all relevant Tier 2 interventions, and: repair, restore, and reteach expectations for all people impacted, confiscation of devices, long-term administrative consequences, including out-of-school suspension (up to five days).