From the K–12 edition of October 9, 2026
Frederick County Policy 124 text: PreK-12 student AI prohibition limited to approved, network-bound, monitored tools
Frederick County Public Schools Board of Education · K-12 education · Frederick County, Maryland, US
- Publisher
- Frederick County Public Schools legal documents
- Original publication
- Adopted 2026-10-07 (policy history record)
- Source retrieved
- 2026-10-10
- Event date
- 2026-10-07
What happened
The adopted policy text goes beyond the headline ban already archived via news coverage: it prohibits student AI use PreK-12 except for AI-literacy instruction, course/extracurricular requirements, or superintendent approval; confines any use to FCPS-approved tools reachable only on the secure FCPS network and monitored by FCPS; bars staff from using AI to replace direct instruction or evaluate student work; mandates AI access where an IEP or 504 plan requires it; and directs regulations across ten areas including human oversight, data security and procurement, plus an advisory group. Why now: the primary text (adopted Oct 7) was not previously archived and specifies the operating constraints.
Why it matters
Gives districts and vendors the exact clauses a large Maryland district will enforce, rather than press summaries.
Evidence and measured results
Primary policy document (5 pages) read in full; no outcome data — it is a governance rule, not an evaluation.
Limitations and uncertainty
Policy text only; regulations, approved-tool list and enforcement are pending. Board elections on Nov 3 could alter direction (reported elsewhere, not in this document).
Put this evidence to work
Lighthouse Advisory interpretation, grounded in this source. Enriched 2026-10-09; this does not change the original publication date. Each role follows the same checklist so takeaways compare across sources.
Sales
Role takeaway
- Customer problem
- District must operationalize a PreK-12 student AI prohibition with narrow exceptions and monitored, approved tools.
- Stakeholders
- Superintendent and designee
- Department of Curriculum and Instruction
- Department of Information and Technology
- Special education / 504 coordinators
- AI advisory group
- Discovery questions
- Which tools are currently approved, and who approves additions?
- How will superintendent-approved exceptions be requested and recorded?
- How are IEP/504-required AI uses provisioned?
- What monitoring data will be retained and for how long?
- Value hypothesis
- Interpretation: structured approval and monitoring support could reduce compliance ambiguity for the new policy; no outcome evidence exists.
- Potential engagement
- Bounded assessment of the current tool inventory against Policy 124 clauses and a draft exception workflow.
- Unsupported claims
- Any learning-outcome benefit
- Cost savings
- That a ban reduces academic dishonesty
Pre-sales engineering
Role takeaway
- Fit
- Fits SSO-gated, district-hosted or tenant-controlled tools with admin-disable of embedded AI features.
- Architecture and integration
- Approved tools must be reachable only on the secure FCPS network and monitored; integrate with existing filtering, identity and logging.
- Prerequisites
- Tool inventory
- Network/identity controls that can restrict access off-network
- Logging pipeline
- Constraints
- Off-network access must be blocked for approved AI tools
- Staff may not use AI to evaluate student work
- Maryland law and FCPS data-security policy apply
- Security
- Monitoring generates sensitive student activity data; apply Policy 208 data-security safeguards and least-privilege access to logs.
- Proof of value
- Demonstrate a tool cannot be reached off-network
- Show per-student exception provisioning for an IEP case
- Verify embedded AI features can be disabled by admin
Delivery
Role takeaway
- Work
- Draft implementing regulations and operate approval, exception and monitoring processes.
- Dependencies
- Superintendent regulations
- Advisory group formation
- Procurement guidelines
- Ownership
- Superintendent with Curriculum and Instruction and Information and Technology departments (named responsible offices).
- Skills and adoption
- Staff professional learning is a required regulation area; teachers need clarity on permitted operational uses.
- Governance checkpoints
- Regulation adoption
- Approved-tool list publication
- Advisory group review cycle
- Acceptance criteria
- Proposed: 100% of approved AI tools listed with owner and review date
- Proposed: every exception logged with approver
- Proposed: IEP/504 AI requests resolved within a set number of school days
- Risks
- Inconsistent exceptions across schools
- Monitoring data over-retention
- Accessibility duties overlooked under a default ban
Implementation considerations
Lighthouse Advisory interpretation across the operating dimensions a public-sector buyer must settle before this evidence becomes a design. Each note answers the question under its heading for this specific source.
Architecture and integration
What must connect, and where does the AI sit in the workflow?
Network-bound, monitored access implies district-managed identity, filtering and logging; consumer tools reached off-network are out of scope by design.
Governance
Who approves, reviews and stays accountable for outcomes?
Exceptions route through the superintendent; implementing regulations not yet published, so enforcement detail is unknown.
Security and privacy
What data, permissions and controls need testing?
Monitoring requirement increases student activity data held by the district, which itself needs retention and access rules under Policy 208.
Accessibility and workforce
Who is affected, and what skills or accommodations follow?
IEP/504 carve-out makes AI an accommodation right even under a ban; staff need training to apply it consistently.
Procurement
What should contracts, pricing and exit terms secure?
Procurement guidelines are a mandated regulation area; vendors must show network restriction and monitoring support.
Operating model
Which teams own the service once it runs?
Creates a centralized approval and exception operating model with an advisory group.
Publication history
- 2026-10-09K–12 · Issue 333 resources
Stable resource ID: fcps-md-policy-124-ai-text-20261007