Human Still Required / Field Notes
Students mostly support in-class phone limits but oppose all-day bans. How leaders make this cellphone ban policy decision, by listening first, sets the pattern for AI policy next.
Read article: Cellphone Ban Policy Is a Listening Test for LeadersStudent AI concerns, from a New York walkout to Connecticut teachers’ worries about reading, are guidance, not resistance. Leaders should name what school will protect and bring students into the conversation.
Read article: Students Are Protesting AI. Leaders Should Ask What They Protect.A banned-tools list tells people what to avoid. School AI guidance built on a few clear principles tells teachers and students how to decide, even about tools no one has reviewed yet.
Read article: School AI Guidance Needs Principles, Not Just ListsWhether schools ban AI or build it into tests, the strongest evidence of learning is the same: a student who can explain, defend and revise their own thinking.
Read article: The Best AI Assessment Tool Is Still a Good QuestionNew research shows AI cheating suspicions are eroding trust between students and teachers. Leaders can respond by asking before assuming, making thinking visible, and writing AI policy with students and teachers.
Read article: AI Cheating Suspicions Are Costing Schools TrustSchool AI bans respond to real concerns, but control isn’t leadership. A pause can buy time; only clear purpose, honest conversation and student voice build the judgment schools need.
Read article: AI Bans Feel Safe. That Doesn’t Make Them Leadership.
