Boston Public Schools allows students to use artificial intelligence to translate text. Lexington school officials say AI can help students write persuasively. And Medfield allows students to cautiously summarize complex material with it.
Though their approaches may differ, the districts all share one thing in common: they’ve developed AI policies to control how the technology is used in the classroom. That puts them ahead of many other Massachusetts districts that haven’t developed clear guidance, leaving students and teachers to interpret, on their own, when and how to use AI.
That town-by-town approach reflects the patchwork nature of AI guidance as the technology rapidly evolves and affects learning, putting K-12 leaders on alert.
“Instead of locking it down, which we don’t think is the right idea, we work in concert with the staff and the students to allow them to be able to use AI in an appropriate manner,” Medfield Superintendent Jeff Marsden said.
Districts in Massachusetts are taking a different approach than in New York City and Los Angeles, the country’s two largest school systems. Both instituted a blanket pause on most AI use this school year — up to grade 8 in New York and for all students in LA — to give officials time to examine its impacts.
Nationwide, nearly one in five kids ages 9 to 17 say they use AI for school on a daily basis, with ChatGPT their leading tool. That’s according to a March 2026 poll by technology research nonprofit Common Sense Media.
Yet half of students polled said they weren’t taught by their schools or teachers whether the AI information they receive is accurate.
“ Kids need to know about voice clones and deepfakes and plagiarism, oh my God, the list goes on and on,” said Jeffrey Riley, former state education commissioner. He’s the executive director of Day of AI, a nonprofit launched out of MIT that trains teaching professionals to become more literate in AI systems.
“ We need to teach kids so that they’re, like, healthy skeptics of this technology, that they mistrust and verify the information they’re getting from it,” Riley said.
Districts are putting up some barriers: Boston, for one, blocks ChatGPT for all students on district school networks, though it’s approved Google Gemini for use by teenage students. Cambridge Public Schools follows a similar rule.
The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education released an AI guidance framework last year. But it’s up to individual districts to shape specifics.
That means some districts have more clearly defined rules to help students, parents and teachers understand what is and isn’t allowed — or when to seek permission first.
“We need to teach kids so that they’re, like, healthy skeptics of this technology, that they mistrust and verify the information they’re getting from it.”Jeff Riley
A Lexington Public Schools rubric specifies students can use AI for “personalized tutoring,” like explaining a complex topic, or to organize their notes. But they can’t use AI-derived facts in a report without verifying them with a primary source.
Medfield, too, has a list of restricted uses: students can’t use AI to write a self-reflection or to come up with topic ideas versus independently brainstorming. Students also can’t use AI to develop or expand on arguments in their writing without first seeking permission from a teacher.
But how can a teacher know if a student is improperly relying on AI in their writing? That requires “vigilance,” Marsden said.
“One of the great things is that we do have fairly small class sizes, and our teachers get to know the style of student writing, and they’re pretty clear on what that looks like,” he said.
Hingham school district’s alleged vague rules about AI-assisted work prompted a high schooler to sue the district two years ago, after a teacher gave him a failing grade for using AI in a research project. He received detention and was excluded from the National Honor Society. A judge denied a preliminary injunction, reasoning that “school officials are entitled to a great degree of deference, including in their disciplinary decisions.” The family later dropped the federal suit.
Hingham today has AI guidance that specifies that students need to cite AI if they used it “to generate ideas or edit a small section of student work.”
The fast-changing landscape around the technology means guidelines will evolve.
“We have it on our policy agenda again for the third year in a row to update it because just everything’s moving so quickly,” Newton superintendent Anna Nolin said.
In Newton, teachers use AI detectors to try and determine if students are committing plagiarism, she added.
Some districts without a policy said it’s a priority this year to formulate one.
Framingham superintendent Robert Tremblay said that guidance will include input from staff, students and the community.
Matt Bach, president of state teachers’ union Massachusetts Teachers Association, told WBUR he thinks districts should exercise “ critical and careful analysis” before rushing to pass any new technology guidance.
“We’re excited that New York City has taken a step in what we think is the direction of seriously examining the impact of this on our classrooms and on our students and on our craft,” he said.
WBUR filed public records requests or reached out to a dozen school districts about their AI policies. Springfield, Milton and Brookline did not respond, or asked for more time to respond.
Brookline High School senior William Koyfman said he’s unaware of any schoolwide policy but that “it’s the express permission of the teacher.”
“Some teachers who are anti-AI will reject it completely, and other teachers who are more pro-AI or more willing to experiment will assign you work to do with AI,” he said.
Sharon High School sophomore Raymond Liu said in his school, “different teachers have different opinions and policies.”
“My generation is growing up with AI, and [it’s] going to be a big part of our education, our daily lives, and eventually our jobs,” Liu said via email. “If we’re going to be using it in the future anyway, I would rather learn how to use it well and responsibly while I’m still in school.”
Sharon school officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Boston’s plan for AI fluency
Training teachers to better understand how AI technology works is one way Boston is trying to make its teachers and students more responsible users.
This year the district launched a teacher training program, backed by a million-dollar individual philanthropic donation to BPS. It’s part of a new district policy to instill more foundational knowledge in AI to students at all grade levels.
During a weeklong workshop at the district’s central building in Roxbury in late August, two dozen teachers from middle and high schools in Boston listened to presentations and participated in small group discussion.
Papering the wall behind them was an illustration of the brainstorming at work. “What’s getting automated?” was the prompt.
“Critical thinking and problem solving.” “In depth research.” “All writing,” the teachers had written on Post-it notes.
Josiah Quincy Upper School math teacher Kristina Danahy said she sought out the training because she wants to help her students better navigate a world dominated by technology.
“ It’s become, like, really critical for our students to have AI literacy instead of us just saying, ‘Well, let’s ban that,’ ” like cell phones, she said.
Kim Taylor Knight, a dance and theater arts teacher at Curley K-8 School in Jamaica Plain, said she approaches AI with some skepticism but “also some curiosity.”
“I think my biggest takeaway is that we’re all on the edge of being a little frightened of the future,” she said.
The teachers will have the opportunity to pilot AI-assisted projects in their classrooms this year.
Massachusetts has proposed making all high schoolers demonstrate knowledge of responsible AI use in order to graduate. There’s no timeframe on implementation.
“We need to teach kids to be educated consumers of this, and that’s what AI literacy is,” Riley said. “It’s teaching you to be an educated consumer of what this technology can do and what it can’t do.”
This article was originally published on WBUR.org.
Copyright 2026 WBUR