From the K–12 edition of September 24, 2026
PSJA ISD September-updated AI Guidebook: approved tools, FERPA prompt bans, student pilot/co-pilot rules
Pharr-San Juan-Alamo Independent School District (Texas) · Public K-12 school district policy · Pharr-San Juan-Alamo ISD, Texas, USA
- Publisher
- PSJA ISD
- Original publication
- Updated September 2026
- Source retrieved
- 2026-09-25
What happened
PSJA ISD’s AI Guidebook, marked Updated September 2026, sets an affirmative GenAI operating model: staff must use district-approved tools via district login and must not enter, upload, paste, or describe identifiable student information into public AI tools (FERPA/Board Policy FL), with incidents reported to IT helpdesk. Approved tools listed include ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini, MagicSchool AI, NotebookLM, Wayground, Khanmigo, Canva AI, Adobe Express, Diffit, Brisk, Curipod, and TeachShare; new tools require IT approval. Student expectations emphasize permission, citation, fact-checking, no private info, and no copy-paste misuse under a pilot / AI co-pilot framing, with academic integrity requiring teacher permission and disclosure. References Texas DIR AI code of ethics obligations (Gov Code 2054.702 / TAC 219). Why now: provides a concrete enablement template contrasting NYC/LA pause pathways covered 2026-09-23.
Why it matters
Useful SLED artifact for districts choosing guided enablement: shows how approved lists, FERPA prompt bans, and student integrity rules can be packaged together. Not evidence of learning gains.
Evidence and measured results
Primary district policy webpage inspected in full HTML text extraction; living document without independent outcome metrics.
Limitations and uncertainty
Single-district guidance; enforcement and training quality unknown; approved list includes general-purpose tools that still need classroom controls; not an evaluation of learning or safety outcomes.
Put this evidence to work
Lighthouse Advisory interpretation, grounded in this source. Enriched 2026-09-25; this does not change the original publication date. Each role follows the same checklist so takeaways compare across sources.
Sales
Role takeaway
- Customer problem
- Districts need a practical enablement policy that hardens FERPA prompt hygiene without defaulting to a total ban.
- Stakeholders
- CIO/IT
- CAO
- Privacy officer
- Principals
- Teachers
- Discovery questions
- What is on your approved AI list today?
- How do you prevent student PII in prompts?
- What is the new-tool intake path?
- How is student AI use disclosed in coursework?
- Value hypothesis
- A guidebook-style policy package can make enablement auditable and privacy-safer than ad hoc teacher accounts.
- Potential engagement
- 3 to 4 week AI guidebook localization: approved list, FERPA STOP rule, student integrity language, and helpdesk intake.
- Unsupported claims
- That PSJA’s tool list improves learning
- Guaranteed FERPA compliance from policy text alone
- That general LLMs are safe for all grade bands
Pre-sales engineering
Role takeaway
- Fit
- Allowlisted GenAI via district identity; poor fit for unmanaged personal accounts on work tasks.
- Architecture and integration
- SSO to approved apps, CASB/DLP hints for identifiers, helpdesk ticketing for new tools, managed-device blocks for non-approved AI where feasible.
- Prerequisites
- Identity provider
- Helpdesk workflow
- Legal FERPA language
- Communications branding rules
- Constraints
- Living document may change
- General tools still gameable
- Single-district context
- Security
- Enforce no-PII prompting; incident report path to IT; prefer district-managed tenants over personal Plus accounts for student-related work.
- Proof of value
- Approved-list coverage of observed use
- Incident response drills
- Teacher attestation completion
Delivery
Role takeaway
- Work
- Publish guidebook, train on STOP rule and student disclosure, configure allowlists, and monitor personal-account exceptions.
- Dependencies
- IT
- Legal
- Curriculum
- Campus admin communications
- Ownership
- IT owns allowlist/intake; academics own student integrity expectations.
- Skills and adoption
- Practice rewriting prompts without identifiers; teach citation/disclosure habits to students.
- Governance checkpoints
- Guidebook approval
- Staff training wave
- Semester list review
- Incident log review
- Acceptance criteria
- Guidebook publicly posted
- Staff completion of privacy module
- Student syllabus language in force
- Risks
- Personal premium account shadow use
- Approved-list sprawl
- Integrity rules unenforced in classrooms
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?
Route GenAI through district-managed accounts and an approved-tool gateway; block or warn on consumer tools for work; require helpdesk workflow for new-tool intake.
Governance
Who approves, reviews and stays accountable for outcomes?
Publish staff and student expectation matrices; require citation/disclosure for AI-assisted coursework; align with state AI ethics codes where applicable.
Security and privacy
What data, permissions and controls need testing?
Strong explicit ban on identifiable student data in prompts; treat any suspected exposure as a reportable incident to IT—practical FERPA operationalization.
Accessibility and workforce
Who is affected, and what skills or accommodations follow?
Student pilot/co-pilot framing supports AI literacy but needs scaffolds for multilingual and special-education learners not detailed here.
Procurement
What should contracts, pricing and exit terms secure?
Maintain a living approved list with IT intake; require DPAs before adding tools; do not equate list membership with instructional effectiveness.
Operating model
Which teams own the service once it runs?
Enablement path: central allowlist plus campus academic integrity practices plus privacy incident ops.
Publication history
- 2026-09-24K–12 · Issue 195 resources
Stable resource ID: psja-isd-ai-guidebook-202609