USD 305 outlines what classroom AI use is allowed, prohibited and still up to teachers
As generative artificial intelligence becomes more common in classrooms and homework, Salina Public Schools has publicly laid out how the technology can and cannot be used across the district. Rather than banning AI outright, USD 305’s framework allows approved tools in certain situations while putting the final decision in the hands of teachers and district leaders. The district’s board policy on artificial intelligence, revised June 11, 2024, says AI can be used to enhance instruction, improve operations and support student learning, but must be used responsibly, ethically, and in compliance with district policy and applicable law.
On its public AI guidelines page, the district says generative AI can enrich teaching and learning and should be used in ways that support critical thinking, communication and social-emotional growth. The website breaks the framework into separate sections for students, teachers and administrators, along with quick reminders, an appendix and an approved tool list.
For students, the district says teachers always have the final say on how AI may be used in a class or on an assignment. USD 305 points families and students to a district “Generative AI Acceptable Use Scale,” which is meant to show how much AI use is allowed on a given activity. The student guidance also warns against inappropriate uses such as generating essays or assignments and submitting them as original work, using AI on tests without understanding the material, creating misleading or false content, over-relying on AI instead of critical thinking, and sharing personal information through AI tools without proper supervision.
For teachers, the district says AI may be used to help with lesson planning, activity ideas and learning materials, but any AI-generated content must still match curriculum standards and learning intentions. Before a teacher brings an AI tool into instruction, the district says the tool must either already appear on the approved list or be submitted through a Software Request Form to the district’s Management Information Systems department for review.
Administrators are assigned their own role in the system. According to the district’s guidance, administrators are expected to set clear expectations, promote equitable access, model ethical use, ensure compliance with data privacy laws and respond to violations of the district’s AI rules through appropriate interventions.
One of the clearest parts of the district’s approach is its public approved-tools list for student use. USD 305 currently shows Canva Education, SchoolAI, Magic School AI and Gemini through Google Workspace as approved for both elementary and secondary students. At the same time, the district’s public list marks OpenAI tools such as ChatGPT and DALL-E, along with Consensus AI and Claude, as not approved for student use. The district notes that staff and students using Gemini must do so through district Google accounts.
The board policy adds another layer by tying approved AI use to privacy and compliance requirements. The policy says approved tools must comply with laws and standards including FERPA, PPRA, COPPA, CIPA, the Kansas Student Data Privacy Act, district policy and district cybersecurity requirements. It also states that no approved AI application may collect, store or transmit personally identifiable information without appropriate authorization and vendor safeguards.
The same policy spells out what the district expects from staff and students when approved AI is used. It says users must demonstrate honesty, integrity and responsibility in academic work, use AI only in ways that support learning, understand that AI is meant to supplement rather than replace human instruction or judgment, and properly cite or disclose AI-generated content used in assignments, teaching materials or official communications. It also says AI should only be used for idea generation, editing or skill development when a teacher or administrator expressly permits it.
The district also lists prohibited uses. Under board policy, students and staff may not use AI to generate or substantially complete assignments, essays or assessments without explicit authorization, fabricate sources or data, impersonate another person, create deepfakes that misrepresent or harm people, access or disclose confidential information in violation of policy or law, or use AI in ways that violate teacher or administrator instructions. Violations, the policy states, may be handled through district discipline procedures or applicable law.
In its quick reminders, USD 305 also takes a position on one of the messier issues in school AI enforcement: detection software. The district says teachers should not rely only on AI detectors such as Turnitin or GPTZero, noting those tools are not always accurate, especially for multilingual learners. Instead, the district tells teachers to use their knowledge of students’ writing styles and abilities when evaluating work. It also says that when AI is used to help complete an assignment, students should be transparent and include a disclosure, such as a note or screenshot showing how the tool was used.
Taken together, the district’s public documents show a controlled-use approach rather than a simple yes-or-no rule on AI. Salina Public Schools is not treating generative AI as something that can be ignored, but it is also not handing it the keys to the classroom. The district’s framework keeps the responsibility on adults to set limits, on students to be honest about use, and on the district to keep reviewing the technology as the tools and the risks continue to change. The board policy says that review of the policy, approved tool list and related procedures will happen annually.