Schools Grapple with AI’s Impact on Teacher Contracts

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly reshaping the educational landscape, influencing various aspects of teachers’ roles, including hiring, evaluation, lesson planning, and assessment. Despite this rapid transformation, only a limited number of school districts have begun to update their labor contracts to reflect these changes. The majority of public school teachers operate under union contracts that define their working conditions in detail. As AI continues to evolve, these agreements may need to explicitly address its implications, covering aspects such as adherence to district AI policies, acceptable AI tools, and protections against potential misuse.

Currently, many districts lack established and comprehensive policies regarding AI in educational settings, complicating contract negotiations. For instance, discussions in districts like Ithaca, New York, and Orange County, Florida, have stalled over critical issues, such as whether AI could replace teaching roles or undermine professional judgment. Experts are still discerning what appropriate contract language should include as the landscape evolves.

Robbie Torney, senior AI director for the nonprofit Common Sense Media, remarked, “Teachers have always had to deal with the implications and challenges of technology in the classroom.” He noted, however, that the lack of clarity regarding potential pitfalls means that some issues may not yet be on educators’ radars.

The National Council of Teacher Quality (NCTQ), which monitors teacher contracts across the United States, plans to analyze AI-related language in contracts over the coming year. Their focus will include how AI can be used for recruiting, retaining teachers, and enhancing instructional effectiveness. NCTQ President Heather Peske commented, “We will see more protection being put in place to guard against the misuse of AI, particularly in ways that could damage teachers.”

Research from the RAND Corporation indicates that fewer than 1 in 10 school districts have implemented policies regarding AI use by teachers. Even fewer have guidelines on how AI might be utilized for hiring, training, and evaluating educators. This gap suggests that many educators and administrators may need to address AI-related issues reactively as they arise.

One notable example is St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, which adopted one of the first contracts addressing nonconsensual digital manipulation and deepfakes. This decision followed an incident where a teacher was recorded without consent, and the footage was altered and shared online. Union President Brant Osborn stated, “We knew we needed protections,” emphasizing the need to foresee and mitigate potential future issues.

The contract developed by St. Tammany includes provisions for teacher privacy and outlines disciplinary measures concerning the unauthorized use of a teacher’s likeness. Since implementing this contract, the district has not encountered further deepfake issues. However, Osborn noted that changes to AI policies and contracts often occur only in response to specific problems.

Another concern is the impact of AI on teachers’ intellectual property rights. Osborn highlighted that many educators sell their materials through platforms like Teachers Pay Teachers, but existing contract language regarding academic freedom and intellectual property was established before the rise of the internet. He suggested that this outdated language needs revision.

In July, both the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA) initiated guidelines for using AI in education. AFT President Randi Weingarten warned that failure to address these issues could lead to significant job losses as AI becomes more integrated into educational systems. She proposed that future strikes could focus on intellectual property rights and employee data privacy.

The NEA, during its annual convention, voted to create model collective bargaining language on AI in schools. This would encompass job protections, data collection policies, ethical AI use, and professional development for teachers regarding AI literacy.

Contract negotiations in Ithaca have faced challenges, particularly when the teachers’ union sought language to prevent the district from using generative AI to replace staff. The district’s leadership has expressed hesitance to impose limits on technology that is still evolving. Chief Investigative Officer Robert Van Keuren stated, “We don’t want to artificially hamstring future boards, future educators, future parents.”

Educators like Adam Aguilera, a middle-grades English/language arts teacher in Washington, have begun to explore how AI will affect existing policies. Aguilera noted that AI tools are being adopted not only for instructional purposes but also for surveillance in schools. He stressed the need for training on these technologies to be a priority in contract discussions.

In contrast, the Rockdale 84 District in Illinois has adopted a collaborative approach regarding AI in the workplace. While their 2024-28 contract does not impose strict limits on AI, it establishes a committee of union and district representatives to guide the adoption of AI tools and the necessary teacher training.

The evolving landscape of AI in education presents both challenges and opportunities. As schools navigate these changes, the dialogue surrounding teacher contracts and AI will likely become increasingly critical in safeguarding educators’ rights and enhancing educational outcomes.