Sign up for Chalkbeat New York’s free daily newsletter to receive crucial updates about NYC’s public schools straight to your inbox.
Even after New York City rescinded a contentious initiative for a new high school focused on artificial intelligence, a significant turnout of parents, students, and educators engaged in discussions about AI at this week’s school board meeting.
Over one hundred local residents presented their views during an extensive, nearly seven-hour session of the Panel for Educational Policy (PEP) earlier this week.
Community members consistently voiced their concerns that the Department of Education is introducing AI tools without establishing clear regulations, transparency, or sufficient understanding of the technology. Students highlighted that AI is already transforming educational environments, with surveillance methods like the digital bathroom hall pass system now implemented in 150 schools across the city. Meanwhile, educators expressed fears that the growing presence of various technologies in classrooms contradicts the preliminary AI policy introduced by the city in March.
A parent from Park Slope approached the microphone with her two young children in hand, one cradled in her arm while she held the other tightly.
“I’ve never considered myself an activist, but I feel strongly about this: It is happening now. Gen Z is pushing back against AI; I am too. The city insists that AI is unavoidable, yet they won’t disclose what devices and applications my children are using. You are spending our money to deliver artificial intelligence to our kids?” she firmly stated, receiving applause from the packed audience at Wednesday night’s meeting.
The PEP’s agenda for voting was largely unrelated to AI. The focus was on the Department of Education’s capital plan, the anticipated budget for the next year, and updates to the Fair Student Funding weights dictating how resources are allocated to schools. In addition, the panel voted on 30 contract agreements, covering aspects from cafeteria equipment maintenance to special education services.
However, the majority of the lengthy meeting featured parents, students, and educators advocating against the city’s investments in AI and educational technology contracts, as well as the preliminary AI policy. While the controversial Next Generation High School proposal was removed from Wednesday’s agenda due to public backlash regarding its AI emphasis and selective admissions, speakers indicated that the same issues would apply to future school initiatives.
“Many believe that AI is promoting a harmful message that prioritizes results over the learning journey. Significant learning often occurs when students face challenges, make errors, inquire, and grow over time,” said student representative Julia Nasef from Staten Island’s Tottenville High School.
AI Discussions Reveal Concerns with Current Education Department Processes
Throughout the evening, speakers expressed diminishing trust in the Education Department’s vetting processes for AI tools and its ability to safeguard students, educators, and families from a complex and evolving technology.
Most speakers voiced opposition to the presence of any AI in educational settings.
Chair of the Panel for Educational Policy Greg Faulkner confessed on Wednesday that he identified as a “baby boomer” with limited familiarity with AI. He expressed the desire for more substantial engagement with both the community and the Education Department concerning future AI-related proposals.
Nonetheless, he viewed Chancellor Kamar Samuel’s decision to withdraw the AI-centered school proposal as a reflection of the schools chief’s commitment to more effectively involve and respond to local community needs.
“In the past, there was a general assumption that the panel would approve all DOE proposals. However, the chancellor’s decision, alongside the panel’s discussions on Wednesday, indicates that this old approach is no longer effective,” Faulkner shared with Chalkbeat on Thursday.
He added that the “AI question” has prompted him to consider proposing modifications to some of the Education Department’s policy-making processes. He expressed a desire for the panel to collaborate more extensively with the authors of the department’s AI policy—whose identities remain undisclosed—to keep abreast of AI research and better convey community concerns.
Education Department officials indicated that the initial AI guidelines were formulated by the Department’s central Academics and Instruction team, with feedback from various stakeholders and internal subcommittees.
“We have not received any briefings on AI research, and while I am apprehensive about a moratorium, I lack sufficient knowledge about this technology,” admitted Faulkner.
Nasef, the student representative, pointed out that many of her peers recognize the potential benefits of AI when utilized “intentionally” to enhance their understanding of subjects such as math and science.
She urged the panel to “establish clear, student-centered guidelines for AI implementation.”
The framework released by the city last month did not provide direction about how or whether students can utilize AI for homework, nor how its use may vary among different grade levels.
Panel Approves Controversial Tech Contracts Amidst Lagging AI Policy
Out of the 30 contract proposals presented for a vote, three were related to educational technology products, with only one being rejected.
One approved contract covered the comprehensive range of K-12 digital learning resources from Kaplan, a global educational services provider that has recently integrated AI features into its digital test preparation tools. Several individuals who spoke at Wednesday’s meeting referenced a recent privacy breach involving the personal data of 1.4 million individuals across seven states. Despite these concerns, the PEP authorized the company’s $500,000 contract.
A representative from Age of Learning, an AI-driven software designed for early childhood education up for contract vote, addressed the assembly. He assured members that the software could be “deactivated at any time,” affirming that “teachers maintain complete control over classroom operations.” This contract received the only negative vote.
Naveed Hasan, the panel’s de facto technology expert who had previously supported the AI-focused high school initiative, declared during the meeting that he now advocates for a two-year freeze on AI applications in schools, stressing the need for the city to strengthen data privacy infrastructure and address educational concerns.
The term limits for all current panel members conclude at the end of June. The Education Department’s comprehensive AI policy is also anticipated to be released in that month. Furthermore, the Department is soliciting feedback from families and educators on its early framework until May 8, accessible through this link.
Lizzie Walsh is a Data Fellow at Chalkbeat New York. She focuses on New York City education and crafts data-driven stories for Chalkbeat’s national network. Reach out to her at ewalsh@chalkbeat.org.
