Ethical Considerations in the Appropriate Use of AI for Educators

This document provides voluntary guidance for Georgia K-12 educators, administrators, and staff on the ethical and responsible use of AI in schools, emphasizing AI as a supplemental tool, not a replacement for human-centered teaching.

Ethical Considerations in the Appropriate Use of AI for Educators 6/16/25 I. Introduction The Georgia Professional Standards Commission (GaPSC) is highly committed to an ethical educator workforce. Given the speed with which Artificial Intelligence (AI) is developing and the complex issues it presents, educators face rapidly shifting ethical challenges regarding its use in P-12 classrooms. With the increasing, varied, and ever-evolving use of AI, it is important for GaPSC to provide guidance to educators on ethical considerations in using AI, aimed at achieving positive professional practice while avoiding educator missteps. GaPSC’s Ethical Considerations in the Appropriate Use of AI for Educators is designed to provide a clear set of ethical principles, standards, and guiding questions regarding the use of AI. Proactive application of ethical standards can help educators anticipate and address concerns before harm occurs, and ongoing professional development can minimize the risks arising from AI’s use and misuse. This advisory document is designed to complement the Georgia Code of Ethics for Educators (COE). GaPSC’s AI Ethical Guidance Position Statement further clarifies the context of these Ethical Considerations in the Appropriate Use of AI for Educators. Forthcoming will be a variety of AI Ethical Guidance Resources including definitions, instructional videos, district policy/guidance exemplars, and more. This Guidance is a living document to be regularly updated as knowledge and practice evolves. Future revisions will, in part, be driven by the feedback survey accessible at the end of the Guidance document. Users are strongly encouraged to complete the survey to help continuously improve this Guidance. To collaboratively produce these Ethical Considerations in the Appropriate Use of AI for Educators, GaPSC assembled a representative development committee from P-12 school districts and schools, educator preparation providers (EPPs), RESAs, state agencies, educational organizations, and others. Purpose This document is intended to serve as voluntary statewide guidance for Georgia P-12 educators, administrators, and staff regarding the use of AI in schools and classrooms. School districts, individual schools, and educator preparation providers (EPPs) may adopt or adapt it for local use. The goal is to empower educators and students to use AI as a supplement to, not a substitute for, core human-centered teaching and learning. 1 Definition For the purposes of this document, the term “AI” refers to algorithms and software programs capable of producing new content—such as text, images, code, or audio—based on user prompts and training data. In the P-12 educational settings, these tools may include chatbots, content generators, lesson planners, or other ed-tech tools powered by machine learning or large language models. Audience The Guidance is intended for pre-service and in-service administrators, educators, and staff to inform their work with P-12 students, colleagues, parents, the community, and other educational stakeholders. GaPSC offers these suggested guidelines to proactively guide administrators, educators, and staff toward appropriate and ethical use of AI. Guidance Structure: The draft Guidance is comprised of seven principles, with each principle having its own standards and guiding questions. Accompanying the guidance are resources that will be regularly updated by the GaPSC. What the Guidance Is and What It Is Not This AI Ethical Guidance is about the responsible use of a powerful and rapidly-evolving technology. This Guidance is not intended to provide pedagogical strategies in using AI, nor is it intended to dictate specific policies, guidance, or procedures that are appropriate for your district or EPP. Instead, it is intended to spur thoughtful conversations among Georgia educational professionals and staff about the risks and ethical responsibilities associated with the use of AI in all aspects of P-12 education. Important Understandings About This Guidance: 1. These guiding standards reinforce our belief AI is not a primary source, meaning this technology should not take the place of the teacher, professional pedagogical practices, and other human-centered aspects of P-12 education. At the end of the day, AI should be viewed as a tool to facilitate instruction and learning. 2. Educators, administrators, and school staff are encouraged to cultivate a shared culture of curiosity and ongoing learning with respect to AI—actively exploring its capabilities, risks, and ethical dimensions together, and supporting one another in understanding its impact across all areas of education. 3. This Guidance supports the district/school developing an approved list of AI-acceptable tools. Most of these standards within the Guidance relate to that. 4. Given the rapidly changing capabilities and uses of AI, these standards are predicated on the idea that districts and individual educators will engage in ongoing review of how this technology is deployed in their districts. In particular, these standards should make clear that effective professional development regarding AI cannot be accomplished in single, standalone sessions; a more holistic and persistent approach is required. 5. It is particularly important for all members of the Georgia educational community to remember that AI is still an emerging and occasionally flawed technology. Since AI systems have been and continue to be trained on human-created content, the output of AI 2 must regularly be evaluated using the same standards applied to legacy sources - Is the output biased in some way? Is it attempting to manipulate the user? Is it factually accurate? The quality of AI outputs is a product of the data on which it is trained and the user inputs. 6. Some concepts and principles are repeated or restated in this Guidance. That is purposeful, as some concepts are relevant to multiple standards. 7. School districts and schools are encouraged to work closely with their EPP partners as they navigate the appropriate use of AI. Implementation It is understood and anticipated that implementation of these guidelines should be differentiated according to the size, capacity, and other contextual variables of each district. When adapting these guidelines to local use, however, districts should align their local policies and standards regarding AI with Georgia’s Guidelines for the Ethical Use of AI for Educators. Effective implementation requires clear reporting lines for misuse of AI, particularly with respect to data privacy breaches and malicious misuse. Ways to Use This Guidance First and foremost, this Guidance should be used to inform and spark conversations in each educational setting regarding the appropriate use of AI and the concomitant risks of doing so. Second, this Guidance should suggest topics for possible review and revision of the polices, frameworks, acceptable use guidelines, etc., which we strongly encourage. If a district or EPP does not have applicable policies or acceptable use guidelines, this Guidance may illuminate why they should be adopted. Third, this Guidance can provide insight into the types of professional development and ongoing training that may be useful to educators and staff, so that they can better understand AI, consider the boundaries of its appropriate use, and avoid ethical missteps. 3 II. Ethical Considerations in the Appropriate Use of AI for Educators Ethical Principle #1: When AI tools are used in the classroom, educators and/or staff have an obligation to ensure they are being used responsibly and ethically. Applicable Standards: 1. Educators should only use district-approved AI tools. 2. Use AI tools only when they enhance instructional effectiveness, student engagement, and/or learning outcomes. 3. Align AI use with developmental appropriateness across grade levels, curriculum goals and standards, learning objectives, district strategic plans, etc. 4. W