CITE24: LACOE’s Advice for Getting Ahead of the AI Curve

Officials at the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE) have taken a proactive approach to artificial intelligence in the past year — forming a task force to conduct surveys on how schools were already using generative AI, then creating guidelines to vet tech vendors, pilot new AI products, train staff to use new tools and even budget for future innovations. At the California Information Technology in Education (CITE) conference in San Diego this week, three of those officials shared what they've learned so far about bringing AI to schools ethically and effectively, and what they’d recommend to educators who aren’t sure where to start.

FLEXIBLE GUIDELINES

Christopher Hoang, LACOE assistant director of technology, innovation and outreach, said the AI landscape changes weekly or even daily, so LACOE opted for a flexible-governance approach.

“Working with our team, I intentionally told them, ‘I don’t want policy,’ because the moment you put policy in place is the moment it becomes rigid,” he said.

Mike Lawrence, IT director at ABC Unified School District, said his district focused less on specific tools and more on general behavior goals. He made an AI addendum to the district’s existing technology policies to address issues like privacy, attribution and critical thinking.

For attribution, the policy includes a “badge” system, which uses physical stickers and posters to show the role AI played in producing work: produced by AI alone, produced by AI and modified by a human, or produced by a human and modified by AI.

“We’re encouraging our staff and students to attach those badges to the work that they submit so that it opens up a conversation and takes away some of the taboo around those tools,” Lawrence said.

LACOE’s guidelines are also adaptable but focus less specifically on instruction, including vetting tips for the procurement process and advice on collecting ongoing feedback.
LACOE director of technology learning and support services Johan Madrigal said that as AI transforms education, it will be important to create guidance like this quickly to ensure the technology furthers organizational goals rather than disrupting them. He said including leadership in early conversations helped LACOE establish guidance relatively quickly.

“Getting in front of everybody was critical for us,” Madrigal said. “We got in front of our executive cabinet, we had the training with them, and they were all very positive on what it can mean for their own group. That kind of led the way for us to have outreach with all of the groups.”

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

One thing presenters said they learned from talking to other ed-tech leaders across the U.S. is the need for ongoing, hands-on experiences, not one-time overviews.

“Professional development for us has to be hands-on,” Hoang said. “Anyone who says an hour of AI training is enough is lying to you.”

Lawrence suggested that the training start with introductory activities that assume everyone has used AI before, allowing them to learn by exploring rather than telling. For example, instead of explaining the importance of specific prompts, a professional development session might display an image and ask attendees to use an AI image generator to recreate it as closely as they can.

After introducing AI, LACOE's recommendation is to break training down into targeted sessions for different groups — teachers, administrators, classified staff, et cetera. Panelists also stressed the need for investment and setting aside funding for ongoing AI initiatives and training.

INCLUDING EVERYONE

Another unanimous tip from LACOE officials was that effective guidance and professional development will include everyone — not just teachers and administrators but also support staff, families and students. AI has the potential to perpetuate digital divides if not addressed holistically, Hoang said. Panelists highlighted the need to include the community in addition to employees.

LACOE held focus groups with students to understand their views of AI and hear their input on guidance principles. In those discussions, Hoang asked students if their parents knew about AI, and all said “yes” even though they had never discussed it explicitly, he said. However, when he told students to ask their parents about AI and circle back with him, he found many parents did not actually know the basics of the technology.

“We assume everyone knows about it, just because everyone in here is very tech-y,” he said. “But the fact is, most people still don’t know about it. They might see it in the news, but they don’t know about it.”

ABC Unified hosted community roundtables to raise awareness about AI. In one event centered on students’ opinions of AI, facilitators gave students a potential use case for AI in academics, then asked them to raise a red or green paddle to indicate whether they thought the situation was ethical or not.

“I think the kids were harder on it than we would have been,” Lawrence said.

Another event focused on families’ knowledge and concerns about AI in education. At this session, Lawrence heard one parent say AI just seems like cheating to them.

“You may have an open AI policy in your district with guidelines, but if the parents at home are like, ‘No, absolutely not, that's cheating,’ then the students will be limited in their ability to learn AI and be able to apply it ethically and appropriately,” he said.