The context

A K–12 school has identified artificial intelligence as a strategic priority connected to its commitments to meaningful learning, academic integrity, and preparing students for a rapidly changing world. Across the education landscape, schools are experimenting with AI tools, but definitions, expectations, and practices vary widely.

School leaders recognize that AI will shape how students learn, create, and solve problems. At the same time, they want to ensure that any approach to AI reflects the school’s mission, developmental philosophy, and standards for intellectual rigor. Faculty conversations reveal uncertainty about issues such as appropriate use, skill development, and authorship.

Rather than adopting tools or writing reactive policies, the school is seeking a research-informed framework to guide decision-making. The goal is to clarify what responsible, mission-aligned AI use looks like across grade levels and subject areas, and to translate that understanding into a shared structure that can support consistent practice over time.

Sample questions guiding this work include:

• How does current research describe the opportunities and risks associated with AI in teaching and learning?

• What principles consistently appear in high-quality frameworks for responsible and effective AI use in education?

• How should expectations for AI use differ across developmental levels?

• What instructional conditions help ensure that AI supports, rather than replaces, deep thinking and skill development?

• What shared framework would help educators make consistent, mission-aligned decisions about AI in their classrooms?

Our approach

In situations like this, Wasatch Education Group works with schools to synthesize research and emerging best practices into a clear, usable framework that supports thoughtful, mission-aligned decision-making.

A typical engagement includes:

• Review of current research syntheses, policy guidance, and practitioner frameworks related to AI and learning

• Identification of shared principles, instructional conditions, and design considerations across high-quality sources

• Synthesis of these insights into a concise, school-aligned framework for responsible AI use

• Development of curated research-to-practice resources aligned to the framework

The focus is on clarity, relevance, and usability rather than exhaustive coverage. The framework is not a technology plan or a set of rigid rules, but a tool that helps educators make consistent, thoughtful decisions aligned with the school’s mission.

What schools gain from this work

Through this type of study, schools gain:

• A clear, research-informed framework for AI use aligned with the school’s mission and values

• Shared language for discussing appropriate AI use across grade levels and subject areas

• Greater consistency in expectations across classrooms

• Guidance for balancing innovation, academic integrity, and skill development

• Practical resources to support professional learning and faculty conversations

Typical deliverables

• A concise executive summary highlighting key insights and strategic implications

• A practice-based AI framework outlining core principles and decision guidelines

• A curated research-to-practice resource guide for faculty and leaders

• A practice-facing slide deck to support internal conversations and professional learning

Why this work matters

Schools are under pressure to respond quickly to the rise of artificial intelligence. Without a shared understanding of how these tools affect learning and how they align with the school’s mission, responses can become reactive, inconsistent, or overly focused on specific technologies.

This kind of work helps schools move from uncertainty toward a coherent, research-informed approach. By grounding decisions in both evidence and mission, schools are better positioned to support meaningful learning, academic integrity, and thoughtful innovation.