Massachusetts schools get new AI guidance for responsible classroom use

Massachusetts education officials released new statewide AI guidance urging schools to use artificial intelligence thoughtfully, emphasizing equity, transparency, academic integrity, and human oversight. The comprehensive framework, developed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education ahead of the 2025-2026 school year, moves away from prohibiting AI use toward teaching students responsible integration and disclosure practices.

What you should know: The guidance includes both an AI Literacy Module for Educators and a Generative AI Policy Guidance document, developed in response to recommendations from a statewide AI Task Force.

• AI use has already spread in Massachusetts classrooms, with teachers using ChatGPT and other tools to generate rubrics, lesson plans, and instructional materials, while students draft essays, brainstorm ideas, and translate text.
• Districts are also implementing AI for scheduling, resource allocation, and adaptive assessments beyond direct teaching applications.
• The learning module itself was written with AI assistance, though the first draft was intentionally created without it to avoid “anchoring” on machine-generated outputs.

The big picture: Rather than banning AI outright, Massachusetts is positioning itself as a leader in responsible AI integration across education, aligning with Governor Maura Healey’s broader strategy to make the state a hub for AI development and regulation.

Key principles: The guidance establishes five core values schools should prioritize when adopting AI tools.

• Data privacy and security: Districts should only approve AI tools vetted through formal data privacy agreements and teach students how their data is used.
• Transparency and accountability: Schools must inform parents about classroom AI use and maintain public lists of approved tools.
• Bias awareness and mitigation: Officials warn that AI systems can “inadvertently reinforce historical patterns of exclusion, misrepresentation, or injustice.”
• Human oversight and educator judgment: Teachers must oversee and adjust AI outputs, such as adapting AI-generated reading plans to reflect individual student interests.
• Academic integrity: Students should disclose AI use through “AI Used” sections in papers, clarifying how and when they used tools.

Why this matters: The guidance acknowledges that “AI already surrounds young people” and is “baked into the devices and apps they use,” making AI literacy essential for both academic and civic life.

• Students need skills not just as users but as “informed, critical thinkers who understand how AI works, how it can mislead, and how to assess its impacts.”
• The framework addresses concerns about AI “fictions” where systems can produce grammatically correct but factually wrong responses, and warns against over-reliance that creates “cognitive debt.”

In plain English: AI systems are designed to copy patterns from data rather than verify facts, so they can sound convincing while being completely wrong—like a confident student who hasn’t studied. “Cognitive debt” means becoming too dependent on AI’s initial suggestions, similar to how using GPS constantly can make you lose your sense of direction.

What they’re saying: The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education emphasized its neutral stance on AI adoption in education.

• “AI already surrounds young people. It is baked into the devices and apps they use, and is increasingly used in nearly every system they will encounter in their lives, from health care to banking,” the guidance states.
• “Because AI is designed to mimic patterns, not to ‘tell the truth,’ it can produce responses that are grammatically correct and that sound convincing, but are factually wrong or contrary to humans’ understanding of reality.”
• Officials stress that “teaching with AI is not about replacing educators—it’s about empowering them to facilitate rich, human-centered learning experiences in AI-enhanced environments.”

The broader context: This AI guidance emerges as Massachusetts lawmakers simultaneously consider restricting other classroom technology, with the Senate approving a bill to prohibit student cellphone use starting in the 2026-2027 academic year.

• Lawmakers backing the cellphone ban have described devices in classrooms as “electronic cocaine” and “a youth behavioral health crisis on steroids.”
• The House has not yet indicated when it will take up the cellphone measure, leaving schools navigating competing pressures around educational technology integration.