Testimony Before the Council of the District of Columbia Committee of the Whole
Public Hearing on Technology in Schools
By Noah Dougherty
Director of School Talent and Academic Strategy, DC Charter School Alliance
Good afternoon, Chairman Mendelson and members of the Committee. My name is Noah Dougherty, I’m a Ward 2 resident and the Director of School Talent and Academic Strategy at the DC Charter School Alliance, the local non-profit that advocates on behalf of public charter schools to ensure that every student can choose high-quality public schools that prepare them for lifelong success.
The role of technology in our schools is a conversation that educators and families are having across our city and I appreciate the Council for elevating those conversations in this public hearing.
This week has involved many conversations about technology in schools, including two days where I worked alongside over 250 educators, families, researchers, and Council representatives to learn about what it means to prepare every DC student to thrive in a world being shaped by AI. The Alliance is proud to serve on the steering committee of the Capital AI Education Collective and to cosponsor this week’s cross-sector AI Education Leadership Summit.
I also want to share appreciation for the good work already in motion. Thank you to the State Board of Education for the robust roundtable discussion on the topic of age appropriate screentime and to OSSE for taking the lead in crafting an AI model policy that prioritizes our students’ safety, privacy, and wellbeing.
The DC Charter School Alliance has four priorities for technology in schools:
1. It is imperative that our city center students first in this conversation, and that means prioritizing their safety, privacy, and wellness. Towards that end, the Alliance has developed a model technology policy which schools can use to ensure they have the key policies and procedures in place to keep our students safe, their data private, and to protect their wellness in an increasingly complex digital environment. We have also developed a model screentime policy to help schools develop guidance that is specific to their community: its stakeholders, curriculum, student needs, and instructional program.
2. We believe that screentime, and technology use in general, should be a thoughtful reflection of each school’s unique mission, community, and student needs. For decades, educators have been learning when technology is, and is not helpful for learning; the importance of quality digital content; the ways technology can help us better serve diverse learners, and the important role schools play in closing the digital divide.
3. Our third priority is engagement. As part of our policy development process, we are particularly interested in hearing from teachers and families on the issue of technology, because they are the ones who are working most directly with students. We believe that listening is critical, because this is an issue where differing perspectives can be equally valuable.
Concerns about technology, its impact on brain development, social emotional behavior, and classroom learning are absolutely valid.
Concerns about widening the digital divide by limiting technology, especially for students who rely on school to access these tools and build these skills, are equally valid.
We want to better understand both perspectives, and all the perspectives in between. Listening is helping us support our schools to engage their families and educators to review and update existing technology policies, share best practices, incorporate instruction about technology and AI into their curriculum, and make instructional shifts where appropriate.
4. Our final priority is responsible innovation. Public charter schools are meant to incubate new ideas that improve student outcomes. That is why we are supporting the Capital AI Education Collective, which held the AI convenings from the last two days, and why we launched the DC AI Innovation Fellowship which brings together 30 high school educators to tackle the question, how might AI enable deeper learning for our students? We know a key concern is that AI is replacing critical thinking, which is why we want to take this issue head-on and support high school educators to determine ways AI does, and does not, more deeply engage students in critical thinking. There will be a showcase for these Fellows in May to highlight bright spots, which we are excited to invite the Council and its staff to.
In closing, I want to share a bright spot from Washington Leadership Academy, a DC public charter school that has been recognized locally and nationally, for its leadership in AI. When asked about AI, a student said, “The term ‘artificial intelligence’ isn’t real because to be intelligent you have to be able to teach yourself. It should be called artificial prediction—all it does is predict answers.”(1) This is the level of nuanced understanding we want all our students to have; this is what empowers them to navigate a world that is changing, to keep themselves safe, and to thrive. In this important conversation, I urge all stakeholders to center students first, their safety and their preparedness for the future.
Thank you for your time and I welcome your questions.
(1) https://www.educationnext.org/trailblazing-school-on-the-frontier-of-artificial-intelligence-washington-leadership-academy/