Brigid Bergin: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. I'm Brigid Bergin, senior reporter in the WNYC and Gothamist newsroom, sitting in for Brian today. Now, a conversation about how New York City public schools are navigating a rapidly changing tech landscape. There are a few big stories we're going to run through over the next few minutes. First, a hotly contested issue in schools across the country, and you probably guessed it, what role should artificial intelligence play in the classroom?

On Tuesday, the city released long-awaited guidance outlining how and when teachers and students are allowed to use AI, but the directives are still a little murky. The city is now soliciting feedback. Another major development, more than 150 schools across the city have adopted digital hall passes. These are systems that let teachers track how long a student is out of class, who else has requested a bathroom break at the same time, and how long they've been gone.

In overall education policy news, Mayor Zohran Mamdani is asking the state legislature to let him maintain mayoral control of New York City's public schools. That's a shift from how he campaigned, which was on ending mayoral control to give families and educators more say. How are Albany lawmakers responding? My colleague, Jessica Gould, education reporter at Gothamist and WNYC, has been covering all of this this week. Jess, welcome back. Great to be talking with you this morning.

Jessica Gould: You too.

Brigid Bergin: Let's jump in on the AI usage in schools. Let's start with the basics. The city just released this red light, green light framework. It sounds like something you do on the playground.

Jessica Gould: Right.

Brigid Bergin: It's supposed to guide teachers and students how to use AI. Can you walk me through the new guidelines?

Jessica Gould: Yes. As you said, it's a traffic light approach. Red light, green light, and yellow. I'll just list some of the things that are allowed and not allowed. Red means stop for AI. That would be, you cannot, as an educator, use AI to discipline or decide discipline for a student, for grades, for special education plans, for surveillance, which we're going to talk about a little bit. Student data can't be used to train AI models.

Then, the yellow is, this is where it gets a little bit confusing, but drafting some communications with families is allowed, using AI to write a first draft of your email translation. Then, for some student research and projects, use caution. That's what they say. it's up to the educator to determine. Then green is brainstorming. Green means go. Organizing, scheduling, professional development are some of the proceed with confidence areas.

Brigid Bergin: Just as you were reading them to me, it raises questions in the proceed with caution space about how an educator would determine whether a student used AI for a part of a project or to do the project. Presumably, that's one of the areas where they're going to be looking for some more feedback.

Jessica Gould: Right. The DOE and the school's chancellor says that this is a living document. They are soliciting feedback in the coming weeks for what they say will be a more comprehensive playbook released in June, and then there are going to be updates after that. In fairness to everyone who is grappling with these decisions, it is a rapidly developing field, very hard to catch up with.

There have been lots of criticisms of the Education Department because they've had a halting, inconsistent approach to AI. First, they banned ChatGPT, then they lifted the ban, and then they've been perseverating on it for years now. This is what we've got so far is this traffic light approach with a lot of areas for educators and administrators to exercise their own beliefs about what should be done.

Brigid Bergin: Listeners, we want to hear from you. Are you a parent or teacher figuring out what your opinion should be on how AI should be used or not used in schools? Do you think there's a responsible way to implement these guidelines, or should there be a moratorium altogether? When it comes to the digital hall passes, which we're going to be talking about in just a moment, do you think it's a helpful way to keep track of students or a major breach of privacy?

We want to hear from you. The number is 212-433-9692. That's 212-433-WNYC. You can always call or text that number. Just the education chancellor says we shouldn't let the fear of AI make us paralyzed and fall behind in adopting the technology, but we just need to be careful about it. A lot of parents are arguing against AI in the classroom. How would you lay out the different camps at this point?

Jessica Gould: I would say that people, including the chancellor, who are offering this more middle-path approach say that, first of all, AI is here, students are using it, and it is a school's role to educate and lead and shape how children learn to operate in this world. Therefore, it's important to give them tools and the ability to exercise their own discretion over these tools. That's one thing.

Then, they also say that there are genuinely valuable parts of AI that can be useful for teachers, particularly with backend lesson planning. I've heard that from a lot of teachers when they are trying to tailor assignments to students' differing literacy levels or English language mastery levels, that they can individualize more easily. Something that would take a long time to differentiate between students can be done more quickly.

Also that there are opportunities for creative work with AI if done responsibly with oversight by an educator. That is what people on the cautious pro side of things say. Then on the con side, there are lots of parents and students and educators who are very worried about what they call "cognitive offloading," which is basically shortcuts that prevent your brain from developing critical thinking skills. Then there's worries about the impact on the environment and--

Brigid Bergin: The energy from the data centers.

Jessica Gould: Right. Energy use, water use, and then there's worries about data privacy. Even though the DOE says that it has controls in place, there are a lot of questions about that and, as this technology develops, whether those controls are keeping up with the technology. I think, for me, one of the things that stands out the most is the cognitive offloading part, because we've just gone through this process of deciding that the experiment with phones in schools, most people seem to be coming out on the side of it, wasn't a good experiment. The results were not good on attention, on learning, and also the toxic effects of some social media, which is now gaining traction.

Brigid Bergin: We're going to talk about later in the show.

Jessica Gould: Yes, so all of these things, it seems like a repeat of a similar evolution where there's tentative, and then exploration of these tools in schools or allowing them, and then this effort to claw back over years.

Brigid Bergin: Jess, I know you've spoken to some teachers, and you've heard both sides of the story, but do you have a sense where more teachers or most teachers fall in this, or has the teachers' union taken a position on this?

Jessica Gould: Well, the teachers' union has. I mean, the teachers' union announced over the summer that it would partner with some of the biggest tech companies to offer trainings in AI at the union headquarters, that they are devoting physical space at the local UFT headquarters here in New York for these trainings, which I went to. As you would imagine, more of the people at those trainings are in favor of harnessing the benefits of AI, whether it's for their backend work or for their students.

Most of them said they would do it more. They want to use it for their own planning work, not so much for student work. They're still pretty cautious about that, but then outside of that, I've heard a lot of pushback from teachers who are very concerned about kids not developing the critical thinking skills and skills in general that they need because of the shortcuts through AI.

Brigid Bergin: I want to bring some of our callers in. Let's start with Sarah in Manhattan. Sarah, you're on WNYC.

Sarah: Hello. Thanks for having me on this important issue.

Brigid Bergin: Thank you.

Sarah: I guess I'll just freeform here. I have been following this when we realized, as parents, that our kids were using tools that were AI-based in our schools that we just heard off-hand from our teachers. I was really upset to learn about that because I didn't see a citywide rollout. It seems that the schools are using their discretionary funds to choose things that are from vendors that are approved by the DOE, but seem to contradict the new red light, green light, yellow light guidelines that were rolled out recently.

There's current contracts in place that seem to take tools that have generative AI that are using student data to train their tools. That seems in contrast with what is coming out from the DOE in general. I just want to have some sort of discussion on what's going to be done about these tools that are already being used in classrooms. I'm talking elementary school. This is really upsetting, and it doesn't seem to be a policy that is meted out throughout the DOE network in the same way. There's a lot of discretion going on here with tools that are, frankly, under-tested and terrible for the environment.

Brigid Bergin: Sarah, just quickly, what age is the student that you're talking about?

Sarah: Six.

Brigid Bergin: Wow. Okay, I want to give Jess a chance to respond. Jess, just to build on that, are there certain chatbots or programs that have been pitching themselves to the city schools that are on that approved list that the union's been doing the training?

Jessica Gould: Yes. Some of these things that I've heard about, one of the literacy curricula that has been required, one of the three choices that schools in the elementary level can have, that is part of this literacy reform, does some voice recognition technology to see if you're reading correctly. It's capturing student voices, little kids as they learn to read. This has been flagged for me as an area where it's biometrics, and that a lot of parents are concerned about and weren't informed about ahead of time to opt out of, and what's going to happen to that voice recognition technology.

The DOE's guidance says that it's an area that they are having, they're going to pursue, that they are trying to figure out, both the degree to which there is biometric surveillance, biometric recognition data collected, and whether they're going to ban it. That's not been decided yet. That's in the to-come area. The officials talked about how they are working on compiling a list of the AI tools that are being used.

It doesn't seem like they know definitively which tools are being used by different schools because schools can buy things out of their own budgets. Maybe they're approved, but it's not something that goes through the more rigorous contract process with the Panel for Education Policy, which is like the Board of Education. In recent months, the Panel for Education Policy was blocking all contracts that had any AI in them because the city didn't have a policy yet, but some of these things are still being purchased on the local school level.

Brigid Bergin: We've talked a bit about the concerns from teachers about the long-term cognitive effects and the concerns from parents. How worried are students about this?

Jessica Gould: I've talked to a bunch of students at different schools throughout the city. I hear from a lot of kids who say, "I don't use AI to cheat or to answer essay questions, but I know people who do." Even the kids who speak about being more virtuous in this way, and they tell me that they're just using AI for study guides and to quiz themselves on material, but they say that the concern over AI has radically changed the classroom already, such that most, not most, but many teachers are doing all of their assignments either on computer or pen and paper in class so that there's not take-home assignments.

When there are take-home assignments, there is a lot of suspicion about whether students have delivered product that draws from AI. The teachers tell me that they use AI software to detect. It's like a cat-and-mouse game. Some students are delivering AI-generated work. Teachers are using AI software to detect it, and none of it is clear. The teachers feel hamstrung because they don't have a good way of knowing what is AI or not. These tools are flawed, and kids feel like they're under constant suspicion.

Brigid Bergin: Listeners, we're taking your calls and texts on the use of AI in the classroom, those digital hall passes, and, of course, the renewal of mayoral control. Just a couple of listeners have texted in with some concerning issues. One listener writes, "I'm a mom of a 10th-grader. My feelings about AI are that there should be classes devoted to the use of AI, how to use it responsibly, but also the long-term developmental and environmental impact. It has to start with training teachers well. Just allowing students to use it on their own sometimes is not good."

Another listener writes, "There should be a moratorium on the use of AI by students for any substantive content. Students must learn to produce themselves. For the same reason, social media must be curtailed to avoid harm to developing minds," a point that you raised. Taking those concerns into account, I understand that there is a proposal for a school specifically oriented to AI. Can you tell me a little bit about what that pitch is and how they're trying to sell AI as a tool for learning rather than this intellectual crutch?

Jessica Gould: Well, it's interesting because when this school was first being pitched around, they were invoking AI more in its title and in its mission than they are in recent months. Now, they're calling it Next Generation Technology High School, and that AI and learning to be both an ethical user and an ethical developer of AI is part of it, but it's not the only thing.

This would be a selective high school in Manhattan for STEM-oriented students. The idea is that this is where jobs are and that the schools have a responsibility to prepare kids for the job world that's out there. There is a lot of interest in some corners for this kind of school that has a rigorous STEM focus, and that would partner with some of the tech colleges and programs, as well as potentially some of the tech companies, to train them to be able to work there.

Brigid Bergin: Before we move on to the digital hall pass, you mentioned that they are still soliciting feedback on these potential guidelines. How would a parent or a teacher provide that feedback?

Jessica Gould: First of all, on the tech high school, formerly known as, at least colloquially, the AI high school, that's going to come up for a public hearing in April. People can sign up to speak and be part of that process. There is a way to digitally send feedback, of course, for the AI playbook to be incorporated in. I believe that the chancellor said that there would be some kind of meetings or town halls. Personally, I haven't seen a schedule for that yet. It may be out there. That's how people can register their concerns.

Brigid Bergin: Yes, so it's definitely something to watch for there. Let's talk about digital hall passes. You wrote a story this week that I shared on social media and got so many responses from people to your work. Let's talk about what they are. This is not handing you the laminated card to go to the bathroom that I think many of us used when we were in high school.

Jessica Gould: Yes, I remember more the block of wood in elementary school.

Brigid Bergin: Exactly.

Jessica Gould: I did do some research on the different ways that people are still using physical passes. Somebody talked about a giant water cooler jug that's handed around just to make it very clear that you're allowed to go to the bathroom. In any case, yes, I think this is an area that some administrators thought was ripe for disruption and tech companies, too. What happens with this particular technology called SmartPass is that students-- There are iPads, which schools have to buy. They are posted by the door.

Students sign out on the iPad. I think it defaults to five minutes, but you choose how long you're going to be gone based on whether you're going to the water fountain or the nurse's office or the bathroom, and then you sign back in. This was brought to my attention by some teen activists at the New York Civil Liberties Union, who feel like this data is very intrusive and that they're being monitored. There was talk about administrators being able to track groups of friends to make sure that they aren't gathering in the bathroom together.

When I talk to administrators and teachers, there are challenges that happen in running a school with bathrooms. Since time immemorial, people have been having smoke breaks or cell phone breaks or hangout breaks in the bathroom. Fights also can happen. There are concerns about what's going on in there and in the hallways, but a lot of people are saying that this is not the right way to deal with it.

Brigid Bergin: Well, we have several callers who want to weigh in. We'll start with Bill in Yorkville, who I understand your daughter goes to a school that has the digital hall pass. Is that right?

Bill: Yes. Hey, thanks so much for taking my call. I did read this story on Gothamist yesterday, and I'm so glad that it was written and posted. My child goes to a high school that was mentioned in the story. They already have bathroom anxiety, which a lot of kids do, and doesn't feel great about going in public restrooms. Now, beyond that, at this particular school, as you said, every school since time immemorial, there are issues with kids who gather in the bathroom. Some who bully, some who vape, smoke, whatever, yada, yada, yada. It happens.

Now, the school's solution is to turn to surveillance. They have these passes. We didn't know about it as parents. We think it's odd because I think you have to opt in or opt out to your child's images being used in promotional materials for the Department of Education, but we were never asked whether we would be interested in opting in or out to this data being tracked, which it is. We also learned from your article that they contracted with an outside company to do this.

You can understand there are major concerns about the privacy of that data. I think they are completely legitimate. In the past, people might have said this is a slippery slope argument where Chicken Littles thinking the sky is falling. After DOGE, et cetera, has happened, I don't think that these are unfounded fears. Beyond that, getting back to the individual students themselves and how it affects them on a daily basis, the high school mentioned in your article publishes per Markham period bathroom pass time on report cards, which I think is just bizarre and has been anecdotally in our home, a source of further anxiety.

Our student is already understandably, as most kids are, concerned about grades and challenges with certain subjects, but the stress over the report card was actually not centered on that. It was centered on, why are they publishing how often I went to the bathroom, which I am already, I don't want to say embarrassed, but I'm self-conscious about, why is this associated with my grade? In sum, we find it bizarre. We find it very invasive and, frankly, I think incredibly short-sighted by the district. I'm very happy that these student activists have raised the issue, and I hope that it goes somewhere. I personally reached out to the principal of this school and gotten diplomatic but unreassuring response.

Brigid Bergin: Bill, thank you so much for calling in and sharing that experience with a student in a school who is using this. So many issues that Bill raised there, Jess. One of the things that jumped out to me was this idea of there is no opting in to the system that if it's been implemented in the school, unlike some of the other things that parents have the opportunity to opt in or opt out of, it sounds like this puts students in a position where, if they want to use the bathroom, they have to use this system.

Jessica Gould: Yes, I think that's what I'm hearing a lot lately, both on this bathroom issue, and then also the voice data collection that there is not the same level of permission-giving and seeking permission that there are for very much simpler activities and uses in schools. A lot of parents and a lot of students are seeking more permission on the front end of this. I also thought it was interesting. I did not know that it would go on a report card. That's pretty interesting.

I've heard from other parents who are concerned about kids with-- I heard from somebody with Crohn's disease and who have disability accommodations for unlimited bathroom time. It's just so hard to be an adolescent. This is such a sensitive area. I do understand the desire to make it safer and more streamlined, and I can see that there would be value there. I understand parents' concerns and kids' concerns about this way of doing it.

Brigid Bergin: I want to bring in Johanna Miller from the NYCLU. Johanna, you're on WNYC. I'm wondering, do parents have any legal standing to opt their kids out of systems like this?

Johanna Miller: Hi. Yes, good morning. Right now, no. Actually, one of the big problems here is that these decisions are being made school by school. This type of invasive technology is really inappropriate to be decided on by each individual principal. We're looking for better vendor controls at the citywide and at the statewide level to make sure that parents don't have to find out about this stuff from the news. They will have a more engaged process to make sure that their children's privacy is protected.

Brigid Bergin: Johanna, it's understood that during the hours when students are in their school, their civil liberties are limited. They don't have freedom of speech or freedom of assembly rights in the same way. Do we have a sense yet of whether this kind of data collection qualifies as another one of those limitations?

Johanna Miller: Well, if there's one area where everyone can agree that we all deserve the utmost privacy, including young people, it's in our use of the bathroom. I think that's why people are having such a gut reaction to this, because there's absolutely no question that this is the most private record there could possibly be, and that there's never been any sense in creating an ongoing report of anyone's use of the bathroom.

We just think that's ridiculous. Ultimately, sure, kids have been hanging out in the bathroom since time immemorial, but the problem here, really, we think, is that no one was making money off of hall passes, and now someone is. With education dollars as scarce as they are, we really need to see better controls at the citywide level to make sure we're not paying precious tax dollars to commodify student data.

Brigid Bergin: Johanna, thank you so much for joining us. Jess, this is all happening at the same time. The city and the state are dealing with budget negotiations. Schools have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on this technology. Do you have a sense yet if this has come at the expense of other needs like staffing or facilities?

Jessica Gould: Well, I think it has to. All of this is a trade-off, always. The student I talked to said that they would much rather see the money go to teachers or facilities improvements rather than this. Yes, it's real money. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in this past year alone on this particular technology. One thing that's so confusing about it is that the AI guidance says that surveillance is prohibited. Maybe this isn't considered surveillance, but a lot of parents would argue that it is.

Brigid Bergin: I think tracking your bathroom time feels like surveillance. Just before we let you go, we have to talk briefly about mayoral control. It's up for renewal this year. As I mentioned, Mayor Mamdani had campaigned on rolling back mayoral control and then reversed that position. He's fighting for the state legislature to renew it. What's the status of that fight to extend his leadership of the school system?

Jessica Gould: Well, mayoral control is always a bargaining chip where the legislature tries to get more out of an administration in return for it and for how long mayoral control is granted. I know that the chancellor was up in Albany this week asking for some more time to implement the class size bill, which is coming to a head now that more classes have to be in compliance. I know that legislators, many of them, want to see the city meet those goals.

Brigid Bergin: That's, of course, to reduce the size of how many students can be in a classroom.

Jessica Gould: Right, which is complicated, expensive, but desired by many, and also part of the law. I think what I'm hearing most in recent weeks is that there are parents who liked that Mamdani was going to democratize the leadership of the school system and make mayoral control less unitary. I think that as they voice concerns about AI and school mergers throughout the city that there are people saying, "I really thought that he was going to take parent voice more into consideration," and so I think that's part of this debate as well.

Brigid Bergin: Well, so much more to come on your beat, Jess. You're going to be busy for the next who knows how long. My guest has been WNYC and Gothamist education reporter Jessica Gould. Jess, thanks so much for being here.

Jessica Gould: Thank you.

Copyright © 2026 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.