OCPS | 2026-05-12 School Board Work Session

001Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. N. I'm Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Good Morning. Um, we ask for the courtesy of the board members, staff, and members of the public that you please silence your cell phones. Good morning and welcome to the Orange County School Board's work session, which has been scheduled today, Tuesday, May 12th, 2026, for the purpose of discussing policy JIC, student code of conduct policy JNDC, appropriate use of electronic resources. The public will not have an opportunity to participate in this work session to provide public comment because this is not a regularly scheduled schoolboard meeting. No action will be taken and there will be no open public comment period in which the public normally addresses the school board on relevant

002topics that are related to the work of the board. Thank you so much for being here with us this morning. I am just temporarily filling in before our chair arrives. And here she is. So, she will be taking over for me. Thank you. Thank you. >> Hello everyone. Apologies for that. Had some stuff going on in district 2 unfortunate about e scooters. We'll talk about that later. But as a reminder, board members will not engage in outside electronic or digital communication during the meeting. So we may focus on the matters immediately before us. To my fellow board members and district staff when speaking. Please make sure your microphone is turned on and to speak directly into it. so our YouTube and Orange TV viewers can hear you clearly. Again, thank you so much for participating

003in today's meeting. We will now pause for a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance. Now for the pledgece to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> I will now be turning it over to Deputy Superintendent Martinez. >> Thank you, madame vice chair. Each year we provide the opportunity to review the code of student conduct and this is the second work session to revisit this topic. As you recall, we first brought this to the school board on April 7th. We have had opportunities for our community to provide input, met with principles, conducted a survey, as well as receive feedback from the school board in terms of what they would like to see

004revised. We have an incredible here, incredible team here with us today. So, at this time, I'd like to turn it over to Miss Diki Joiner and Alkevia Haynes to go over any proposed changes to the code of student conduct. >> Thank you. >> Good morning, >> Chair Salamanca, Deputy Superintendent Martinez, and board members. Um we're just going to go over um those changes that were requested um from the last work session. First going to page 10 under cheating, we removed attempted use from the cheating definition and that's also going to be on page 16. on page 12 under the disciplinary responses. We removed safe referral um as a safe coordinator positions um based on that and that's going to be on pages 16 and 23 as well. We're going to skip to page 33 under

005our level one through three procedures. Um we removed uh business hours. It previously said under step four 24 B business hours we removed business for clarity. Um that's going to be on page 35 as well. Next on page 36 under step seven, um we just added um DTM for clarity. Under step nine, uh we removed the new language and reverted to the previous language. The language that we previously had allows for an area administrator to place a student at OCVS if that is the request of the board. Skipping to page 50 under dress code. We removed the new formatting and language and um went back to the old language. Under number five, we added language. Specialized courses may require specialized attire such as sports uniforms or safety gear and these must be approved by the

006principal before being worn during the school day. Additionally, this part is the new language. Practice uniforms and game uniforms are expected to align with competition uniform requirements as outlined by the Florida High School Athletic Association or FHSAA in its bylaws and its sports specific manuals as well as in requirements adopted by the National Federation of State High School Associations or NFHS. And that concludes the updates. >> Thank you. Um we have member Vanos queue up. >> Thank you so much Madam Chair. My question is on page 50 with the dress code. Um the comment here is added per board's recommendation, but my recollection of the last meeting um was that we were not going to be requiring practice uniform. We were just going to let our students wear what was comfortable for practice. So I'm

007not sure why this additional regulation was um sought out. Um, however, I would suggest that if people feel strongly about this that at least we allow students when they are off-campus practicing to be able to wear what is comfortable to them. Um, so that is my suggestion. >> May I respond? >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Okay. So, when the team went back and talked to our um head of the athletics, Lonnie, um he stated that um in these sports specific manuals that we have to um we're obligated to abide abide by um they do list requirements for uniforms and as well as practice uniforms. And so that's why that language was added. Um, I do have a picture that I can show you that would allow for um students to wear it wouldn't allow them

008to wear whatever is comfortable, but it would allow their um practice uniform to align with what they would wear in um a match or a game. And give me one second. So here, this is our tour of our school's beach volleyball uniform. That uniform would technically be in violation of our code of conduct as their shorts do not reach mid level, but they would be allowed to practice in something that is similar um to that. >> And is that be is that because that's the competition uniform? >> Correct. >> Okay. So unless the competition uniform mirrors what people are practicing in, then it doesn't really address what we actually talked about at the last meeting. >> In my in our research, the only thing it would not provide for is for students to wear um

009for example, a sports bra um because none of our um uniforms are sports bra are of a sports bra type. Mhm. >> Um just curious why this wasn't part of the dress code before. >> Um it's in the athletics manuals and I am not 100% why sure why it was there before but I can go back and ask the team. >> Is it possible that we could allow students to again wear what professional for example professional women runners wear um on practice that is not on campus but off campus? Could there at least be a compromise to that degree? Is that legally possible? >> They still would be student. >> Madam Chair, may I? >> Yes. So, >> Mr. F. >> So, thank you, Madam Chair. If the board wants to compromise in that manner,

010uh, they could do that. We typically do not enforce dress code or pretty much anything with respect to the code of conduct offampus unless there's very specific instances in which we do it. Um it's for example like um bullying or hazing. There's provisions that allow us to enforce if it happens off-campus especially if it has an onampus um effect to it. So um you know and and just as a practical matter our principles aren't going to be out there policing or administrators aren't going to be out there policing off-campus conduct. So if we wanted to put in there practice and uniforms and game uniforms when worn on campus have to align with FHSAA I think that's within the board's authority. >> Just just a point clarification member Vano. So I when we were talking about

011uniforms we said there's a lot of students out there that wear their uniforms to class. A lot of those uniforms might not abide by dress code. I think cheerleading was one of the examples that was given. And so we said we wanted to make it explicit in the policy that they should be allowed to wear whatever it is their spot sports uniform is. Are you saying that you want it to be broader beyond just the uniforms? You're saying anything that is athletic and comfortable that they would use for practice, not just their uniforms to be allowed during the day of school. No. Um this is related to the conversation we had last time and the students who came. It is for pra practice offampus. Some coaches are not allowing students to practice, let's say, in,

012you know, they're running off campus to not be able to practice in like normal running gear, which would be a sports bra and a a shorts. >> And so it's it's really that >> after school, not on campus. I get I'm fine. Like on campus, understand let's I'm good with that. But I'm what I'm talking about is after school, off-campus practice. So I think yeah the concern is more if we are enforcing the dress code at moments where I mean you're out there in the sand 95 degrees and we're saying you're not in dress code. We wanted to make it explicit that it's not just during the day but after school as well that this should not be enforced as well. So, if I may, we if it's on campus, I think the language is

013going to be that the the approved the practice uniforms and game uniforms are going to be expected to comply with it. Um, with respect to off-campus, I think we could allow it, but here's the thing. Some coaches may say, and I think the superintendent and her staff want to have some flexibility here, some of these coaches may say, "You know what? I want you practicing in what you're going to play in. And if you're going to have to run in 95 degrees, I want you to run in the attire that when you go to a meet, you're going to have to um run in that just so you get used to being in that in that uniform during that heat. So, some coaches may want to have the authority to say, I want you practicing

014in what you would have to play in in order to get the feel for competition. And so I do think we want to leave some flexibility there for a coach to say, "Yes, you I'm not going to police off campus," but they may want to say, "I still want you to wear the uniform just because I want you to get used to game conditions." >> I understand what you're saying and I think in some instances that makes sense. Um, I also think that is giving coaches a broad authority to um to to to use it for other reasons and other purposes. But I mean, if I'm the only one who cares, I'm I'm we all know how I feel. So, I'm going to stop talking and let some other people share their comments. So, thank

015you. >> Thank you, Member Vonos. We'll figure Well, if if folks have something else to say on this topic, we can go around. Member Gallo. >> Thank you. Um I I agree with Stephanie. First off, I don't know of too many sports that have practice uniforms. Like most my kids played sports. There was no practice uniforms. You wore whatever you wore to practice. So if we put something in language that says they have to wear practice uniforms and they don't have practice uniforms, what will be considered practice uniforms and who's going to pay for the said practice uniforms? >> So practice uniforms are I'll take football and and baseball. They're the easiest examples that I can put my hand on, right? Practice uniforms may be shorts for football, but you have shoulder pads. You have

016some sort of jersey that would allow them to cover the shoulder pads, the helmet, etc. Baseball, you may not wear the full uniform top, but you would wear baseball pants, especially if you have to do sliding and all of that kind of stuff. So, um, most of the time the kids provide it. I think we and and deputy superintendent can jump in here if I'm saying this wrong. If we have kids who don't have the ability to afford, you know, things that they can wear in practice, our schools work with them to ensure that they do have stuff to wear to practice if that becomes a barrier. If if cost and ability to provide it becomes a barrier. But, you know, basketball's your typical, you know, t-shirt or shorts in order to play. Various sports

017have various practice uniforms like that. >> Um, thank you, Mr. Palmer. I would argue that they do not. I would argue that basketball does not, that track does not, that lacrosse does not, um, that a lot of like cheerleading, like they're usually just in short, like there's not, we don't have what we would consider designated uniforms that students only practice in. They practice in a variety of different clothing at every each and every practice. they don't wear the same uniform at each practice. Especially if you're in the season and you're practicing daily, you're not going to wear the same clothes. Um, and so I I would argue that we don't really provide or have like a set uniform that they wear to practice. I think they usually wear what they're comfortable wearing, whether that's in

018basketball baggie shorts and a tank or in running or beach volleyball. We just saw an example of what they wear. Um, so I I'm just hesitant to add language to our code of conduct that's not explicitly understood or explicitly explained and therefore could be subject to someone's interpretation. >> I have a question. Would um because it says additionally practice uniforms, that's the language that you're talking about? >> Yes. Um, we could change it from uniforms to attire so that it's not a specific uniform, but make it say attire. >> Okay, that would but still >> so practice uniforms and gay uniforms are expected to align with competition uniform requirements. That's outlined by the Florida High School Athletic Association. That assumes that there is attire requirements by the Florida High School Athletics Association, which my guess

019is there's not. There's uniform now. >> So there are there is game uniform attire that is required. Um so if we change the language to say additionally practice attire um and game uniforms are expected to align with competition uniform. I think that would encompass that I can just where if I pull up the picture again um >> we can go back to member. Go ahead. I think we're asking the same question though. Um, so for example, if I just wore like a white t-shirt that was similar to their blue t-shirt and then, you know, blue shorts that's similar to the shorts that they're wearing, that would be acceptable to practice in. >> Thank you. And I and I appreciate that. I just I don't necessarily feel the need to add this language. I mean, as

020member Vanos pointed out, we have never had this language in our student code of conduct before where we're we're referencing the National Federation of State High School Associations like that's never been in our code of conduct prior. So, I would be more comfortable just taking it out. I I just don't know why. I think it it increases ambiguity and um it could be used to dress code students when they're practicing that I don't feel is necessary. That's that's my two cents. Thank you. Um I'm up next. So my there's there's two things. So I believe we added the language we added because we wanted to make it clear that it's following the cheerleading thing. I think it's a good thing that we have that language now because it is explicit for our athletes that they

021cannot be dress code as long as they are following any of those guidelines. And I I from my time back at school, I do remember some cheerleaders getting dresscoded or requested to wear additional shorts or call it yogurt pants underneath just to be in dress code. That wasn't necessarily it was their uniform. So, but it was very unevenly um call it enforced. So I'm okay with keeping that explicitly saying that during the school day that is I think my issue is more along lines of memberos after school I don't want coaches to be unevenly enforcing dress code on workout practice attire because the reality is I mean if you go down Avalon Road and you see the cross country team running in the middle of summer this is not Even during school, they're practicing. They're

022preparing to like actually try out. You see, it's girls in shorts and their sports bras and they are like sweating out there. I wouldn't want a coach to suddenly say, "Hey, you're at a dress code. I need you to put on more clothes." Just just because. Um, everyone drives past Avalon Boulevard every day and I'm not particularly distracted by their bodies. Like, I don't I don't I don't really understand the why. And so for me, it's more of like keep the language as is, but I want to make it explicit that coaches don't get to just determine what is in dress code or out of dress code during practice or non school hours or non-competition hours as long as of course private parts are covered. Like I'm not saying it's a free-for-all, but I also

023think that our after school in 90°ree weather dress code should not be anywhere what is expected inside of a classroom. It's just unrealistic. So, I don't fine with the current language. I just think we need to make explicit that you cannot just every individual free-for-all on what is enforced or not enforced after school or during summer hours. It just it doesn't make sense to me, but that's that's how I'm viewing it. Member Bird. >> Yes. And I was just going to agree with you on that. Um, and also boys, at least I see boys have no shirt on either when they're running, cross country running, training. Um so yeah I don't my question here is um and maybe this was I think this was shared with us and I apologize if I missed it but

024are there guidelines FHSAA guidelines for practice attire or is it just uniform attire? It's It says practice attire and the FHSAA takes their directions from the NFHS who sets the standards for uniforms and practice attire. >> For practice attire, >> yes, it says that the practice should mimic what's worn um in competition. >> Okay. Um, okay. I don't know. Um, I don't know where to go from. I don't have a no one's no one's really reached out to me that this is a um problem. So, I don't my preference would be to just um have it in there for the uniforms during the day. My my feeling is the code of student conduct is to make sure that um learning is happening and that behaviors are not getting in the way of learning. And um

025I don't know why we're even I don't even think we need to have practice in there. Um, I understand that there was some concerns that um, girls may be targeted during practice, but I also feel like putting this in the code of conduct adds another layer of um, extra accountability that we may not want unintentionally want. Um, so yeah, I'm gonna um, I don't know. I'm going to ask for some other input from other board members. I don't really have I don't really see why we need to add this to our dress code. I don't think this has been a huge problem, but maybe I've just missed it. Sorry. >> Thank you, member. Um, member Douglas. >> Okay. Uh, good morning everyone. Um, I just wanted to say, um, we do need dress codes during

026the day for students. >> Mhm. And uh and that's important and just like member Salamena said we dress code is to learn. I mean we we we just make sure that the kids are focused on learning and not other no other things. Uh but during practice uh outside of school hours I think we should um let the student dress comfortably to play. Of course there's limited you know they need to be covered at least a little bit but we need to let the to how can we adjust in a way that we can say that during practice kids should be dressed comfortable comfortably so that they can perform and play. So I don't know if we can use that comfort level level to add to this to make it um lawful I don't know in

027your how do you call it the the code of conduct the comfort of the kids is important but at a certain level that we don't have only like sports bras and I'm just trying to to figure out how we can make it happen >> if we add the comfort >> part of it. >> Thank you, member Douglas. Um, D Martinez. >> Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Um, I do want to point out that uh in my time as a chief of high schools, you you will come across um coaches that do follow those Florida High School Athletic Association bylaws that have also been adopted by the National Federation. So, it it will be challenging to um put something in policy that we can't enforce. So, you do have um some coaches that do um you

028know, speaking of practice attire, do want a certain look. you know, there is a philosophy out there that it brings a level of cohesion amongst the teams and it's challenging to kind of speak of individual sports because each one is different and each one is unique. Um, but I did want to point out to you that that is something, you know, from, you know, overseeing all of our high schools for some time that within athletics, there are, you know, certain philosophies and and visions that coaches have for their teams um in terms of creating that unity and that discipline. And so it is something that we we definitely want to consider um as we do follow FHSA and and the bylaws within the National Federation. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh member Font. >> Thank

029you. I am with member Bird on this one. I feel a little neutral. Um I haven't heard a lot of issues except the ones that were voiced at the last um school board meeting. I can understand the frustration. Um, but at the same time, I think our school our, excuse me, our code of conduct really is for the school day is the way I view it. It's what we want to make sure after hours or after school. Um, maybe that is something that we can um ask the superintendent to discuss with our um the athletics department and make sure that they are all on board and um discussing that. Well, I think when we put too many stipulations within a code of conduct, all of a sudden it just kind of it can tie people's

030hands and sometimes it has un un um necessary consequences that unintended consequences. Um, so for me, I mean, I I just think as long as it's I feel like we could just eliminate the whole practice thing and all of that and keep it as they need to like they would be allowed to wear it if it is part of the like there's a wear your uniform to school day. um that type of thing. Or if it's on a Friday and the cheerleaders are asked to wear a uniform um but maybe the principal says to them you're allowed to wear it uh during first period but then you do need to change after but I think it should be up to the principal um you know to get that approval. >> Thank you member Front. Um,

031I don't know if it's easier just to add a line that that is during the school day and after school. Maybe it's up to the coach and principal's discretion what the practice attire is. Just to make it explicit that it's two different things. I think my only concern with the current wording is I don't want that to be read as enforcement after school or during non school hours. So that that's one. I don't want someone to read the code of conduct and say this applies to after school or summer practice or whatever because I don't that is not the intention of this board from what I'm hearing. Um, so I don't know what that means in terms of language. I als I also can't find it. So I I would be helpful. We don't have

032to do this now, but if you can send us a language of what a tire is under what you're mentioning, maybe on there it's more broad or more flexible or less specific. Right. So, cuz it's not uniforms. We know these students are not running in their uniforms for cross country. They're just not. I've seen them. The boys really don't wear shirts. Um, so whatever that maybe we just need visibility into that. Um, or the second thing, if we don't think this is a problem, then we should be able to pull the numbers on if there's students getting dress code in sports or after school. Is there do we track that? Like how many students get dress code during school or after school? we wouldn't be able to distinguish, but we could find out about dress

033code violations. But we >> and I think that's maybe the problem. Like I wouldn't be happy to see a dress code form come in and it happened to be at 5:00 p.m. writing practice. Like that's not what the dress code is intended for. So I just think in the current version of what we wrote, that distinction is not clear. So that's my concern. Um that it's just going to be enforced um unevenly after school or during practice. Um so whatever it is we can do to fix the language, I think that's the intention of the board. But obviously whatever your recommendation is to make that happen, that's okay. If there is language we can refer to that is more standard but also not a uniform, that's great, too. But I just I haven't been able

034to find it. Um, anyone else? Member Vanos. >> Thank you. Just closed out. I mean, I think that's that's the key. It's just what is happening after after school is not what we're trying to target with the dress code. So, to the extent you just need a consensus statement, yes, I I think that's I think that's what we're trying to address. And I don't think you will find what you're looking for if you are looking for dress coding after school because what happens is the coach just says don't wear that. And so it's not it's not as if it's written up or it's going to address. You're not going to be able to track that information. And so that is another reason why it is so unevenly enforced because we don't even know. >> So

035just to add to that. So thank you. >> Okay. We we will work to change the language and present um some options. >> Thank you. Uh just to one last clarification. Is the board okay with keeping the current wording for during school uniform language? Okay. So we're good with that. I think we just feel that the afterchool practice part is not addressed yet. >> Okay. >> So procedurally if I can ask a question. >> Yes. when we come up with language, >> we're get I think we are on track to approve the code in June at our June meeting. Right. >> That's great. >> So my plan is to once we come up with the language to circulate it to you all to see if there's >> any strong objections to the language that we

036circulate and then you know we'll incorporate if we don't see you know strong objections. But is is that okay with board members if that's the procedure we utilize? Yeah, I'm okay with that. Is the board okay with that? >> Yeah. >> Yep. Okay. Is there anything else? >> Oh, member Gallo, one last minute surprise. Thank you. Um, the the student use of micro u mobility devices. I'm I'm assuming I know the answer to this, but I'm gonna ask it anyways. Would it be possible or under our authority to require that students wear a helmet? Well, like if you're going to come on school campuses with this type of microability devices that you must wear a helmet in order to ride these to school. I know that the law quite hasn't caught up yet, but I'm

037I'm I I just this week had somebody fly past me on a bike going extremely fast on a sidewalk about knocked somebody over on a sidewalk. Had no helmet and had I not seen him in time, I would have crack I would have hit him. And if I would have hit him with no helmet, >> I don't know that that person would survive. I mean, it's just it's becoming a such a huge um problem. So, I don't know if that's within our authority to say, "Hey, if you want to ride your scooter, your ebike, or whatever you want to ride um to school, we want you to wear a helmet." >> So, with respect to before they get to our campus, obviously, we can't regulate their conduct, right? I think we can say the expectation

038is you're going to wear a helmet while you're on campus utilizing it, but I think is our language is if I remember correctly that they're not writing it once they get to campus. >> Correct. >> They're they're getting they're getting off when they get on campus. >> Okay. >> I thought I would ask because I just really want these young people to wear a helmet. I just really really want them to wear a helmet. >> Oh, yes. >> Thank you. Thank you, member Malo. Um, well, we're still talking about the student code of conduct which includes microobility. So, if there's anything here, if not others, we'll wrap it up and move it to the use of electronic resources. >> Um, one of the I have a comment actually about this. I I don't think right

039now the code of conduct is the best place to use it because I think we need to be talking about the micromobility policy on its own and I know that's kind of a separate thing and we're waiting for some state guidance on it. Um I did unfortunately have a student pass away. >> Yes. >> Uh over the weekend due to getting hit in a micromobility uh device. When you get hit and you're going at 40 mph with no protection, it is a very dangerous thing. This is the second student in district 2 this year that has died because of micromobility devices. Um, so I I brought this up many times to the board. I'm very very concerned. I'm doing everything I can in my district. I'm going to have a town hall meeting with Commissioner

040Keane. I'm going to bring OPD. I'm going to try everything I can to get uh parents to understand that. At the same time, I've talked to principles and principles say it is really hard to enforce this. It is really hard to have enough staff out there at the beginning of the school day or after school day saying get off your ebike, get off your scooter, put on a helmet. There just is not enough staff to enforce that. And the educational component is just not enough. And so I I I think they're incredibly dangerous. I hate getting the calls where a student gets hit or is really critically hurt going to school or from school um when I know that I can just honest I personally want to just ban these things from our campus. Um

041they can do use it outside of school. I don't care. But much larger conversation. I'm going to continue to bring it up in the context of whatever we decide there. Uh but it is very fresh in my mind. Um it these things are incredibly dangerous. Um, and so I a little sick of getting those calls and this year has been particularly rough in my district. So, member Font, thank you. I am trying to find in um the code where we have this listed, but um I know last time we were discussing um when something occurs in a classroom or in a lunchroom and then students are pulled in to give a a report, give share their um firsthand account of what happened. And we had discussed whether we wanted to make it mandatory for principles

042to be to contact the parent prior to speaking with that that child and getting their why am I like forgetting the the name of this. You guys know what I'm talking about. >> Witness statement. My goodness. I don't know why that was like just not coming to my mouth. Um, so the witness statement, I spoke with um the the principal team, Okasa, and then one of the principles in my area, and he really just made it very clear that if we were to create that, um, it really, if we put that into the code, which we would basically be tying their hands, it prolongs the process. It creates uh more issues than benefits. And while I am I fully support engaging parents and making sure that they're aware, there are many instances where my own

043kids have been given a witness statement because they saw something and maybe it was just something simple, but it's not like I I think for me instead of putting it in the code of conduct, I think again that's something that we need to talk with the superintendent, have her team really make sure that parent, excuse me, principles are um their them and then their team whether it's the dean or whoever are very well trained um when I do hear complaints with witness statements it's from parents who feel like their child was interrogated and their child was brought into a room the door shut and they felt intimidated that's where I think that's really more of a training not necessarily saying the parent needs to be there and and a part of the process. Does that

044make sense? Um, you know, as a parent, I want to be I want to be informed. So, I think letting parents know, hey, your child gave a witness statement, this is what it was, and letting them know. Um, but I think just informing, you know, having the superintendent and her staff really train the school teams where they bring the kids in and like, "Hey, buddy, like, you're not in trouble. We just need to know like were you there? Did you see anything happen? Um, and so within the code, hopefully I didn't just ramble all of that. And does that make sense? Do we Can you show me where in the code it >> It's page nine. >> Yeah, it's um first on page three at the first bullet point. Um it gives the parents the

045option um option to opt out of the discipline investigation and then it explained in more detail on page nine >> if I >> and was is this new? No, >> if I can just >> I'm sorry. If I can just add. So, what we were proposing to add is for students grades K through two that administrators make every attempt to notify parents. We hear a lot from K through2 parents that they would like to know when their kid is going to write a statement. So that's why we're adding K through two. Um so they can attempt to notify the parent before the kids are writing a statement. Okay. So right now the way it is written it wouldn't cause like a pause where they couldn't in in um do any kind of witness statement until

046they get >> No. the way the way that it's written currently, they would try to call leave a message. Um, but they still would move forward with the investigation. >> Perfect. Okay. So, I think that's the part I just want to make sure that we're not um tying a principal's hands and making them all of a sudden not be able to uh move forward. When it is a K2, you know, a kindergartener, I'm assuming, is not going to be writing the witness statement. So is it more like they're listening and then um you know whoever it is the dean or so whatever they're listening and then they take notes and say I'm you know speaking with the child this is what they say they saw or >> Yes. So they usually write on the witness

047statement transcribed by the dean. So the dean will listen to what the student is saying write it down and say that this was transcribed by the dean. >> Perfect. Perfect. Thank you. So, I just want to definitely make sure that we are um you know revisiting. I know some of those um positions change um from time to time like new people coming in. So just making sure that yearly they are being reminded to have um to not make it an interrogation room um but really it's just a welcome space that it's like you're going and talking with dad or you know what I mean like just more of a family friendly instead of kids feeling like they were interrogated. >> Yeah. Every year um the entire team principles APS deans um get training during the

048summer and we also provide additional training throughout the year. So, we'll make sure we add that to the both trainings. Yes. Reinforce it. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you, Member Font. Uh, member Vanos. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, just keeping with this same um line, I'm I'm fine with the the new language that's in there. Um, I also found it helpful to meet with um principles um and hearing how they how kind of um investigations and this sort of thing actually happen. Um, I I would one one change that I have is is rather than requiring the written note, I think it would be more helpful to parents if it's an opt out that they can just sign it at the beginning of the year. Um, because they may not know that

049they can even really do this unless they're reading the code of student conduct carefully, which I don't think most parents probably do. Um but if it was just added to that opt out that they could if they don't want their child to participate they can just simply opt out there. Um and then uh so that's just one idea to just make parents more aware of their ability to do that. And then the second piece on micromobility um again may not be the right forum to have this conversation but I I agree with member Salamanca. I I I am open to I mean our students are dying. we we can do something about it and I think we should. Um I I I would you know whether we look at a temporary ban while we figure

050this out, whether it's maybe just for elementary and middle school. Um I am open to that conversation and I think we should have it and I think we should have it soon >> for the school year >> be definitely before the new school year starts. Um yeah, so I just wanted to voice my support for um continuing that conversation. Thank you. >> Thank you, member. >> Just for point of clarification, so this is new language if it is the board's pleasure for us to remove this language cuz the first line does says OCPS permits students to park. If you guys do not want them on campus, this language can be removed because this is completely new language. It's not currently in >> I know the timing is tricky because the code of conduct for the

051upcoming year is the one we're discussing right now but also the microobility conversations ongoing at the state. So I think Mr. Pomearin is there any advice you have for us for us to address this conversation without holding up the code of conduct? >> So I want to make sure there's another policy that addresses student parking on campus that says that they are allowed to park scooters and other types of stuff on C. So, I don't want us to, you know, pass anything here that would conflict with that other policy. Right now, we are not in conflict with that policy. Um, if you all want to guess we can, we don't have language with regard to getting dismounting and walking it. Um, currently in the policy that I remember, the other policy, the student parking policy.

052So, I would recommend this staying in here for now. And if we need to come back and address our underlying student parking on campus policy, we can do that later. I want to make sure and not do it right here in in this room where I'm rushing an analysis that we're good to go. So, I my recommendation keep this as is and then if there's any issue that needs to come back to this board, we'll bring it back. >> Yeah, that makes sense. member bonus >> and how and can you how would that come back? >> I could what what I'll do is I'll identify hey I think there is this issue or this conflict between um what we have in the code versus what we have in the parking policy. I don't remember there

053being a conflict. I looked at this but admittedly it's been a while ago. So if I go review it I'll look and say hey I've identified this issue this issue and I think we need to have a work session on it. Okay, that makes sense. Thank you. I have a clarification on that later, but uh Andrew G member G. Um thank you. Um moving back to um parental notification when we do witness statements. I know we had discussed um possibly like highlighting like maybe putting in bold that they can refuse to do so. They don't have to fill out a witness statement or even possibly on the witness statement putting in I like a little box that says I want you to contact my parent. Are we Is that something we're still thinking of doing?

054>> Um that is correct. Yes. And it um so that page three I believe is usually like our highlights of what's the big issues in the code. So it wouldn't require parents to like deep dive in the code. Um but we could make that second sentence folded if that's your will. >> Okay. Thank you. That's all I had. Just >> and then we can add it also to the witness statement. Call my parent. >> Thank you. Thank you. Member Douglas. I I like that idea of um the box and to check it in and or out. And I also wanted to um to see if we could insert a letter uh for to to have the parents being able to opt out if they don't want their kids to be if they don't sign that

055letter. That's mean we can actually, you know, go ahead and um question the kids without the parents. if they want um you know just have it when we give the the code of conduct to the parents with a letter included in there to say if they want to opt out of not having they can sign the letter and we can put this side and we know that we cannot interrogate this kid without the parents. So we don't have to call or anything. We already have the letters that saying that we should or we could or we could not do it. Um we actually stopped printing the code for parents years ago. Um currently I think >> I mean we can write it also electronically a letter where they can you know sign electronically saying I

056do not want you to you know for my kids to be interrogated without my consent and if they don't sign the letter then you know we can we can question the kids. We have documentation that the the parent did not sign the letter. So we can interrogate the kids without any problems. >> We have documentation. >> Yes, we can create a letter for parents to um opt out. Yeah. >> Um but as member said earlier, the investigation would still continue. We >> in most cases we will be unable to wait for that parent if that parent is saying hey I I want to come in and but I can't do it for a week the investigation will continue. >> Yes. Yes. But in the meantime we have documentation that the parents opted out. So >>

057yes we can do the work. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> U member Bird. >> Thank you. And um I'm sorry to um continue the discussion, but um I I too met with Okasa. I understand their concerns. My concern with this is always since I the first day on this board with this section has always been my concern for who's watching out for students that could possibly criminally um criminally uh incriminate. >> Thank you. incrimidate themsel with their statement. Um, and like I've said before, every adult knows, you don't talk to someone about something that you personally may be being accused of without a lawyer present. But then we allow these kids who are 14, 15 years old to go into a room and give statements about something they're being accused of without a

058parent or without an adult. And I understand the law says in loco parentus that that's our job to stand in for a parent. But um at that point my concern is who is the par who is the administrator is the administrator really standing in for the child for the parent for the child when they are investigating a crime possibly that took place in their school. And what I heard from the principal when we met with Okasa was there's so many investigations every day and you know things like vaping and you know uh maybe people a student that said something in a classroom that um that could be considered you know like sexual harassment or you know things that are not criminal. Okay. And those I do not have a problem like pull kids in, get

059witness statements like do those investigations. My concern is when it is a something that could be criminally >> um significant, I would want my child sitting in a room without me making statements. Um just because they're kids and they don't, you know, they could easily say something and then the adult writes it down and then it could be used in a court of law. Am I correct from the lawyers at the table? I don't know, but that's what I'm thinking. Um so that's where my concern from this is always taken. So, I don't know if um anyone else shares that view, but this is where my problem with this section of the code has always been. And maybe what it is is um maybe as you guys say, if it's more apparent in the beginning

060of the year, um and I'm thinking when parents do the um checklists at the beginning, the check boxes on Skyward, including like library checkout, all those things you have to do, why can't we have this be one of them? Do I want, you know, permission to for photos, all those things. Do I want my child to be questioned or investigated for um an activity with without me? Yes or no? That kind of thing. I mean, granted, it will make probably a lot more parents say, "No, call me first um or I want to be there." But maybe we could even preface it by um law enforcement activity. I don't know. And and John, I don't know even if when or Demetri when when it is something that's criminal, is it a school administrator that's doing

061that question or is it it's law enforcement that's doing it? >> I was going to say that. So if it's something that is rising to a level of a criminal investigation, um law enforcement takes over, school steps out. Sometimes they do sit in so that you know somebody could be there with the student that's familiar with the student but it's completely law enforcement's investigation at that point. >> Okay. So and a law enforcement would obviously I would assume say >> so yeah law enforcement would say if they are a suspect in a crime they then have to mirandize the student. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you can't say can and will be used against you. So if they are a suspect in a crime, >> okay, >> police have to say that.

062If police don't say that and the student incriminates themselves, then that confession without the Miranda warning is going to be tossed out because it would be a violation of their due process. >> And in those instances, we do have policies in place where we ask law enforcement if the parent could be contacted. If they depending on what they say yes or no, we will contact the parent. And if they tell us no, then we contact the parent afterwards and say, "Your student was questioned by law enforcement. Here's the person you need to contact." >> Okay. Thank you. Um that does make me feel better. What about um like Title N investigations? Those are also parents are also contacted for those. Correct. When those investigations because those are long drawn out processes. So >> yes, parents

063of both the victim and the alleged offender are contacted >> are usually brought in to the school and yeah. Okay. Um okay, that makes me feel better. Thank you. It relieves my heartburn on this one. >> Thank you, Mard. Um I'm up next. Um so why is it that we decided K through second, not K through third? Like was there is there a reason for the second cuto off? it that was the feedback that we got from a lot of parents. It was mostly K through two parents that were questioning why. Um, >> Got it. Okay. And then clarific clarification question on the actual statements when we taken from students K through 2. Um, are those like I know some of these things come to us to the board. So I've seen kind of like

064the written thing. Are those written by the students? Is there an adult writing it on behalf of the student? Like how what's the workflow there? >> It varies. It depends on the students level of understanding um and how well they can write. So if that student um is able to articulate and write what they want to say then they'll be allowed to write it. If they are not then the um adult will write it for them and write on the statement that it was transcribed by the adult so that we know it's not it's the student's words but the adult wrote it. >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean if that happened to my kid, I would not be happy. But um I Yeah, I mean I I share the same concern with the board, right? I

065understand high school, understand middle, I understand the administrative burden that we would ever put. I I mean we all get the fast scores on ELA, right? Level three and below. 40%ish of our students are level three or below. I'm doing that math right. I just reversed it. I would not want my student who's a level one or level two on a fast ELA for first, second, and third grade writing a statement or even saying I just I would worry deeply about that student's self-inccrimination or ability to be influenced or did you see this student do that? Isn't that right? Like I I I hate every part about this. I always have specifically for the younger students in particularly. So, um I am with uh member bird. I think when I was talking to folks if

066we could have we have parents opt out of pictures on a checkbox. I don't this feels so much more serious to me than if my kid can be in a picture like disclosure that I would love to have that be an opt out. Um I get why we do it. They're the witness when something bad happens, but they're still very small kids. I mean, they're they're incredibly susceptible and having like any form of due process for them under third grade is just I have a really hard time seeing how there isn't just an imbalance of power no matter what we do in this. And so I would love a more explicit opt out uh that is independent of the code of conduct. So I'm happy with the language. Let's keep it as is. A parent

067can send it, but I would want to have some form of opt out from K through 2. Um because we still I mean even if we won't have a criminal investigation like a level three or a level four doesn't impact an academic record of a student and so even maybe we put it up right like maybe it doesn't happen at a level one or a level two and this was my recommendation when I chatted maybe it is only of my you will not talk to my student or my student will not selfinccriminate at a level four or level three like that is serious it's going to impact them I don't not want to be in the room when they're going to be at risk of that. And so I would be okay with splitting a

068level one, level two versus a level three, level four. I think that's a very different uh impact to a student's outcome. So that would be my recommendation. >> So the concern with the level is that you have to do an investigation in order to determine what level of events it meets. So, you would still need the witness statements first before you determine what level it is. Um, but we could add um the opt out to the um >> but when a teacher writes a level four referral in first grade and then oh writes a thing, it sends it up, someone else decides that it's a level four. >> Correct. >> But you kind of know what you're going to investigate for, right? Like the list of things on level four, they're pretty straightforward. No, >>

069no, not necessarily. >> Like I know there's some that are progressive that's different, >> but there's some things that go straight to a level four that I think are very explicit. If a teacher writes that, that sounds like the accusation of a level four. >> Okay. So teachers just write on the top of the what the alleged accusation is. So provide a description, but the discipline team is the one that actually will code it and see what it code is it is coded as and based and that is based on witness statements because a teacher could think that it's you know level four harassment but then based on the witness statements then it's only a level one harassment for example. >> Yeah, it's a hard one. Um but at the very least I would love

070an opt out for parents. >> Yes. So we can do the um you you just let us know your pleasure. We can create a letter or on that those parental notification forms we can >> the skyward notification form the way we have it for the photographies. >> Okay. >> That would be my preference. Um Martinez Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. I just wanted to um also point out to in addition to just the student code of conduct with regards to the parent opt- out um process, there's also um now new systems in place where we do have parent videos and also parent square messaging that goes out to families um because I know this has been a point of discussion in the past. Um and also uh my second point with regards to the witness

071statements, I just wanted to um share with you that when an investigation is initiated, you know, our expectation is that communication and documentation occur consistently um with a high level of fidelity. So, you know, it's incumbent um upon our teams to make sure that we're actively monitoring these situations to ensure that schoolbased administrators um are informing the appropriate parties um in a timely manner. So that is something that we um will continue to monitor very closely um to ensure that investigations are done accordingly to our expectations. >> Makes sense. Member Fant. >> Thank you. Okay. No, so not to belabor this but um what if we were to move it to like um if a child is is the one being accused? Let's say they're the ones that are the ones that are up for

072the level. Yeah. The investigation. They're the they're the ones that >> they would then need, you know, we would really advocate to get a parent in the room for that witness, but you'd have a day or two maybe, right? I don't know. I know you're maybe this really is um putting more pressure, but as far as witnesses, that's different. And it's not like they're accusing them. You know what I mean? They wouldn't be incriminating themselves. >> It happens. >> Oh, I got you. >> It does happen sometimes where Yeah, it happens. >> Okay. Well, we'll let it go. I think it's I agree that I you know you really want to make sure parents are there and um I feel like as long as the schools are doing a good job of really trying to

073contact parents. Do we have any kind of data showing how many parents don't respond and how many parents do respond to those phone calls or not really? >> No. because it'd be nice to know like I mean maybe we're up here like really arguing this fact and and most parents are responding. So I think just making sure that a parent is notified prior to it happening and giving them a little bit of time uh to respond would be awesome. Um but just wanted to go back to the um I want to make sure that it is in here. I wasn't seeing it. But for Orange County Virtual School, I know we had discussed last time that if a child receives a level four, before we said that they wouldn't be allowed to even attend a

074Orange County virtual. Where in the con code does it say that they would be allowed to now? >> So, um, we took the language out that they would not be able to enroll in Orange County Virtual. Um, it's I pulled it up. It's on page 36 and it's going to be step nine. Um, and so it now reads, "It's important to note once the student is withdrawn from their home school, the only OCPS school the student may attend is the school designated by the area administrator at the DTM." So the team felt that that language would cover um the area administrator um assigning that student to positive um sorry to OCVS. >> Okay. So either one they can just ask the parent what would you prefer and then >> Yes. So, for clarification, um the

075board can let us know if you want options or if you would like the team to determine, I guess, what offenses would go to OCVS versus positive pathways. Can you guys hear me? >> No. >> Okay. So, next year when we have a DTM, air administrators would give the parent an option of OCVS or positive pathways. um when we say um having certain offenses, that is your decision. But if I can just add, I think that would kind of make it um maybe somewhat unfair because as a parent, they may want to know why um do certain this kid well certain offenses have the option because parents do talk and certain offenses they do not have the option. A lot of parents will probably continue to go to positive pathways because some parents don't want

076their kids to be at home. And then the the parents that want OCVS are the ones that's probably trying to go to OCVS. Now, I think it's probably going to be the same. So, I don't know if we want to um say that we want to have certain offenses go um to positive pathways versus certain offenses going to Orange County Virtual. was whatever you guys >> personally I don't I just think it needs to be maybe a team effort where the parent and the I mean I can think of one situation right now in my district where um a you know a student brought on a knife unbeknownst to him and um it was like in a backpack that he had used for hunting. Grabbed the backpack totally didn't realize it was there. gets um

077is basically out of school for a year. I'm sure that family would have preferred Orange County virtual, but because they didn't have the option, now they were kind of put in in a bind. So, not every family wants to send their kid to positive pathways. Um so maybe it is just then so this language will help create like it doesn't put any kind of stipulations but provides the option. >> Correct. Yes. >> I just want to make sure that parents know they have the option. I think that's >> they will know that at the DTM the the area administrator will give them the option. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Thank you member for me remember member Vonos. Thank you. Um, and thank you member front for actually bringing this back up. I I don't think

078it's clear from this that the parent has the option. So I I think we need more clarity because this makes it sound like the area administrator makes the determination and not anyone else. So I think if our intent is that the the parent can make the choice, then I think we need to include that in this language because it it is not clear reading this language that that's that's what's happening. Just my two cents. I also have a question. >> I mean, is that how you're is that how you're reading? >> Question for Paul Marini. Okay. >> So, if the board wants to make clear that the parent has the option to enroll, that's the policy choice. We're gonna have to say once I guess it would be once discipline is complete. We're looking here

079at step seven. The parent may have the parent has the option to enroll in Orange County Virtual School in lie of the PL I'll have to come up with it. But in lie of the placement at positive pathways if that's the board's policy desire we can create a sentence that says that >> which I mean I thought that was our conversation. Maybe I'm misremembering but I thought that was a conversation last time. Mhm. Yeah. So, we can we can clear up the language and just put it in a sentence that that'll take care of it that says the parent will the parent will have the choice to um choose Orange County Virtual School as their alternative placement. >> Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. And I had just one other question. Um going back to

080member Bird's questioning about criminal investigation. If can can a student's statements that they provide to an administrator at a school, can those statements be used against them in a criminal investigation? >> No, they don't. Normally have to write them on there. >> So, I'm sorry. I I don't know if you were looking for direction from Mr. Pomeranian. >> No, no, you're you're a former state attorney. How about that? >> So, we do not use the stu those student statements. Law enforcement has their own statement um that they um would provide to that student to make a statement. So, our specific statements would not be used, but if law enforcement is investigating and that student makes statements, they could use those statements. So, it would not be like we're handing over our witness statements to law

081enforcement. Can the information obtained from a school administrator, staff, teacher, can that information be used? Can that information be given to law enforcement? So maybe so I guess what I'm trying to ask is maybe they're not getting the exact statement that the student made in the school community school but can information that the school um gets from the student from the witness statement or or whatever or from the student themselves can that be used to give to law enforcement? Law enforcement can list um a dean or administrator or whoever took the statement as a witness. The state attorney would then need to provide a subpoena um for that person for them to get that information. >> So the answer is yes. >> Pursuant to a lawful subpoena, yes. If there they don't receive a subpoena,

082it wouldn't just be turned over. >> Okay. So, I think that does add some context to making sure we're protecting our students in the in school as well. Um, just to add to what to what member Bird said because even because I I know the the response to her question was that law enforcement handles criminal investigations, but the reality is what is happening in a school, what a student says, what witnesses say can be used in a in a criminal investigation. So I I I think the point you bring up is very valid and I feel it's something that is concerning to me. Um I think it merits further discussion. Um but I also so one thing and then also want to again um request that we have that opt out form and it sounds

083like there is a consensus for that. So >> yes. Yeah. >> Thank you. So just for clarification, they still would not get the witness statement because they there are hearsay and exceptions that for the witness statement to come in, but if they if the accused student made statements pursuant to a lawful subpoena, that person can be a witness, >> right? So there's information. So I guess yeah, the bottom line is there's information from a school that can be used in a criminal investigation. >> Correct. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, member Vanos. Um, so along those lines, just a point of clarification. So I remember back in the day we did a change to suit of conduct where in every offense that had some Florida code equivalent, we added the term must report to law enforcement.

084And so I'm thinking about threat and intimidation, right? So if I'm a second grader, I am being investigated for threat and intimidation. That's one of those. It's a level four. It must be reported to law enforcement, but who does the investigation? Law enforcement or is do administrators do that? >> So, it's reported to the SRO normally um and then the SRO will give this the school guidance on whether um they feel like it doesn't arise to the level of a criminal offense and then they would turn it over to the school. >> Got it. Then I mean this this is kind of where I was saying that I do think I understand that the teacher writes a thing there's not quite yet a level on it but if a teacher writes the student made a

085threat or a student said this student made a threat we know we're reporting it if we get there right but like I think that's the place where I have issues with the self-inccrimination component like we do know when something has to be reported to the state we're very clear about that I I I feel weird that we must report something to the state aka an SRO, but we're not reporting it to the parent that the students going to be doing some witness statement potentially about themselves or about others. So like that's where it feels weird to me. Um and why I do think that the level levels themselves do matter because some of this stuff is Yeah. I mean, level four, I mean, alcohol threats, threats to the school, drugs, weapons of possession, like some

086of the stuff we're going to report to law enforcement. Law enforcement is actually going to take it from there. Why do we need the student to self-inccriminate? Like, before law enforcement comes, like why do we have to take that statement from the student without the parent? It just feels like a slippery slope to me, especially on level four. And like majority of these are like robbery, sexual battery, sexual harassment, drug distribution, >> hazing, >> like all of these things. I think that I understand that they're not going to get a love full until investigation comes. But seems pretty clear to me if a student has a vape on them, that's probably level four. We know where that's heading. We have to investigate. But I wouldn't want us to be like, let's investigate and then tell

087the parent. So I I don't maybe we don't handle it this year around, but I I do think that there is a real difference between certain levels of discipline and how comfortable I am with us taking self-inccriminating statements or not. Uh it just doesn't feel like we're protecting the students in this case and especially K through third. I I just have a hard problem hard like a hard time thinking a student and an adult in that situation isn't on any equal playing field for a criminal investigation when they have a parent that likely could just tell them just don't say anything and we'll figure it out. So >> Madam Chair, can I say something on that? especially with young students on K through three. Um, in there has to be criminal activity that breaks the

088law. But there also is another thing that has to be demonstrated which is men's rhea or criminal intent. And for students that young, generally the courts will say they don't have the requisite knowledge to have form the requisite criminal intent to be charged with a crime. So even if the act that they did would actually be a crime, law enforcement will generally not prosecute children that young because they don't have the ability to form the requisite criminal intent. >> Right? So a lot of that goes through us, not them ultimately. >> But it's still a level four. Like again, if a kid makes a threat, if a second grader claims another second grader threatened them, it's a level four. you have all these witness statements. It it just I don't know. I I it's I

089have a hard time with this one, but that's own the opt out. I think that's gray. I think in the future if there is some delineation we can make on the level of offenses and how willing we are of part of the process on self-inccrimination of students. Um I think that would be best really. I I I again I know the reading level of these students, their communication level of these students. I just have a hard time that they know half the time what they're saying when they're writing these statements or being asked questions. It's it's they're just kids. So that that's my uh member Galla. Thank you. Um, I want to pivot back to OCVS and positive pathways. I would feel more comfortable if there was something in writing that informed the parents of

090their of of their choice. So, I know that it would be discussed at the DTM and they would offer them the choices between positive pathways and OCVS, but I would personally prefer as a parent for it to be cited somewhere that I could refer back to if that does not happen. So, I would just prefer for transparency and clarity to list the two options that a parent would have for their child if they were to get expelled. That would be my preference because I just >> if it's not written anywhere, how will the parent know? And if you know thing, you know, things happen all the time and I'm just concerned that it might not be communicated to them and then they have no way to go. Wait, you were supposed to give me an

091option. Well, if they're looking for where they were told that they could have an option, there's no paperwork. There's no paper trail that shows that they do have an option. So, I would prefer it be in writing. Thank you. Yes, we're going to add it to um that language in step nine that talks about the alternative school on page 36. >> Thank you, meal. Um a member Felder. And then I think that's it. >> Thank you so much. Uh I just and you probably clarified it because I I thought about it way back and so now I'm coming back. Um, and help me to make sure I understand it uh clearly. Are we saying that if a student commits uh does something that's wrong, they have the option to either go to positive pathways or

092o the uh Orange County virtual? Is that what we're talking about? So if they commit, give me an example. Because if a student commits, does something that's wrong and against the rules, why are they given the option to go to o OCVS and not positive pathways if they have done something that requires that they go there? I maybe I'm missing something. Am I missing something? Okay, for an example, because you all are looking like, what is she talking about? Okay. Uh the kid brings um a weapon to school, maybe a knife or whatever, uh brass knuckles, and the and he they they um uh call him in or call her in and the decision is made to send him to Positive Pathways. And you're saying that the parent has the choice to say, "No, I

093don't want to go to positive path even though he committed the crime and committed the the uh did the thing that was wrong. I want him to go to OC OCPS. Is that what we're saying? Is he not going to still get the the lesson that he needs to get a positive pathway or is he missing his his opportunity for for learning? Why why are we making this decision? Am I missing something? Is that what we're saying? >> That's what we're saying. >> Correct. That that is what the board would like us to do. So instead, so a child that comes to school with a knife or a gun, even if just a knife, >> not a not a firearm, >> not a firearm, but just a knife or brass knuckles. I need to understand

094brass knuckles or knife and he commits hit somebody with it or cut somebody with it or just if he brings it >> only just brings it. If he uses it, then that is a full experience. Yeah, I'm missing something. He doesn't use it. Just brings it. >> Yes. >> Oh, okay. I No, I don't. You know, he should have an option. I think he just brought it cuz I'm just saying little kids. Okay. Children maybe in the um the east part of the the district. They may have a bagel and cream cheese. They have a butter knife and they're eating their their breakfast. My babies, we don't like bagels and cream cheese. Some of us, we might have a sausage biscuit and then a little, you know, from uh McDonald's or whatever and cut it

095and we're five or six or seven. I think that would be a bit much to send them to. But I'm glad say I knew I said I bet I'm missing something. Not using it, just bringing it. Okay. No, I'm in agreement. No, they don't need to. No, let them go to school. Thank you. >> Thank you, member. Yes. I think we wanted to say the FTE dollars should not exit OCPS in that case. Um >> yes, it would be only those offenses that currently the consequence would be positive pathways. >> Correct. Yes. >> Or alternative placement. >> Understood. Um we have no one else. Uh member Mr. Pomearini. >> So I just wanted to actually did a little bit of research while I was sitting up here with respect to interrogation standards. So remember between

096for school officials versus police officials, school officials need reasonable suspicion that some sort of criminal activity has occurred whereas law enforcement needs probable cause to figure out whether some uh criminal activity has occurred. And they have talked about the requirements with respect to school administrators versus police officers. And and the case that I'm looking at is state versus JTD. And in that case, a student received a um made a statement to their assistant principal that there was um that he was in possession of marijuana. And the court said because that school official was acting in their capacity to do a student investigation under the code of conduct that they are acting as a school official, not a law enforcement official, and that no Miranda warnings, for example, are required there. Now, the case also said,

097and this one is going to give some of you pause, but this is what the law says, if our SRO happens to be in there witnessing it, but doesn't say anything, that also doesn't require Miranda warning. But the case says, the mere presence of a law enforcement officer who stands mute is not sufficient to transform a school official's interview into custodial interrogation by law enforcement. Conversely, if the law enforcement officer participates in the interrogation, Miranda warnings would be required. So, our officials, our our principles, assistant principles, our deans, when they're conducting investigations, they do get to collect student statements. We do not have to give Miranda. If law enforcement starts interviewing the students, they do have to give Miranda because it's now transformed into police custodial interrogation. And I understand member Vanos the concern of

098can they eventually subpoena you know records you know witnesses to come testify. Yes they can. But that would occur in a lot of instances for people who witness you know comments or statements made by defendants potentially. So this is not unusual. And I don't know that we have our our school officials getting subpoenaed all that often. But I will I'll look at Mickey and or Miss Joiner and Miss Haynes to confirm that. I don't think our school officials are getting subpoenaed very much to testify in criminal cases. >> Yes. What I've seen is when um like a battery on a school official, so they're the actual victim, then they will be subpoenaed or like a firearm. That's all I've seen since I've been here. I haven't seen anything where they're like a random witness. helpful.

099Okay. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. >> So, I believe that is it for the student code of conduct. Um, I'll turn on to Mr. Martinez for IG and DC. Oh, yes. Very excited for this. Okay. Good afternoon. Thank you once again, Madame Vice Chair. Our district must continuously adapt to a rapidly evolving technological landscape by sustaining secure systems, managing risks, as well as ensuring reliable service delivery. I will now turn it over to Mr. Maurice Dragon to discuss proposed changes to policy JNDC regarding the appropriate use of artificial intelligence and electronic resources. Maurice, >> thank you. Good evening, Deputy Superintendent Martinez, Vice Chair, and members of the school board. Today we will review the draft of the updated appropriate use of electronic resources policy. We made several updates to the beginning of the policy starting

100with updating the title to the appropriate use of electronic resources file name JN DC. In the policy's introduction, we updated the opening statement to read, "The school board of Orange County, Florida board recognizes that artificial intelligence AI has the potential to support the educational system, including operations and learning." Within section B on the human- centric belief, the text was updated to state all highstakes decisions, including but not limited to student placement, grading, disciplinary actions, and personal evaluation, personnel evaluations shall be made by staff. Under the data privacy and cyber security heading, we updated section B to state enterprise tools. Staff shall only use districtv secure AI systems that do not use OCPS data to train public models. The use of open-source or unvetted commercial AI models is explicitly prohibited. The guidelines for staff section of

101the policy was updated as follows. Recently, student town halls focus on AI were held with high school students at in every school board member's district. A dominant theme across all town halls was the perceived unfairness of teachers using AI to grade assignments while students were penalized for using it. Students argue that when teachers use AI to grade essays, they lose the nuance of recognizing individual student growth. Furthermore, students share they believe that AI only generated grade that AI only generated grading lacks the actionable personalized feedback necessary for them to actually improve their writing and work. Students across multiple town halls also expressed deep frustration and anxiety over the use of AI detection software. They noted that these tools frequently generate false positives, flagging their original work as AI simply because a student may be a

102strong writer, uses advanced punctuation like the Oxford comma or includes properly cited quotes such as in AI AP seminar courses. Students strongly feel that receiving an automatic zero based on a flawed software is unjust and requested that teachers be required to use secondary proof such as checking a document's version history or having a direct conversation with the student. Based on the student feedback, we updated the draft language in the guidelines for staff section to read as follows. Professional responsibility. Educators are responsible for verifying the accuracy, objectivity, and appropriateness of their own AI generated content and instructional materials before disseminating it. When utilizing approved AI tools to assist with the evaluation of with the evaluation or grading of student work, educators must critically review the AI generated assessment compared to their own direct review of the

103students work to ensure fairness and the provision of actionable personalized feedback rather than solely replying on the rather than relying solely on the AI output. Educators shall ensure that all AI generated instructional materials align with the state standards and bore policies regarding the selection and evaluation of instructional materials. In section B, student discipline, it now reads, "While AI detection tools may be used as a reference, they shall not be the sole basis for student disciplinary action. Prior to issuing disciplinary consequences or failing grades for unauthorized AIUS, educators shall employ secondary verification methods. These methods may include reviewing document edit history, comparing the submission against baseline writing samples, or conducting a direct conversation with the student to assess their understanding of the submitted content. Instances of student academic dishonesty involving AI shall be addressed in accordance

104with the CTA contract. the co the student code of conduct and board policies. We updated the guidelines for students section to mirror the guidelines for staff, focusing on areas of student responsibility when using AI and and adhering to the district's rules and procedures. In the student town halls, students expressed a need for the district to clearly define the line between acceptable tutoring and unacceptable cheating. Students find AI beneficial for breaking down complex math problems, brainstorming project ideas, organizing citations, or studying for tests. They agree, however, that using AI to write an entire essay, or provide the final answer without understanding the steps is cheating. Students specifically mentioned tools such as Conigo, the AI inside of Khan Academy, which guides them through the steps of a problem rather than just giving them the answer. The responses

105from students reflected a need for policy language to recognize the use of authorized AI for these supplementary tutoring functions so students are not afraid to use district approved study aids. The guideline for students section now states a verification. Students utilizing authorized AI tools shall verify the accuracy of their own gener generate AI generated content and B academic integrity. Students are responsible for adhering to the student code of conduct regarding the ac regarding academic honesty and the use of AI to generate work submitted as their own. The use of authorized AI tools is permissible following the lesson guidelines identified by their teacher, providing the final submitted work represents the students original thought and effort. While the policy prohibits AI chatbots for emotional support, students during the student town hall shed light on why they use it.

106Students may turn to AI because they feel they have no safe, trusted adult on campus or fear that they that that speaking to a mandated reporter like a guidance counselor will result in their parents being called or their p privacy being violated. While they recognize AI is not human and will just tell them what they want to hear, they use it because it is available 24/7 and does not judge them. Students also stated that taking away AI emotional support without providing a better, more trustworthy human alternative will only isolate further vulnerable students. The prohibited uses section was updated as p as follows. The following uses of AI are strictly prohibited. A harassment and impersonation. The use of AI to generate deep fakes, voice cloning, or synthetic media to impersonate, harass, bully, or mislead others. B.

107Copyright infringement. Using AI tools to generate content that infringes on copyright, trademark or intellectual property rights. C. Emotional support. Using AI chatbots to substitute for human companionship or on district approved devices. This includes relying on AI companions that utilize emotional memory to simulate personal relationship as distinct from educa AI educational tutors. Students seeking emotional guidance or coping strategies should be directed to approved supports and trusted adults. District approved tools, if any, may be used under defined safeguards. And finally, the professional learning provision of the AI policy remains unchanged. At this time, I'll turn the presentation back over to the deputy superintendent for comments and questions for the school board. >> Thank you, Maurice. And it was uh really really helpful to have the student town hall meetings across the district. I think um it was

108fascinating to see the same themes come up over and over again in every high school regardless of obviously the students are not communicating with each other. Um so the the themes were were very clear. So, thank you for sending out those notes. Um, member Vanos, >> thank you, Madam Chair. I'm sure we'll go back a few times, so I just want to start off with a couple of questions. Um, starting on page two, um, for the human centric, I mean, I'll start off by saying this. Um, I appreciate that we did the town halls. Um and I my town hall at the in my district um was honestly it was extremely sad um hearing students struggle with these issues in real time. Um many of them feeling like AI um was their only option to

109get support that they needed was sad. Um, and there was a real, at least in mine, a real desire to have more human interaction. I mean, that was really what I took from these was we we don't really want AI. Uh, we we feel forced to use it in some circumstances, but um, you know, many of them said we're we're overwhelmed by screens like it's too much. Um, and I had a administrator sitting next to me who shared that in their high school, one of their um, one of their areas went back to paper and pen for the most part and they've seen their scores increase this year. Um, so I just want to start there. Um, okay. So, um, looking at the piece on the human centric belief, uh, in final approval, you've included

110high stakes decisions. I think um it is also important to include IEPs. I would support including that as um not being allowed to just use AI to complete those forms. Um and also personal things such as student recommendation letters. Um you know teachers a recommendation letter that is generated by AI is meaningless. Um, so I think that is important to include in there as well. >> Okay. The only the other thing I wanted to ask about was um Okay. So is just about the using AI detection for student writing. There was a lot of discussion in my town hall about this. A lot of students feeling um and a lot of students feeling well what is the point of me even writing something if you know if um if a if a teacher is going

111to run it through a well two parts if a teacher is going to run it for AI grading um which is interesting because the day before I spoke to a teacher who said what is the point of me spending my weekends reading student essays when they just use AI to write the essays. So, I think there is on both sides this feeling like, well, why should I put in the effort if you're not putting in the effort? Um, and I'm not sure that the the policy really provides a good answer to that. Um, I I I mean, we'll work through it. I'm I'm curious to see what other people say. I I honestly don't think the policy answers that very well. Um and and let's go to the um the using the the AI detection

112systems. And I I see we've included in here that a teacher cannot rely on, you know, solely on an AI detection to um I guess accuse or accuse the student of using of of improperly using AI. What I see here are then adding more burdens on our teachers. Like I guess I'll just This is the point. I feel like in order to allow our students to use AI, we are creating all of these other administrative and instructional tasks for something that is supposed to make us more efficient. I I think that's just my my bottom line. I appreciate that we are trying to create a policy. I appreciate that we recognize that people are using AI. I don't think AI is all bad. I I really don't. I think there can can be really great

113uses for it. I don't think a great use is in the K12 education system for the most part. It's not to say if if you know someone in the um business world or or someone for workforce training, you know, has an idea of how we can incorporate AI into schools, I welcome them. I welcome their resources. I welcome their financial resources to come have an afterchool program. Like let's, you know, show us how you're using AI in your industry. Like I get that. Like I welcome that. I think there are some good uses for it. I just I mean I can go sentence by sentence, but I I feel like we are taking something that is supposed to be making us more efficient and actually making us all less efficient. So I I'm I'm going

114to let my other members continue while I gather my thoughts on specific questions. But I I I think there are better uses of our time that actually have to do with core education and foundational education pieces for our students than trying to manage something that I think we are going to find is impossible to control. Thank you >> Dowo. Thank you. Um, so you know, AI is is a tricky uh discussion. I I do believe that we have to have guardrails in place or a policy in place that kind of dictates where we go. I really appreciated the um the student town halls. I thought that especially the one I went to, the kids were awesome at Timber Creek and they were very thoughtful and had a lot of ideas and a lot of information

115and clearly very familiar with the uses of AI. >> So I I don't have a problem with AI as long as it's being used as a production tool. I think that's the appropriate use of AI. If it can make and take burdens off the plates of our staff members, our teachers, our pair of professionals, I think that's appropriate use. So, I I disagree with member Vandos a little bit about the IEPs. I think that's an example, a perfect example of how AI can really streamline the process and make the job more efficient for our staffing coordinators or our teachers, but there has to be a personal touch to it. So, it's like when you use AI to generate the IEP, you still have to review it, go over it, and and confirm that the output

116is correct, right? because the outputs are really based on the inputs and the prompts. So it you have to still review it to make sure that it's it's accurate. Um and so I I I think it's okay in uses like that for for AI. When it comes to kids or grading, >> I'm less likely to support using AI as a grading tool only because I feel like that you may miss something in translation when AI is grading your products. you're not getting a sense of of a children a student's writing skill of where they may need improvement or where they're um needing more information. I just think that that and I get that teachers are frustrated because kids are using AI, but if you're reading the essays from students, you can tell a student's pattern

117of writing. Like there's a distinct pattern to students writing, like there's a distinct pattern to adults writing. And if you're grading those essays on your own, you're going to very quickly understand the pattern of that writing from that student. So if that student writes something and then switch to AI, it's going to be extremely obvious, I believe, to the teacher that this isn't the normal writing. And it's not because of the Oxford commas, which by the way I use. I love the Oxford comma. Um, it's just it's it's the tone of the essay. It's the the verbiage, the words that they use. AI tends to be a little bit more succinct and a little bit more elevated um that kids may not be used to. So, I think as long as you're grading it, I

118think you can tell if you know your students, it gets a little tricky. I know in in the secondary level when you when you're trying to grade so many papers. Um but I would I would be less likely to um really want that to be the norm when we're when we're grading work. I also think that AI literacy is important. I think what we know today is that students need to be AI literate as they move into the workforce. I think that the skilled workforce is demanding it and they have to know what that AI literacy looks like. And so I'm all for teaching about AI literacy to our students. Um and I think AI literacy is a different bucket than 1:1 digital devices because I think everybody knows how I feel about digital devices

119in K through 8. And so I just want to make that that distinction that it's two different buckets. You can be AI literate and still not be on a computer all the time. And I think that that's a distinction that we must make and we do need to educate our students on AI literacy. Moving on with regards to um using it as a um emotional support. I I want to be cautious here and I get that we shouldn't be you that AI is a bot, right? And it does tell you what you want to hear. I mean, I've put stuff into um AI before and it tells me how smart I am. I'm like, you don't know if I'm smart enough. I could be dumb as a box of rocks and I just gave you

120a good prompt. like you don't know. Um, so I I understand that we have to be careful with that, but I do not I want to cautious us caution us on putting how do I want to say this? I about us reprimanding a child who may use AI as a form of emotional support. like if they're asking them questions, if they're struggling with their identity, especially with the laws that we have place in in Florida where if you go to talk to a person, they have to notify their parents and there may be something that they don't want their parents to know. Um, and it could be a slew of reasons. It could be they're struggling with their sexual identity. It could be that they're pregnant. It could be that they're abused. It could be

121a lot of things. And so I just I'm I'm do not want us to reprimand a child who's struggling and the only place they really felt comfortable going was to AI chat bots. What I would prefer us to do is I know that we have Gaggle. I know that we have other instances and I guess my question is it would Gaggle or one of the programs that we have. Would it pick up if a child is speaking to an AI chatbot on our computer? Would it pick it up and notify some someone that this student is struggling and that this student really needs to talk to a social worker or a licensed mental health counselor? Like I would prefer that the AI gets flagged and then someone approaches the student to talk to them versus

122us reprimanding the child for looking for some sort of answers or what could you know what to do. And I and I say that because they're going to use it and I I don't want them I want them to be supported if it's if if they're really in crisis. And I can think of many many many things with the laws in Florida um where a child might feel like they're in crisis and they're too scared to turn to their parents. They don't want to turn to an adult because it may be automatically reported and then they just suffer in silence. Like and I'm not saying that the chat box is a good thing. I'm just saying if we have it monitored, I would prefer us monitoring it so that we could get those children the

123help they need before reprimanding them. So that's that's just my thoughts there because I know that kids are going through a lot with mental health. Um we're doing a lot of changes with our safe coordinators. Um so there's going to be some influx of really kind of figuring out who that first line of response for that student will be at the school. And um I just don't want to see a kid in crisis get in in trouble because we created a policy that says absolutely prohibited any type of emotional support. >> That's that's my two cents. And so maybe my question is does do we have a program that monitors the um chats and could we utilize that program to get the students help if they're truly in crisis? So specific to the question around

124Gaggle, we do have Gaggle on middle and high school laptops and Gaggle does monitor internet usage which would include any access to a a chatbot. If there is um input that takes place that is of concern that is flagged by Gaggle, then we already have established procedures where that input would be reviewed. it would be sent to the school for review and because the school already has established procedures around it. It is not something where the student is automatically in trouble because something is flagged by Gaggle. It is something where often times there's a discussion by the relevant uh school staff members with that child to understand what was flagged before any additional steps are taken. So that would take place if there was a tool that was being used um on on the computer.

125>> Okay. Thank you for that. That was my that was my biggest concern is I just really want to make sure that we have the supports needed for our students. Thank you. >> Thank you, member Gallo. Um I queued up next. Um I also really appreciated u the town hall meetings. I I knew that AI was going to complicate things in education. I think I underestimated by how much. Uh it truly is way worse um I think that any individual stakeholder understands. Um the policy itself, right? Like this is not a binary thing, right? This school board is not saying you're allowed to use AI, you're not allowed to use AI for our students. That's not what we're discussing here because member Vos kind of said, I wish we just didn't have AI. That's not

126even a choice we have as a school board. And we heard this over and over again from our students. Our students are not asking permission to cheat. What they are asking for is coherence. They said depending on which classroom I go into, what grade I go into, what teacher I go into, my teachers, some of them absolutely say use AI and some of them absolutely say no. So we as a school board don't have that question of use AI or don't use AI. Our teachers have that question and they are making that decision every single day in their classrooms and we got it from students I think and and I went through the notes of every single high school. I mean there was trends where the AP and IB and ACE and dual enrollment courses

127actually had stricter prohibitions on AI. Somewhere they had less um strict guidelines on AI. there were some standard and honors courses that were more permissive and the teachers encouraged the use some that they didn't. And so a lot of the students consistently said, "Well, my math classes sometimes allow AI and and I like that a tutors might checker um the LA classes will be like this is absolutely cheating. My social studies and science falls somewhere in between." But they're literally just saying depending on the teacher, it's completely varied. They're saying I can be in the same in the same grade as someone else, taking the same class as someone else, but I have a different teacher and the AI policy is completely different. That is a huge issue because and and so based on our

128policy, sometimes you have discipline because you have AIU, sometimes you don't. And the other thing we saw is that some classrooms where teachers are saying you absolutely don't use AI, you're not allowed to as a student, the teachers are using AI. So like I think I pulled like the word map of what were the words that came up most consistently across from our students and it was hypocritical. It was confusing. It was disrespectful. it was unprofessional of how they were seeing the adults in the room and treating this technology and the power and balance between them. Of course, students the job of the education system for them to learn. So, I'm not saying students and teachers should have the same AI usage. Absolutely not. Like there is so much work that our teachers can save

129time from using AI tools, but it's the inconsistency that is really eroding the trust that our students have. And I think my biggest concern is these students right now are feeling that the they're feeling the adults in the room are hypocritical and inconsistent. And I assure you that when these students are a little bit older and they have their own kids, they're not going to have a positive association with public schools and how they right now they feel as high school students and how they're being treated because they really don't. There was I mean there was this one quote of saying I have a bunch of quotes here. If you're going to use AI to grade my stuff, why shouldn't I use AI? I don't think teachers should use AI to grade work because how

130are you going to expect me to do work that you're just using AI to create and to grade? It's hypocritical that teachers will fail you for an assignment where they they themselves use AI to create and grade the exact assignment and they have no idea how. Right? There was one where it was like, "Teachers will send me to watch videos teaching me the thing that they're supposed to teach me. Why would I go watch that video instead of just going to AI that can teach it to me better?" I mean, these are all very fair points by our students. And so, one of the biggest issues we have is is inconsistency in what our teacher policy is. I don't see anywhere in this policy even our ability to do anything about that. Uh, I think

131I saw page four, what is it? instances of student academic dishonesty involving AISH will be addressed with the CTA contract. I mean, is there anything that we can do in policy that creates more coherence around AI policy in the classroom? >> So, you can develop policy to the extent it does not conflict with the express requirements of the CTA contract. under the CTA contract and your policies. If there's a conflict between the CTA contract and your policies, CTA contract will control. >> We can't tell our teachers what to teach or how to teach as long as they're following standards. Correct. >> They get the ability to implement their teaching style within the classroom. Um, as long as they are teaching the curriculum that we that has been mandated by the state. Yes. >> With or

132without AI. >> Yeah. If they don't want to use AI, they don't have to. And if they want to use AI, it will have to be done in accordance with both CTA contract and to the extent that there are any additions made by policy in accordance with the policy. >> Yeah. Well, there it is. So, we can't get AI out of Orange County Public Schools without tackling that issue. So, that's just not the question at hand. the question at hand is a lot more about what is the discipline to both either staff or guidelines to staff or to students that that's kind of what we have to work with. Um so a couple of questions uh Maurice on page four when we say the AI output in part A is this where we're talking about

133detection tools without calling it detection tools guidelines to staff a professional responsibility. Okay. >> So I think or is that B? Sorry. Is that Well, AI detection tools may be used. >> They can be used as a sole purpose. Okay. >> Yes. In that in that section where it talks about and I just want to make sure I'm reading the the right place where you're saying the AI output. Oh, sorry. Yes. um that is also speaking on the on any tool that may be used >> for grading or >> for grading. >> Okay. So, just so I get this right. So, in the guideline guidelines for staff, A says you can't just grade a student based on what the AI told you the greatest, right? So, if I put in a student paper, the AI

134says this is a B, I can't just give him that B. I have to use something else. >> Mhm. >> Okay. And then for B, I cannot give a student a zero just because some AI detection tool told me that it had used AI. Right? So those are okay. So then my question becomes are these guidelines or are there professional consequences if a if a staff doesn't follow these guidelines? I do believe we had a discussion before around what would happen if something was written in in policy and a staff member did not um was found to not not follow and there was a discussion. And I believe the the superintendent mentioned that there would be a there would be a gradual rise where there would be first a discussion with the staff member in

135line with what is written inside of policy >> before there were any additional steps that were taken but that those things would are not outlined here. It was more about the steps that would be established between the administrator and the teacher as far as >> Yeah. So, I mean >> that conversation. >> So, these are guidelines, suggestions of what we expect professional conduct to look like. >> I think when we last talked about this, this was before the town hall meetings. The superintendent say, of course, if a student or parent believes they got an A F because of AI detection tool or it was used for the assignment, you know, we can look into it, but this is not I almost remember explicitly verbatim the superintendent saying this is not happening like it's not being

136reported. It was super clear in the town hall meetings that it is absolutely happening both A and B like I think it was across every single town hall meeting students said AI detection tools are being used and our teachers are using AI to create and grade assignments there was I don't I didn't have any question it was kind of like an unspoken assumption rule every student had it so there is a huge disconnect between our guidelines and suggestions of what we believe our staff and professional staff should be doing or not doing and our ability to enforce anything. I I my issue with the policy is it sounds great on paper and I'm not seeing it happen and I don't know that we have any form of enforcing these suggestions. And so I don't I

137can agree with this policy. It sounds great. I believe in it. I don't know that I have any real sense or belief that this is going to be enforced in any real way. So, I'll just put that there. I don't know. Um, let's see what was the other question I had. So, number on and page five, academic integrity. So, students are responsible for adhering to the student code of conduct regarding academic honesty and the use of AI. Okay. the US uh the use of authorized AI tools is permissible. That's authorized by US a district. Correct? >> Yes. >> Um provided that the final submitted work represents the students original thought for work. Okay. When it says guidelines identified by the teacher following the lesson guidelines identified by the teacher, is that a teacher is expected

138to provide upfront clarity that a student can or cannot use AI? That's the intent there that on the lesson at the lesson level that a teacher would have the ability to say you cannot use AI with this lesson or you can use AI with this lesson and that it doesn't necessarily have to be a blanket you can't use AI in my classroom. >> Yeah, >> if they want to do it at the lesson level. There are some lessons that it's appropriate to say that the and it's something teachers already do where they will define at the lesson level what tools can be used by students. >> Got it. So we Okay. I I mean for that I think right now we know every teacher has a different policy on AI and use of AI not

139just for the students but for themselves. Mhm. >> I just worry that as long as things are clearly defined, right? Like I remember in college you started class, there was a syllabus at the beginning of class. These are the books that we're going to read. This is the things you're allowed to do. This is the way test go or don't go. Yes or no go. >> And then you kind of knew the rules of interacting with the class for the rest of the year. Are teachers being clear up front? Hey, in this class we allow AI. Are they doing it assignment by assignment? Are they doing it after the fact where it's like, "Hey, everyone submitted their assignments." It's like, "Actually, you weren't allowed to use AI in that, so now you get a Z."

140Like, what is happening in in the classroom when it comes to identified by the teacher guidelines? >> Like, do we as a district know what guidelines each teacher has for AI? Like, are we collecting and we know? The current feedback is that it is incredibly varied across every single with the within the students that we spoke to. It is clear that the current guidelines are varied. And so in the in the conversation with the students, what was shared is that part of the goal of of establishing this policy is providing at least a baseline that then we can have those conversations as a district when we start going into the actual procedures. at the schools around from this baseline how is it being applied and being built inside inside of every school and by every

141teacher but right now we don't even have the baseline of saying whether or not >> in general you know establishing anything around AI so it is really up to each individual teacher to establish that baseline on their own >> can we as a district collect what is each teacher's policy policy on AI. Are you going to be using AI in the classroom or not allowing it? And at least we know and like is that like I I I don't even know that we should have we have any visibility on how widespread the use of AI is with our students that is actually allowed by our teachers versus not. I think it's hard for a student to go from one classroom where AI is encouraged in a good way or a bad way and then go

142into one where it's like hey suddenly the pseudo conduct is looking at you in the eye and then you having any respect at all for the coherence of the institution and so and I think that's what our students are telling us and so I don't know if there's a way we can at the very least create a guideline suggestion that a teacher at the beginning of the year is very clear if you can or cannot use AI and we ourselves take that into account when we do disciplinary action over students. Um, I just think our our our students are asking for guidance. They're not asking to cheat. And let me let me I'm not saying students don't cheat. I think students will always cheat when given the tools to cheat if they can. Like there

143is a group of students that if they will they will find a way to cheat no matter what. And they were very clear about that in the town hall meeting. said, "I would love to use the district's AI tools, but if it's 2:00 a.m. and I have five homework left, I will go to CHP." So, they're not lying about that. So, like that that's clear, right? So, but I also I just think that they need support. Like the second biggest thing that I really heard is our students are going to AI to fill really important gaps for themselves. So, number one gap, tutoring gaps, right? they don't understand something or class time wasn't enough or the way the teacher explained it was not the way that they learned it right everybody learns differently so they're

144like I go to fill in my gaps on tutoring call it I heard the mental health gap which is obviously aside from my counselors have a massive load I mean we don't have safe coordinators anymore not to mention all the students seem to be incredibly aware of the mandated reporter requirement so they're kind of like I don't have adults in my life that I can talk to or trust to for this stuff. So I have to go to AI for this. That's an awful second order effect of policies that have happened in the state of funding that we have going on. So like I I understand students being frustrated with us just coming out right being like AI is cheating and you shouldn't use AI and they're looking at adults everywhere either use AI not

145follow these rules. I mean it's I I too would really lose a lot of faith in the system if that's how it was treated. So the policy uh itself that you put together Maurice is a lot better than what I think addresses a lot of the issues we had talked about. Um and again my biggest thing is we have prohibitions and very clear code of conduct guidelines on our students and then for our staff everything is a suggested guideline. So it is what it is. I mean that's what we work with. So, thank you, uh, member Felder. >> Thank you, Chair. A lot of what, um, you said and other board members, I have some of the same concerns. First of all, thank you Maurice again for uh the presentation and I was just so

146proud of the presentation at uh the school that I chose to do the AI discussion and the questions that you set up was so appropo to what the students would be thinking. You just I mean you just strategically did that in such a way that would engage them in truthful conversation as member Salamancco was saying that she picked up from the students at the town meeting that she attended. Um and uh something she said are uh I just want to make sure are we saying that if we put AI in this policy um to determine what grade it is if the teacher doesn't follow it would that be something that they would be going against the policy but this is one of the things I mentioned um you all said also someone said is AI

147really making us really efficient that is a question I was that uh brunch on Sunday and I talked to some people who were just talking and Switzerland was the first one the schools to deal with this whole computer AI they're now going back they're taking the computers the the phones the watches from the students and they're going back to uh paper pen and pencil to write to understand and I know that's difficult for us to try to do that now because we're just now trying to, you know, get with AI. Uh Switzerland has the number one, uh school, uh district in the the world. I mean, they really are very advanced. So, uh one of the things that I think uh because, you know, I've always not been a trooper of AI. I told y'all

148that early on in the beginning, but this is one of the concerns that I have if we use it because it can be useful. Uh I think in terms of as a teacher like right now they're at the stretch. They they they they winding down. They they had to stretch right now and parents and and students especially seniors are coming up with I didn't do this assignment. I need to graduate and they got to do all that because they want to make sure that they are accommodating to to their students. So my concern is that we need if we are using AI, AI has to be filtered through the rules that we create. So that will kill the whole idea that it's not AI or it's not us. We the the thing has to take

149what we put in there. the it has to be filtered through the rules we create and when we create the rules then uh the users that that reinforces exactly what the teacher is teaching now that takes time and that takes expertise and that takes help for us those of us who are computer literate and AI literate to help teachers that's how it's going to work because in all honesty as board member Solomon said they were honest and say look I got five papers to do and it's 12:00 at night I'm going to check B what is it check >> GBT >> GPT and if I got papers to grade and I've already understood I kind of this is April this is May I know how Johnny B writes because I've discovered it by October I

150know it's pattern of writing so I'm I you know look I got all these papers I need to do this I need to do that but I am concerned and um and you some of You mentioned it this whole mental capacity that AI feels in for our students. We had a situation where student committed suicide listening to AI. I I we have to find a way as a board uh to put in policy how we deal with that because our our children they are needing help. They're needing to have a voice that's real and not something that was generated by a smart mind. They they need to have real uh communication. And it's hard because budget cuts and we can't get the kind of uh mental support that we are hoping to get because we

151have to be able to pay people to do those things. So um we talk about uh you know personal uh relations with the students if you use a how how are we going to do that? Um and again I'm a teacher and it's important to me that we establish or create in in students cognitive learning. They have to be able to look at something and be able to think through how to do it. I don't want a computer to do it for them. But if we're not, again, if we're not putting in place, filtered through the rules that we put in there, that's what's going to happen. So by the time we become old and and not being bothered, the world is going to be run by computerenerated things and that's not going to be

152good. Not in my opinion. It's not going to be good at all. So um I think again in closing uh Maurice and board as we gently and gingerely work through this use of AI we have got to not rush it. I don't care what anybody else is doing in the rest of the world, rest of the country because we have all stated in other in in so many words. We want the genuiness of learning to remain with our students. The genuiness of teaching to remain with our students with our teachers so that we're going to this cannot be a rushed endeavor. It is a creative endeavor but it cannot be rushed and if it is we will find ourselves right back at this board at this discussion. So again uh in closing there are some

153positive things with AI but I will rest on this hill. AI has to be filtered through the rules we create and create the rules that AI uses to reinforce exactly exactly what the teacher is teaching. Thank you. >> Thank you member for member for >> Thank you. riveting discussion on AI. Um it's um I I agree that I think the town halls were very eye openening. >> I think it's a lot of things that I mean if you have kids that are teenagers right now, it's a lot of things you hear them say at home. Uh I know for my own kids, they would feel frustrated that they sat in class all day and didn't really understand what was the assignment or didn't feel like the teacher explained it well. Um, and then the teacher

154would give them a video and say, "Go watch this at home." And they're thinking, "Well, why didn't you just explain it in class?" Like, "That's what you're there for. We want a human." And really, this generation, I think, really is looking for real. They're looking for that human interaction. They're looking for things that aren't fake. Um, but when the going gets tough and your teacher isn't explaining it well, you're going to turn to AI and say you're going to maybe upload some of the things that the teacher's been giving you and saying, "Could you explain this to me in real person's terms, you know, like just dumb it down for me? Help me to understand this." Our kids shouldn't have to be going to that level. the part of the policy that feels frustrating, like

155it's a lot of like language, a lot of things that maybe look good, but how do we enforce it? Are teachers even going to really understand? Is somehow the the CTA contract maybe will contradict this and it won't even be applicable? um how do we make sure that what we're putting in policy really is setting a standard and helping >> I think from the both the conversation that we have with students and you know previously we had the teachers that were members of the um the superintendent uh the superintendent group the and then we had the survey with parents and one of the threads that was through all of those conversations is that piece around AI literacy and a piece around providing training and knowledge on the appropriate use of AI. So part of it

156is the AI policy that provides that initial lens but beyond that there does need to be education that is around just exactly what is AI what is >> option >> one of the things we've talked about here very very you know a lot which is productive struggle which is that piece where the AI is not actually taking that work from the student they're still doing that work I know that the there are district teams that for example have worked uh extensively on some behind-the-scenes courses to help teachers learn more about AI and there going to be discussions about how the best way for those courses to for that course to be distributed to teachers and and for them and for them to take it but it is the next step that is going to be

157key um it's and I agree with the statements that are being made here for sure where it is not passing this policy and then we're done. There's a lot of work that will need to be done. This is just the baseline of trying to put the floor for where we need to go next. >> Okay. I do agree. I think it's going to have to be something that is a a continual discussion by the board. And I think as we hopefully I mean I would love to see laptops coming away which would then enforce our stance on teachers having to teach. They can't just say open your laptop and watch this video. um as we see that happen which you know then I think we'll begin to see a a change in the framework but

158it's just it's very hard I think there's different areas so when help me understand this so if we're doing um using this for an IEP for instance which I think is very beneficial IEPs can be very lengthy um if you're putting in like these are some of the parameters we want to use. How do we word this? So, it helps with that, but it needs to also have that human interaction where the we're looking it over. We're making sure that it looks good, it's correct. What happens to that data when it's inputed? Can it be done in a way where you put um like can we have in policy where a teacher or school staff can't form an IEP for a specific student like putting in their name where it just says like student and

159then they take everything that's written you put it back on your in your um whatever you're using word or whatever document you're using and then the staff member has to go in and put the students name so that AI isn't receiving any of that information. The language that we have in in policy that is around the use of AI tools states that staff should use tools that are vetted and approved by the district. We currently don't have a tool that is vetted and approved for use with with IEPs, but that piece around once that if if that is a direction that the district chooses to go into and there is a tool that is identified, the guard rails that are being discussed here would have to play a role. So number one, the the tools

160that we have today are tools that it's been established through contract the way that they can manage student information and student um and student resources. So and specific to AI things such as no training, no retention of that data beyond our contractual agreement with that company. And so those would have to be pieces that part of that contractual uh contractual establishment would have to be part of that also. And I guess to put it another way, it would be a way of saying that if a tool is going to be used in that manner, it would have to be a tool that would be safe for student use overall where it would be safe to enter in a name, a student name. Uh because it is a tool that's been vetted that it will properly

161manage the educational records or any kind of educ educational information that's put inside that tool. and then that that data would be destroyed after afterwards and would not be used for any kind any kind of training. And then the training process that we would have to ensure is that one that tool meets district guidelines, meet Florida states law and that there is a review process for anything that comes out of it before it is actually finalized and then sent off to the state or put in front of a parent as the as the IEP for for the student. So there would be have to be a lot of processes that are that are built in before a tool like that could be used and put forward for teachers. >> Do you feel it would even

162be beneficial then? I mean it sounds like it would be a lot longer process if you have to go through all those steps still. I mean you might as well just sit there and copy and paste and do your own own work. I think the question really the answer to the question depends on who is where that work is taking place. So that establishment piece of is a tool following Florida law is this is a tool actually providing output that meets district guidelines. There are steps inside of there that can actually be established before that tool is ever used by an educator. So that once the educator actually gets that tool in their hands, what they're getting is a tool that has been vetted, that has those pieces in place, and now what they're doing

163is they're using that tool to then scale and get an output for them for them to review. But they know that they can have a level of trust that what is being outputed is not just a general output but it's an output based upon some guard rails that has already been put in place by the district in the procurement in the procurement and the distribution of that tool. So what we're talking about and this is the piece around AI overall which is that it does not eliminate the need for work. It may shift the ability for us to take some of the components of that work and take it where instead of having every single person who's writing using the example of an IEP where every single person is referencing district policies referencing the state

164laws and every single person has to consistently do that on every single IEP where just like the conversation we have with the policy we can provide a baseline where the resource has that built in and we can ensure some consistency in that being done. Still requiring human human review and you know it's very clear from the conversation of the board that we want that human review and and it is needed but at least providing a baseline of consistency in the initial production of some of the components. >> Okay. And then how are we involving parents as well? Because I think the human in the loop um I want to make sure parents are part of that um process. How are we involving parents then? Um or how does the policy really involve parents or is

165this more of um the institution if you will of OCPS is dictating the policy? So there's I think there's a couple different aspects to that question. I do think that there is the aspect of AI literacy and training that may be provided to parents and through the survey that was provided to parents there were areas where parents identified that they would like additional additional training with AI and so that is a piece that we will be looking at. I think that when it comes to the educational inclusion of um of of electronic resources in what in what the teacher is using in the classroom, I do think that is a piece where that is going to become a it will have to reference back what's inside of what's inside of the CTA contract. Um because

166I do think with some of the language that's there that will have to take take play a role. >> Madam chair, may I? >> Yes. Go ahead. >> So So the CTA contract actually does talk about usage of AI tools by employees and it says as following that at the beginning of each school year, bargaining unit members will be provided a list of district approved AI platforms which may be utilized by the teachers for instructional purposes. So contractually we are setting the standard of what AI programs teachers will be allowed to use by utilizing our data and that dovetales with this policy that says we're going to vet any AI tools to ensure that the appropriate privacy guidelines are met etc etc to ensure that you know student data isn't going out into open source

167out in the public. And then the contract also says if during the school year the district approves any additional AI platforms which may be used by teachers for instructional purposes, it will provide notification to bargaining unit unit members and we'll make available training on how to use the platform. So we're keeping control of the platforms that teachers are using >> district-wise with >> I see the skeptical look. I understand the skeptical look, right? But if a teacher is utilizing an AI platform that hasn't been approved by the district, then that is something that we would take action against to number one stop and it number two could potentially subject the teacher to disciplinary action if they do it. Also, if a teacher is misusing a platform, there is a provision in the contract. member Salamanca

168referred to the you know freedom that they have to implement the um curriculum and and essentially but their contract also says the administrator has the right and obligation to question consult and direct whenever necessary. So for ex for example if a teacher is using an AI platform to help grade and they are not checking it over and the teacher is marking things wrong that are actually correct or marking things correct that are actually wrong vice versa right our administrator can come in and say you know especially if there's a complaint lodged by by a student saying hey I actually got this question right and I got marked wrong for it our administrator would have the ability to say to go to the teacher and say what did you utilize to to grade this? And if

169they say I AI, did you check it? And if the answer is no, then we can direct them to say, hey, you can use this for grading purposes, but you're going to have to check to ensure its accuracy. So, we do have that ability contractually to direct our instructional personnel if they are misusing a tool. >> Yeah, I just I don't see that really happening. Well, and that's all they have to say is, "Oh, I just missed it." and they don't have to even say that they used AI. I think the bottom line is we really just want teachers to be teaching in an engaging way that kids are engaging. End of story. It's a this will be a interesting conversation to have uh as the time goes by. Thank you. >> Thank you member

170Fant uh and thank you u Mr. pome for reading the language. Uh we'll go back to have questions for sure. Um member Douglas >> um I just wanted to say um I don't want us to lose sight that we also have a great district and we have great teachers and you are doing a great job at your work. Uh AI is a new it's a discovering for all of us and we are new at all at this and we all discover as we go. He may be tweaking later on and we may be great. But what I'm hearing in here is a lot of bashing about teachers who are not doing the work. We have great teachers who are doing great job in Orange County public schools. We have a new school and our schools

171our our students are performing and we can see that every time. um what I'm hearing um it was great to be at Horizon High and listening to the kids talking and having opinions that very smart kids um and what I am here what I heard is that student are in need of that one- on-one interaction human interaction with teacher and the feedback that they can give after an assignment. Now they did not dismiss the use of AI but what they wanted is to see use it as a tool okay as a tool and the and not as a solution for the homework that they wanted to do. um they were not against teacher using AI as well but what they were against is the length of the homework that they were giving and not having

172that feedback that they needed to have after the assignment so they could learn more. So that's what was needed and I think uh we need to reinforce that that one-on-one interaction after any assignment that the student the the teacher you know pulled aside the child and said this is where you have a mistake this is where we need to improve and etc that one-on-one conferencing that we used to do and it's still going I'm sure in in a lot of the classes um um let me think again. So that's really what um I wanted to say. So the teachers are doing a great job. They do. However, when they give an assignment, try not to be too lengthy because the student have a whole lot of homework and give them a feedback. Have a one-on-one

173interaction with them after the the assignment. And that's what really they looking after. The kids want that to happen. And just like I said before, we we have a lot to discover about AI. We have a platform, but it's not perfect. So what maybe they're using maybe need to be tweaked also to make it a little bit more efficient to teach. So we we working together in that same path and we're trudging along and hopefully we'll find a promised land, right? And that's all I have to say. Thank you, member Douglas. Member Bird. >> Thank you. Um I'm just I'm going to try to be as quick as possible. Um inconsistency. First of all, I want to thank Maurice. I think that you did a great job of listening to us um listening to students.

174I really really appreciate you doing the town halls. Um, more than that though, I really appreciate you publicly sharing in this presentation exactly what the student said. And I honestly feel like um we should be sending this to all of our staff, our teachers, our secondary teachers, and let them know, you know, this is what students are saying, these are their concerns, and um and then let this be part of our ongoing education. And that's what I wanted to say about all of this, you know, um it's it is here. It is changing daily. And but we have to, as you said, we have to have a home base. We have to have guard rails. And we have and this is just the beginning. And I think we've this is a great place to start.

175I think that you've addressed kind of the basics. And I think the more that we put this into play and as more teachers learn more about AI tools, I think we will see le maybe we'll see less and less of those inconsistencies. I think right now it's so new that there's still so many teachers maybe that aren't using it. Teachers that are really engaged with it, teachers that you know that there's of course there's going to be inconsistencies. I think as it becomes more ingrained in kind of you know um their practices that maybe there won't be so many inconsistencies and it's unfortunate for the students right now and this because it it is a big change in education um with AI and I get it that that's frustrating but on the other hand too

176there are inconsistencies with grading I mean just you Oh, if you talk to students who I hear all the time about students who take, you know, I'm taking AP um, you know, US history and my friend is taking AP US history over here at blah blah blah and this high school and they got a three and they now get an A in the course. But that is not the way my teacher is grading. >> Well, that's certainly not fair either for them, but that's the way it is. And that's the way it is when they go to college. Every professor is going to do their class different. And I just think that I'm not I'm not downplaying what they're feeling, but I don't think that you're ever going to have every classroom have the same

177rules. It's just when you're in high school, every teacher does things differently, and that's just part of being a student. You just you figure that out. And I think that as this gets more comfortable, that will get better. Um, I think this is a great place to start. My only concern is what member Gallo brought up on um the prohibited use C. It would be my preference to not have that in there only because of the same reason. I think that, you know, um not that I'm supporting emotional use, but we already have gaggle for that purpose of, you know, flagging students that need help. I don't want it to be a discipline thing. Um, if a student is using a chatbot for support, there will be we will hopefully find out through our gaggle

178and get them the support they need. I don't think that they need discipline on top of that. So, my preference would be for that not to be in this policy. Um, other than that, um, other than than that, I am good with the policy and I appreciate the work that was put into it and I look forward to seeing it grow and change and all of us learn more about it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Member Bird. Member Vanos. >> Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Um, I'll hit on some of the comments other people made, but I'll just start off by saying I think, you know, as far as teachers and paras using it to manage their workflow, you know, is it more efficient? I don't know. But if they find it to be

179more efficient, I'm fine. You know, if a student uses AI to study because they find, oh, you know, it to be helpful to provide um sample questions or, you know, a study guide, fine. I those things don't bother me. Um but okay looking at the guidelines for staff um so this is 3A for so what I would require what I think is important to have in this policy is if an an employee um is using an AI tool so if a teacher is using an AI tool for grading or to help create instructional materials I get it's not something that we can stop them from doing. But I do think it's important to include in here that if they're going to use it for instructional materials or grading that that is disclosed >> to parents

180and students. Um I if we can add in more, I would like them to explain why they're using it. Um so that people understand. I think the disclosure piece and the explanation is important to helping people understand where AI is being used in our schools and why. I think we need to keep coming back to why >> and I think we need to require people to articulate that >> um with the second piece be be on that same page the detectors that >> I think it's on the wrong side. >> Oh, sorry. >> No, you're you're good. It was just so that the public's seeing what you're saying. >> Oh, thank you. I appreciate that. Um, with respect to B and the student discipline for the the detectors, I think I asked this before and

181I and I apologize if you provided the answer. Do we do we pay for those or how >> we do not have a generally available detector that we pay for for staff to use? I believe that there are some AP courses where turn it in is part of the required tool that is used and turn it in does have a AI detection feature inside of it. Um but it is not something outside of that specific uh example where we pay for an AI detection tool. >> Okay. But if teachers are relying on them to determine whether AI has been used and I guess it's it's written in here. I think we should be providing that resource to teachers. One of the challenges and I think it is the challenge that's posted here also is that

182piece around the reliability overall of the tools and what was shared even by by students where they saw inconsistency sometimes when the same paper was fed into into the tools and I I think it would have to be a discussion that would be would be that would have to be conducted where If we are providing a tool, then the statement we're making around the tool, which is that it's going to in some consistent way detect AI, would have to be a statement that I think would have to be uh valid. And I there's not really support right now that provides enough comfort to really say that those tools would consistently provide a valid result for staff for staff to use. Uh the language that's in here provides a recognition that there is staff that may

183be using those tools >> but also tries to establish that that the tools because they are not universally valid that they cannot be the sole tool that is being used to determine if a student is being academically dishonest. So that's it's trying to really walk those two pieces, but I think I would be concerned around the for lack of a better way of putting it veneer of reliability that may be placed if we are providing an AI detection tool. Also knowing that the percentage of the the detection is not is not high. >> Okay. So what what I'm what I'm hearing you say is you actually don't want them to I mean that it in theory you actually actually aren't really encouraging people to use AI detection tools. You'd rather them use something else. So

184you're just saying if they do then it can't be the sole basis. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. That that makes sense. Okay. Um, so if a teacher believes that I mean I guess so I guess is what the saying they look back they they think a student used AI so they're now going back in looking at the edit history they're comparing other samples they're having conversations with the student I know in some schools they're asking other teachers to you know to read the um the product to see kind of get their opinion. So again, very timeconuming process. Um but let's so let's say they get to the end of that and the teacher says uh I believe this the student is using AI and the student says that they're not that they didn't use it.

185Uh I mean h how does that get resolved? I mean, let's say, you know, the the student gets in trouble for using AI and then there's discipline and then, you know, can the principal come in and say I I guess h how does it how does it get resolved if a parent comes in and there's disagreement about whether maybe the principal disagrees with the teacher and then there's a parent involved and the student like how does that ultimately get resolved? Who has the final say? Well, the conversation that we had with students, the preface that we provided when we asked for student feedback around discipline is that there is language is being added, there's language that's being added around discipline even inside the code of student conduct around the use of AI. And what students

186shared is that they would like to like for us to really consider a process or a recommendations for items that teachers can do before the disciplinary process kick kicks in. So if there is this place where there is a subi suspicion of academic dishonesty, there is then the code of student conduct and the process that's outlined there. And there is inside the student code of conduct an investigative component that's there. And it would be that investigative component that would be the final determination of if there would be um any disciplinary consequences if the teacher says the student was submitted work that was not their own. >> Thank you for that answer. >> I think uh deputy superintendent Martinez has >> Thank you, Vice Chair. Um so I will share with you um board member Vano.

187So, one of the great things that came out of the uh town hall meetings that we had was obviously student voice and that's something that we're continuously preaching um to our principles to make sure that we understand what is that student perspective. The feedback that was received was extremely eye opening to several of our high school principles. So much so that it's actually generated conversations within um the school for teachers and staff. So, you know, one of the things that I was thinking about was really how this has laid out the foundation for us because it works a little bit and and we all know I'm a huge Yankees fan, but I'm comparing it to like a baseball analogy, right? When you step up to the plate, you just don't step up and swing randomly.

188You listen to your coaches, you take a couple of the balls to see what's a ball, what's a strike. And you know, using that analogy, the teacher input combined with the student voice is going to be really huge for us when we start having conversations within those school walls and and really the care and thoughtfulness that's been taking place thanks to all of you in establishing this policy is going to be huge because this is now the groundwork for us to further those conversations. You know, going back to the question that you proposed um to Mr. dragon, you know, you want to see conversations where um teachers are providing their input as well as that student perspective and how are we going to handle those situations that arise. Um and again, communication is going to

189be key to those successful relationships that we want to have. So, you know, moving along, I think this has really helped us to define what is our strike zone really, what is our AI policy and how is this going to impact our schools. Thank you. And I agree. It's great to have the student input. I think I mean I can give it I can give an example of what I'm talking about. Um student writes a paper for IB teacher. Many teachers believe that it was written by AI. Someone has to certify to IB that this was not written by AI. I mean what happens in that case? parents involved, students involved, teachers are saying this isn't their work. I mean, I think these are real questions that like actually need to have an answer. Um,

190and and I agree that this that we we continue to fine-tune the policy, but I think there are like real things that are happening right now that we don't have good answers to and >> we need to have an answer to who has who makes that final determination. So, uh I mean that's that's a concern that I that's another concern I have with um with B. Okay. Moving on to guidelines for students for for section A um verification. What happens if a student doesn't verify the accuracy of the content? agreed. If a student does not verify the accuracy of the content that's generated by AI, which would then result in inaccurate content being submitted as far assignment, and that the most direct um consequence will be whatever they're going to get on what they've submitted

191because it would be that they're submitting now work with inaccurate inaccurate content. Okay. So, I guess is the point of the of this section just to say that AI is not going to save them? They can't say, "Well, I AI told me this was the right answer." >> They still have to do the work. >> Got it. Okay. For B, academic integrity. Um, when it says um students are are responsible for adhering and to the work submitted and it says the use of authorized AI tools is permissible. Is it any use? I is the key that as long as it's an authorized AI tool, they can use it for any use as long as the the teacher provides the guidelines. We have several just um digital resources overall and AI fits into that bucket of

192digital resources and a teacher as part of any lesson they are providing is able to set the guidelines for what resources can and cannot be used as part of that lesson or the completion of that lesson. And so a teacher can even if it is a AI tool that is permissible, a teacher can certainly within that lesson say this is a tool that will not be used as part of this lesson. >> Okay. And I think this is going to something member Salamancco was saying as well that that just needs to be clearly articulated as to what is allowed and what is not because just because it's an authorized AI tool doesn't mean that you can use it for all of its permissible uses. Um okay. And then the second the part um provided the

193final submitted work represents the students original thought and effort. I think this is extremely vague. Does that mean some portion of the final submitted work has to involve the students original thought and effort? Does that mean the whole thing? Um how are you interpreting that? Part of this came from the discussion that actually took place with students where they did the students themselves provided a a ve a line in between what they saw as the tutoring aspects of AI and then the aspect where you just put in a prompt you just get a result and then that result actually does not just represent any thought or any effort on your part. it is just the output from the AI that includes no no review. Um, one of the things that came through very clearly in

194the conversations with students is not just that there was a differentiation in the use or not the use of AI, but also there was a differentiation in even when you go just to the category of the use of AI in what teachers said could be done with the AI. As far as some students, it was you can use AI to generate some starters, but then after you generate the starter, you need to you you can go back and you can you have to do all everything else after that yourself. And then for some students, it was not only used to generate the starter, but after you finish writing, you can put it into a tool and use a rubric to then to then have it go through your work. So there were inconsistencies that that

195were inside of just how teachers were sharing overall students could use could use the tools. But the the consistent part that came through is that if it was just an input that generated an output, there was nothing original to the student and there was no effort that came from the student. And so that should be considered um when you're when we're talking about academic integrity. Okay, thank you for that explanation. I I think that's extremely broad. I mean, from what you're saying, as long as there's some effort and some original thought, students can submit essentially AI output. As long as there's some I mean, how do we interpret that? What does that mean? What does some effort look like? What does some original thought look like? And and I'm not asking this to be difficult.

196What I'm asking is to have conversations with teachers where >> teachers >> you know I mean um a teacher um has shared that you know she considers it cheating >> if a student is writes um and you know is supposed to write an essay and she said you know no AI well the student used it just to sort of like give her um some tips and then like based on those suggestions the student revised her her writing like she considered that to be cheating and I I think you know I think when you're maybe asking and I understand there There can be a use here when there's a gap in in learning and you know I don't understand this physics problem like what step am I missing help me figure this out or you know

197there's a step I've missed in this I don't know calculus problem are there steps in calculus problems yeah um >> you know that um that maybe there's a gap when students get home they realize they need that that piece I don't think personally in K12 education there's a place for AI in writing I think this is a foundational skill again I I think it's different among subjects I think writing is a foundational skill and I think anytime you were even if you're using AI to generate ideas to help you pro create an outline to give you feedback like that's like part of the process of learning and so I I think there needs to be different guidelines maybe it's for different subjects but I very I really worry about treating the use of AI the

198same whether it's for a calculus class or a writing class. They're different. Um uh and then the the last comment is is well the last comment just uh relating to this is regarding the emotional support. I I agree. I don't want to punish students. Um, but I think we need to make it very clear that relying on AI for emotional support is not right and it's not healthy. Um, you know, it was sad talking to students. I mean, they even said in the student town hall, they said, "We know, we know that AI, you know, emotional health is not really helping us, but we're using it anyway." >> Um, it's sad. Um, you know, I I hope that we've been making those outreaches to partner organizations, >> which we haven't, um, in this area, um,

199trying to establish those partnerships, making sure we're having more tea health, mental health, um, help for our students because what they're doing is is not healthy and it's not good and it's not helpful. Um, and I know that's not that's not on you. So, that's not part of your job. So um I'll just end it with saying you know I think again I understand that AI some people use you know consider it to be more efficient for some workflow fine students can use it stu for studying got it I do think everyone I think up here probably agrees that AI um literacy is important and so I I think that should be part of the policy I think we all agree that students should understand what it is what it can be used for what

200are some of the big consequences uh in and research on it. I I think that is an important piece. Um I think we also probably need to have a bigger conversation on busy work in school because students what I heard feel pressured to use AI because they have so much busy work that they just can't get it done. So I think that's a conversation that we need to have. Um and I also think and I understand member Gallo's point about laptop. We can separate that from AI but unfortunately you basically use AI on a laptop. So there is some there is that's true on your phone. There there's some overlap there. Um and I also think you know it's I I can tell you what some teachers are doing to combat this. Um and I've

201heard this from several teachers. They are are are basically having all written work done >> during class in class time with browser locks on um or even just pen and paper but you know in class time where students can't access AI. So I and I think more and more teachers are turning to that because it is a way to make sure that our students learning is not infiltrated by improper well improper uses of AI. And so I would love to see and I know some of the other board members have echo echoed this as well but I I would love to see more of that. >> Um just doing all of that in class. Um, and then I guess the last point that I would say is I think it's really important that whether you

202are a student, whether you're an employee that no one and this was also brought up in the student town hall that no one should be required to use AI. And that's why I think it's important in class if a teacher is going to use AI, they want to use it for something in the lesson, it needs to be disclosed. >> It needs to be explained. And if parent does not want their student to use AI and there are so many reasons people don't want to, right? And it's not necessarily because you're, you know, you don't want to change or because you hate technology. There are many, many reasons that people are opposed to AI and I think we need to respect that. And I mean, people can opt out of books, people can opt out

203of health education, people should be able to opt out of AI. I just think that's common sense. Um, and I think it should apply to both teachers and students. And I think if a if a teacher or educator decides not to use it, that cannot be or a student that that should not be something that they feel um negatively impacts their review or or performance. I think that's it. Thank you. But I do appreciate the time you put into this. I enjoyed going to the student town hall with you. I know this is not an easy task. Um and I appreciate your thoughtfulness. >> Thank you, Maurice. Uh, I think I'm I'm last up, but it was just a few of the clarifying stuff. John, you read to us the contract that said that the

204teacher may use any of the AI tools that the district has approved. So, Con Academy AI thing or all the stuff that we approve, right? So, they may use it, right? Is there any language in there that prohibits the use of anything that is not district approved? >> Let me look. Um >> cuz I'm reading may use what we approve as a opt into what we approve, but I'm not hearing an opt into not using prohibited tools. >> It doesn't explicitly say you can't use nonapproved tools. How we how I look at this one, how I read it is that what we're doing is saying these are the tools you can use. And to the extent that we have not approved a a tool, we cannot use it. So I look at the language more

205as we're telling you what you can use. >> But yeah, we're not telling you what you can't use because we we know that we do not want them using AI detector tools and they are actively very much so using AI detector tools. That's not in our approved list. >> No, I I that I don't know. But it says which may be utilized by teachers for instruction. We tell them at the beginning of the year the district approved AI platforms which may be utilized by teachers for instructional purposes. So >> yeah it it sounds like uh you may use the ones we suggest of which many of them are like I don't want to use that so I'm not going to use that. I'm going to use my own. So I'm glad we had some language.

206I don't know that it's uh very helpful for the purposes we've discussed today. Um is there anything on disclosure but teacher will disclose the use to parents to students staff principal? >> Not in the CTA contract. No. >> Okay. Um and and I think one of the things to the point made there are some incredible teachers. Uh I think member Vanos mentioned that are now member member Vaness was talking about like teachers that are doing in-class work and the pen and paper and we're going to do this together and we're going to discuss and we're going to write this stuff. Um but that's not all teachers. Um, and I, you know, I think the last recognition I brought in here, my AP language teacher who has been teaching for 20, 30 years, she has six,

207seven periods of AP language. She read every single one of our handwritten essays for all six, seven periods. She would have them every like two essays per nine week. So, it wasn't like a hundred busy work assignments every day. But those two essays, we got real feedback on that helped us be better writers and communicators. And every student in that class remembers how much she helped us be writers. What our students were saying in the town hall was not that. And they were not complaining or saying anything about those teachers like they know who are really great teachers. They were making comments about teachers that are creating enormous amount of busy work because AI makes it really easy to create 10 20 worksheets because it's just they don't have to do it. and they can

208just say hey I want to make a spreadsheet for this concept make a spreadsheet for this concept and students are getting a lot of busy work that isn't also expected not to happen in the class it's happening after class and so you have this like AI created assignments for students that then use AI to submit the assignments and it's like the the why are we doing this is a really important question that member Vanos brought up like why are students using AI for their busy work well probably because it's busy work and why are teachers is doing busy work. I don't know, maybe they're also busy and so many other things that is not on the teaching of the day of the class. But there there's a lot of why questions here that I think

209are at the core of the problem and AI is just like this red herring of what we focus on for that. But I do think that there is just general distrust from our students where they have a teacher that in the classroom they're writing and getting grade and feedback and then they have another teacher that in an English class and I have another student in one of my schools that said I have my AP English teacher has not read one DDQ or FRQ the entire year. It's all been AI. So what like and it's the same class. They're going to go take the same AP test. Maybe some students will do better than others. And I know that there's some inherent discrepancies and every classroom is different, but it's definitely not fair and students don't

210see it as fair. And if a student knows that that teacher hasn't graded one FRQ or DDQ their entire year and then suddenly they're looking at the code of conduct because of academic integrity, that is incredibly unfair. And so like I I still have issues with if we don't have every teacher pick a position. Are we encouraging AI in this classroom or not encouraging AI in this classroom? Are we taking them to the code of conduct for AI use or not? Then students are constantly in this gray zone and like I to your question member Vonos asked like I did hear from the town hall meeting students have been getting zeros when the teacher decides that an AI was used. I don't think right now there's any process aside from the teacher believes that it's

211AI and they get a zero and there was a ton of them that had examples of them getting zero. So I don't think there's a lot of checks and balances usually unless a parent gets very involved or principal gets really involved. It really is the grade the teacher gives you. And so some balance there might be good, some of it might not. I don't I I don't really know that I have a good answer to that one but um that's it's true. And my last thing is on AI detectors and I I talked about this in the last time. Um, turn it in turnitin.com back in the day used to be like 90% accurate. AI detectors today are like 60%. Like the reliability, it is awful. And most specifically, AI detectors have shown and been

212proven by research that they have a bias against second language learners. Yeah. >> Because they just write differently. They have a bias against students with disabilities. So if you are on the spectrum, autism, ADHD, dyslexia, you get flagged significantly more as using AI um just because of the structure of how you write. And then also actually the top of language usage. So if you have a perfect SAT score on English, you likely do use the Oxford commas. Your vocabulary is probably more advanced. You're getting flagged. Um, I have a huge issue with our teachers using these low reliability AI detectors and giving students zero. I think it's going to overly impact students with disabilities, second language learners. Um, not to mention students that are actually smart and need to get into college and are competing

213out there and hustling and working really hard every day and suddenly they're going to get a code of conduct for plagiarism that is going to be on the record for their university application. So I huge issue with AI detectors and I don't see anywhere in the policy or in the CTA contract honestly any teeth to us saying you cannot use an AI detector and we highly don't support it like as is the policy it's a guideline it'd be nice if you didn't and then the CTA contract is kind of like you may use this but anything else you're free to use. So that those are my issues that I I think we come back to Maurice on next year or whenever we come back to the AI policy, but they're pretty open-ended and I'm sure

214will continue being an issue. But at the very least, some disclosure to parents and students of I am a teacher who believes in AI, will be using AI, encourage the use of AI, you won't have a code of conduct in this classroom if you use AI with the right guidelines, or I'm a teacher that hates AI, I don't use it, my students won't use it. That'd be great. I think every parent would deeply appreciate that. And other than that, I think we're just eroding the trust of our students and our parents when it comes to our public schools. But thank you. Anybody else? No. Okay. Then with that, I think we are done. >> Thank you so much, Marius. Really appreciate the work on this. I know it was a lot. Hey, hey, hey. Heat.

215Heat.