All right. Good morning, folks. Thank you for uh thank you for joining us this morning. Uh delighted to have you back in this nice, brisk, cool uh December morning. Just a reminder, Christmas is uh over a week away. So
you're not going to do your shopping. >> You can't use the next two hours for that. Just just so you know. Uh but uh we'll start with the roll call. >> Good morning, Mr. Appel >> here. >> Miss Brousard >> here. >> Miss Cordell,
Mr. Cunning, Mr. I mean, so I'm sorry, Miss Rebecca here. >> Mr. Godfrey, Miss Beasia >> here, >> Miss Rachel Parker, Mr. Kemp,
Mr. Wedgeworth >> here, >> Mr. Davis >> here, >> Miss Vanessa >> here, >> Dr. Cderon >> here, >> Mr. Craig >> here, >> Mr. Dirk,
>> Mr. Gasper >> here, >> Mr. Mr. Nier >> here. >> Mr. Ronnie Morris >> here. >> Mr. Andy Quig >> here. >> Mr. Matt Winters. >> Mr. Booth >> here. >> Mr. Preston Castillo >> here.
>> Mr. Aaron Colada >> here. >> Senator Rick Edmmonds. Mr. Goel >> here. >> Miss Mary Hubards. Mr. Omar Padilia, Rex Slabel
>> here, >> Mr. Matthew Vince >> here, >> Mr. Anthony Owen. >> We have a full line. >> Very good. I know we also have some guests here. If our guests would like to to just introduce themselves, we all know themselves in the room. We start with
>> Hey, Thomas Mule, OCS, communications director. >> Thomas Lever, assistant superintendent for assessment accountability analytics at DOE. Ben Le Moy, director of government affairs, DOE. I'm Paul Randler, representative Sire. >> Hi, I'm executive director of teaching
and learning a DOE. Also, West Michigan a lot of good students. >> Bonnie, I'm the department head of computer science at South Eastern Louisiana University. >> Kelly Williams with consulting work magic schools. Julie Courtman on the
district partnership here for Williams Pan de College of Education Independent Science at University. >> I'm Ashley Town, president for policy and governmental affairs with LOE.
>> Andrew Schwarz, professor at FLU Amy Cap, chief student affairs officer, LCTCs. >> Very good. Thank you all for being here. Our first order of business is approval of the minutes from November 10th. They were all sent out by email. Got a moment to review those. We'd entertain a motion
in a second to approve. >> I'll make a motion about Henderson minus one technical correction. I've already presented to Miss. I guess we have a motion. Is there a second? And then we have a second from Bruce. Any opposition to that? Okay. The
motions are adopted. Uh we would like to uh have a change in the agenda to move uh to swap the placements of item three and four. So we would start with the uh the swamp. I love the acronym the swamp presentation in first followed by the
standards alignment conversation. I did a motion in the second motion. Morris second by Mr. Pel. Is there any objection to that? Okay. So we have changed the agenda. Now glad like to recognize Mr. Morris for some preliminary comments and opening
remarks. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a couple things. One, I wanted to bring this hand out to everybody's attention just to make sure everybody's got this copy and then particularly with the focus on page two uh which which uh speaks to the upcoming work group meeting focus area.
So as you as you plan the calendar and so forth, this gives you some appreciation for the working plan going forward. So it identifies um the meeting months and then the focus areas for each meeting and then we make sure that u
each of those focus areas is aligned with one of the six deliverables uh that that we're we're going to provide with Essie on March 10. So I just want to make sure everybody uh knows where to find that information. Uh second thing I want to share uh Mr. Chair is uh I was I
was invited to my second um uh um AI party uh in New Orleans. And one of my takeaways from that meeting uh was a story that Miss Guy shared with us uh and and she shared the story that we're
all familiar with to some extent. Uh Rubble Stillskin went to sleep for a hundred years and upon awakening uh members of the community gave Rubble Still Skin a tour of the community and Rumble Stillskin was so amazed at the
progress or the changes in 100 years and then they took Rumble Stillskin to the school building. Rumble Stillskin said, "Oh, fantastic. Nothing has changed." So, I'm just really excited that uh we got this group here together and in
Louisiana is uh positioning itself to uh to be very responsive to this very significant change uh in the education system. So, thank you all again for for your commitment here and the skill set that you bring to the table as well as your vision going forward because we're
going to need that to prepare for the next hundred years. So, thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, sir. And uh appreciate that very much. I think there's a lot of uh what is it? The alapone from the untouchables. We laugh because it's funding and we laugh because it's true.
And I think that's certainly one of those. Uh the first thing few weeks ago, as you know, we had a a federal grant opportunity arise and um with a very very short timeline. And so with with this completely unreasonable expectation, I called Lindseay Keith
Vincent who does remarkable work at Bling Attack and asked to put the together a consortium of about 10 different organizations uh to do a comprehensive response to that grant application. And so they came up with the swamp acronym which is kind
of contrary to the political winds in in DC where they're trying to drain the swamp. But I think it takes on a new meaning here. And so Lindsay asked her and her team to come and present this because that covers so many of the metrics that we're working with the deliverables we're trying to reach. And
uh Lindsay, the floor is yours. >> Thank you. You know, he did ask for an unreasonable task to be completed. I simply asked today that he wear green. Do you want to speak to why you were unable to meet?
I I don't own an article clothing that's not blue or orange. That's it. >> I appreciate that. >> So, it was a task, but I think our team was able to meet the moment and create a
really strong proposal and cast a vision that hopefully you also will have interest in and want to be part of. So, the structured workforce and multi-institutional um partnerships for AI in Louisiana
proposal, what our swamp stands for, was submitted on December 3rd. Um, and it was submitted in response to the absolute priority one, which was focused on higher education and the integration of AI in that space. What we found is
based on our assets and experiences across a number of sectors that we were also able to touch priority two which focused on teacher preparation and education and also workforce with shortterm programs
for upskilling and reskilling. So just quick recap on our timeline. Um as Dr. Henderson noted we found out on the 12th of November. It was submitted on the 3rd and there was lots of life in
between. Um on the 14th we were able to talk with some experts including some of you in this group about who needed to be part of the work. On the 17th we met um in New Orleans with additional leaders.
Matt Winters um had an AI presentation at a conference and we were able to connect with him about some of the Utah work um and we were able to discuss what could be for Louisiana based on what was happening across the country understanding what our strengths were.
Our first team meeting online was on the 19th. Today is the first time we've met many of our friends in person. So, it's really quite remarkable what was able to be accomplished um and able to be done electronically with this timeline. On
the 20th, we had our first draft, Thanksgiving. We were thankful for lots of good feedback. Um and then by the first we met with Blake. Blake, do you want to talk a little bit about the work we did with prompts? >> Sure. Uh first, I want to commend the
team. I thought it was uh an amazing uh show of of of support for um for AI um among a lot of different universities and and I came into this hearing people saying universities don't get along and this was really a show that that we do
and if we want to push Louisiana ahead we can. Um we uh looked so my team has has worked with with lots of different organizations and what we did was we looked at the priorities that were presented um uh through the different
collaborative meetings. Um and then also look at the guidelines and the rubric of the grant. And we basically did the hard thing of saying how can we meet the priorities the group has with the priorities that DOE puts puts out and how do we put that into a cohesive grant
proposal. Um and we used AI to do it. Um and and we we used AI as kind of a co-pilot in our process. We first assembled these priorities this rubric. We pulled together a big library of all
of the content that the team had come up with prior to me meeting with them. And we also pulled together a library of the publicly available DOE information. Um, and then we started to ask questions and started to form our ideas. Um, Lindsay
and I were up kind of going back and forth. Is this making sense? We're verifying, looking at things, and then the human comes in the loop. Once we have a pretty definitive understanding of what the narrative structure is and how that is tackling the rubric, we're
then able to look at it and do what humans do best, which is say, "No, yes, here are the political implications of this. We need to rearrange this." Um, and so you know that I think AI did really well at pulling together a 30 plus page document with a lot of
different ideas into a single cohive system. But what um I hope that we learn from this this process that it that we can really lean on AI for is creating a starting point for us to bring our unique skill set in and quickly rapidly
iterate on ideas. I think what you presented and what was submitted um is not necessarily an AI generating piece. It's a a piece of of of a lot of different expertise coming together and
being synthesized through AI then corrected and edited and eventually submitted um by our our human team. So I thank you for that and um and it was a fun process. It was a fun process and we appreciate your engagement and support.
I learned very much quickly about AI in the process. As a former English teacher, um it was a steep learning curve for me to create those data sets and work on that um coding and prompting. And so um if we're expecting our teachers and our leaders to do this
part, we need to make sure we can too. Um, we received our final support letters the day it was due at 4:40 I think is the time reflected there and then at 456ish we could enter um and it went to the US
Department of Education for review. We'll hear back on this on New Year's Eve. U Mr. Morris has assured us if and when ours or any in the state of Louisiana are funded that he will celebrate with us on New Year's Eve.
So moving on, >> Lindsay, if we could also at this point in time, also I wanted to recognize Ashley Townson and the team at DOE for helping us with those letters of support uh because that was a big deal. It was a lot of work. It was work over the Thanksgiving holidays and so we really
just appreciate that uh uh spirit of collaboration as well. So want to thank those cops. >> Certainly. Um, I believe that was Regina and Javaris that assisted Ashley and that group with that process. So, incredibly thankful for that. Um, and
right in the nick of time. All right. So, what did we build? Um, first of all, we did create some things, but one of the things we really took time to understand is what was already going well. The folks on this screen
here, the universities, the agencies, and the partners have some great work taking place already in the AI space. Um, and I'm happy to share this slide with you. I know there's lots of information on them. Um, but essentially, we have six universities that are key contributors to the
visioning. Um, and will be with the work once it's implemented. But it's important as you know our project design um leave space for anybody who wants to be part of this moving forward to secure funding through a competitive process and be part of the development of
products that are going to lead to those successful outcomes um that we're hoping to have at the end. Now, we've talked about the universities, the number of centers located on those campuses, um, funded projects from different agencies, but I think it's also important that we
don't lose track of the fact that there's state agencies that were key contributors to this conversation. Um, certainly the Department of Education and Bessie were active contributors to our visioning. We've worked closely um with those groups each of our
universities in different capacities and we would envision those relationships continuing once this is awarded. The le has AI initiatives in place. We've worked closely with their leadership to make sure if this is funded that we're
communicating directly with the folks who are making economic development decisions across our state, including in rural Louisiana um where those conversations really need to happen so we have the workforce necessary to meet
those opportunities that avail themselves. uh workforce commission Omar Padilla um had a side job for those two weeks and it was to provide feedback to us about ways we could do a better job of ensuring that the outcomes were
aligned with employment outcomes and strategies for the state. The Louisiana Board of Regents has two initiatives that also are directly aligned to what we were proposing with swamp. One of those initiatives was the leem centers. Um there's nine in the
state of Louisiana. We've learned that this activity will be moving under the workforce commission. Uh but the goal will still be the same. We're making sure that STEM education is happening at all levels from PK to all levels and of
our partners that are engaged. um all of the institutions either are homes to centers or they're working tangentially with centers for outreach um and academic programming. LA Next is an NSF funded effort. That
award was an $8 million effort and that supports building research capacity across the landscape of both two-year and four-year institutions in the state. And we're hopeful that this has funded some of the research that's taking place
in that space will be AI focused. So again, using funds that exist in our state, aligning with initiatives that have already been investigated and then having an AI focus on the work. I promise I'm not in in charge of the
technical part of this project. Finance funding. >> All right. So really quickly I want to talk about the humans. If you'll notice there's lots of people in green here today. One of the focuses of this effort um was to come together working towards a single goal not necessarily as
institutions but as individuals who were excited about this work and think it's a priority for the state. Um so I do serve at Louisiana Tech. I'm Lindsay. We also got lot of from two lane that's working with us. Andrew Schwarz who you'll hear
from shortly from LSU. Henry Chu at ULL. An K Saints with ULM. Paula Calderon is at SLU. Lola. Um and then Bonnie in the back is there today. She's one of our co-PIs. Amy Papel who leads at the LCTCS
um administrative level. And then we have additional support from Vanessa Bata at the Cane Center LSU. She's one of our co-PIs. and then Chris Campbell, Mike O'Neal, Craig Van Slide, and Lisa Dick.
Thank you, Andre. In addition to the state agencies and those university partners that I mentioned earlier, again, I'll share this deck with you. I know there's lots of information, but we have a number of nonprofit and industry partners that leaned in and wanted to be
part of the word with us. So with our colleges of education and human sciences, we have a number of initiatives with K12 districts already. Um and so certainly we would leverage those relationships to be able to advance some of these um activities and
some of these opportunities for youth. We're also partnering with charter schools USA. Um, not only in Louisiana, but we have access to those partnerships and over 100 campuses beyond the Louisiana borders. Code.org and
cyber.org are partners on this initiative. We have some ambitious goals and in order for us to meet those, we're going to have to have partners who have already been able to demonstrate their ability um to meet ambitious goals. And both of those agencies have done that.
created great content that we could leverage. T-Mobile is partnering with us on access. We need to make sure that folks in every corner of the state have access to these materials and opportunities. T-Mobile can do that with
5G. Um, and they're committed to partnering with us in this next season once funded um to bring these resources more broadly. WordPress and 1111 AI. You've heard from Blake um he mentioned some of the work that his team has done
um with prompting and AI WordPress is also a key partner again with a demonstrated history and the impact. Oh, Andrew I got too excited and one more time. So next um we're going to talk a
little bit about the problems that are solved with a proposal we built out. Dr. Dr. Andrew Schwarz serves at LSU and he's actually in the college of business. Um he is an AI expert and a decision making expert. So after we get
past this particular project, I'm going to ask for advice in general. >> Thanks, Lindsay. Um it's been an honor to serve along this capacity. It's really great. I've been at Lship for 22 years and it's great breaking down institutional silos and actually working how we should be, which is across
institutions. And I think that if there's any residual impact that's going to come from this grant, I think the relationships that we're developing is going to be good for the state because you're starting to see a real integrated approach to AI, which I think is really, really important. So, I've been in LSU for 22 years. I married a girl from down
to Bayou. I did not think that down to Bayou was a thing. I was raised in Maryland and Virginia, Florida. on my first date and she said I'm from down the bayou and I said that is not a thing until I went down Highway 90 and I hopped off Matthews and there's a sign up the bayou down the bay you and I
you're right so she the reason why I say that is this is not just a professional exercise this is personal my wife is a fourth grade was a fourth grade uh teacher and she was actually a former elementary school principal now retired of education but the impact of that was
huge on me as I started to think about education I've now raised four kids here, 16 to 20. One's at LSU, one's at UL, one and the other two are LSU and UL also. So, this to me is personal because I want to give my kids a place to land. I want to give my kids opportunity. And I think
that that's what we're going to see here. And the past 3 years, I've been traveling the state. I've been from Slidell to Northshore to to everywhere else in UT Streetport. Just talking. I've talked to Mexican restaurants. I've talked to universities. I've talked to you name it, I've been there. And I've
been so impressed by the state. It is amazing when you see the amount of achievement that that our students are hitting at the state level. It it's really it it really brought me back and said this is something that we need to really achieve not just for us but for
them because I truly think that we're going to look back in 10 years and say what was the legacy of the decisions we made in this room. Are we making the decisions that are going to benefit the state as a whole? Because we can't leave anyone behind. The problem is the first problem that we identified as a team is that we're not starting from the top.
We're starting from a point near the bottom. Now where that where I view that is opportunity because that means we have opportunity to build something truly unique by breaking down walls here. The problem though is that economic mobility is linked to educational attainment. So we have to link the two together. And you're going
to say, well that's an egg professor talking, right? Let me go on a little tangent for a second and tell you another reason why this is so personal. My grandparents were actually uh raised in Hungary. They were sixth grade educated farmers. My dad was actually born in a displaced person's camp in
Bon, Germany. He spent the first 18 months of his life in a rail car. They were immigrated to United States in rural Pennsylvania. My grandmother was a factory worker. My grandfather was a trucker. My dad was first of high school. He ended up as the chief of staff of NASA. He was in charge of the
Mars project. I have a PhD. When my when I was wring my dissertation, my grandfather looked at me and said, "I listened to Kiter on the radio trying to influence the next generation. Now you get to really do it." In two generations, I've seen my family go from sixth grade educated to a PhD. We cannot
leave people behind. So by by by investing in this, what we're doing is we're actually allowing for the opportunity to get rid of inequity. Second, one of the big problems we always have, I'm in business, right? Right. So one of the biggest problems we have as we talk about education is the lack of alignment between K through 12,
higher ed and employment. It it feels like a lot of times that we're in three separate buckets. This project has finally enabled us to come together which is what's going to be good for the student and how do we integrate that down and work across ecosystem. And if there's one message that I hope that you
hear from all of us is we need you. We need this conversation. We need to be at the table because if you bring us those students prepared, imagine what we can do with them. Then we're actually working with the Ken Center right now to do dual enrollment for AI and cloud. That's going to be a gamecher because
now when the students hit my class as juniors, I can take them from a higher level to even more higher level. There's so much opportunity here. We have more than 114,000 open jobs and only 58% of workforce participation. AI is the way and the pathway by which we can achieve
this objective. The other issue that we that we identified is the disparities that exist in education today. So I said it was personal. My 18-year-old son when he was a freshman in high school, he came down to one day and I was working
and he said, "I think I want to learn computer programming." Said, "Why?" He said, "I play Minecraft. I want to do that." So I did what every good professor does. I give him a book. Said, "Here, learn Python." Came back six weeks later. The book was there and he was programming. I said, he said,
'YouTube. Oh, got it. He taught himself 30 computer programming languages. As a senior in high school, he went to his headmaster and said, I don't want to say French. I want to say AI as my language. And the headmaster said, great, but we don't have anyone here to know AI. He
said, I got that. He taught himself AI. Talked to one of my former students, worked with them. I got him hired as an intern. At 18, he got $15 an hour before graduating high school. 2 weeks after graduation, he got a raise, $30 an hour. I moved him into the dorms here at LSU
this fall. A week later, he got a raise to $50 an hour. He is now the senior AI developer at S1 Technology in Lafayette, and he's the hiring manager for AI. That's an amazing story, right? My son's story should be repeated across every
single one of our students across this state. And not just because I had a dad who's an AI professor. We have to allow opportunities for everyone to stand up and work together in order for us to achieve these objectives across the board. So let's just do nothing, right?
That's easy. Well, the cost of doing nothing is severe. We have the data center coming in. We have we have the opportunity to scale up a lot of jobs. We have more data centers coming in without eight. We have even more on the horizon. All this points a picture of opportunity. If we do nothing, then we
stand a chance of our students being left behind. We have to stand up. But to do that, we not only have to focus on the students, but the teachers as well. And that's why this has to be all hands on deck. This is why we have a chance to lead. And you say, well, is it that impressive of what we're doing here in
Louisiana? Let me tell you a story. In February last February of this year, we had AI day at LSU. I think a couple of you are actually there. We had a live cook. Our keynote speaker was the guy who created Siri, Darren Hos. Darren flew in and it was so impressed by what's happening in Louisiana, he
actually wants to set up shop here. So, he's actually trying to create an ecosystem to bring Silicon Valley to Louisiana solely based upon the conditions that exist, what he sees here with the tax breaks, with the alignment of Bessie, higher ed, and and industry
as well. That's one story but those stories can be replicated across industry and across company as well. If we do nothing those opportunities will go away. So we have to do something. So what are our goals here? Our goals were first we we need to improve postsecary
uh student learning. Second we increase student use of AI enable advising. Third expand our faculty and programs exist. Fourth grow participation in dual enrollment. And last create new type of opportunities. So we defined those as our five objectives that we were trying to accomplish to solve the problems that
we identified. So based upon that we said we created a framework. We said there's five different areas that we want to focus on in our proposal. The first was statewide infrastructure. The reality is a lot of our institutions have their own licensing and their own approaches to AI but there's some commonality and some cost efficiency
that can be gained across the the entire ecosystem. So one how do we create capacitive infrastructure so that we solve that problem of just being for few but it's for all second workforce development lining up microserts micro credentials and certification with
industry needs across institutions and ensuring that there's sharing between institutions so that if you get a cert in one you can move to another. Third real world real world deployments and industry impact. We're trying to focus on how we go about bringing industry to
the table for these conversations and providing opportunities for our students to be involved in deployments of AI scale. Fourth, the truth is trust about AI is very very low. I'm on the radio WW about once a month talking about AI and every month I get the conversation why
should we trust AI? The public is concerned and they're concerned when they're coming home as when the students come home to their parents. Their parents don't get AI either. So AI can't just happen at the school. AI has to be predated. Everybody has to be aware of it and know about it. Lastly, how do we
make sure that this is going to be handled responsibly? I'm sure you saw Thursday night there's a presidential executive order that says that states cannot regulate AI at the state level. It has to be at the federal level. So, what that means is that we're going to have to start to teach students and industry
how do we develop responsible AI research? How do we develop AI responsibly? And how do we govern it in a responsible way? So those are our five different pillars and we're going to talk about activities here in a moment but that's going to have a pretty significant impact. So for each of our pillars we identified a series of different impacts. So if you look at
this here we see opportunities for 100% of students that may have access to tools 10 plus micro 2500 students enrolled 500 educators enrolled test beds prototypes patent disclosures workshops participation of underserved
regions this is across statewide publications. We tried to create a framework that enabled us to impact research, teaching and economic development that could really propel the state to become a leader in AI across all those areas. Now, more specifically, the types of activities that we want to do, Amy is going to talk a little bit
about that. >> Good morning again. That was the TCA. If >> I can interrupt just one second, there was a specific that that Dr. Schwarz had on there about workforce participation. I don't want to take for granted that everybody understands what workforce participation is. If everyone's familiar
with unemployment rate, right? But that's the number of people that are actually in the workforce that are employed, right? In Louisiana, we've had a constant struggle with workforce participation. That's the the age of non-incarcerated working age adults that
are actually either working or actively seeking work. We have census tracks in Louisiana with workforce participation rates as low as 20%. other words, working age population, not incarcerated. They're neither seeking work or actually working. And so, I'm
glad that you brought it up because it's an extraordinarily important challenge for us. And just wanted to acknowledge that. Thank you. Sorry. >> I think from the annual activity standpoint, what we know is that collaboration and discipline information is critical in order for this to work.
It can't be a oneanddone task force and then we go about our business. And so what we really want to do is establish a lot of different activities that will encourage this collaboration and we want to continue some sustainability around the work that we're doing. So one establishing a central communication and
coordination hub. Essentially this would be a statewide online portal and email system that aggregates and distributes AI enabled instructional resources, high impact tutoring tools, AI literacy modules, advising and degree planning and data dashboards. It's interesting
before we um before this meeting started, we were talking um a colleague and I about well what happens if an instructor comes up with something really cool in AI and it works or what if it doesn't? How do we get that information out? And I think that communication and coordination hub would be critical to get that information out
because just as we can learn something that is successful, we can learn from something that is not. Um one management or number two management of the grant awards and subreients. to the swamp. Um I guess I guess would run this sub the subawward. Um but they will lead a
competitive subawward program funding institutional projects that actually redesign gateway um and high enrollment courses using AI evaluation and driven um information. So it's really about giving sub awards for those colleges that maybe businesses and industry are
willing to go in and kind of test this out a little bit, see how it works. what can we how do we re-evaluate curriculum development or the workbased learning opportunities and this fund can help with that. Swamp leadership will host an annual statewide convening. So again
this annual event will be focused on post-secary teaching and learning. So it's really an opportunity for teachers, instructors, student leaders, CIOS, individuals in all areas of the campus to really learn about what we're doing and how we're using these state these
funded pilots. How are we doing some comparison of different models and then how do we actually scale that out to all of our institutions and the other organizations that are partnering with us? Um uh regional convening. So these are in-person convenings that will bring
campus teams together, regional employers and K through2 partners to ensure that SWAM can extend um you know those capabilities into other areas of Louisiana. We know that in some parts of the state broadb brand is not existent.
So it's going to be hard for T-Mobile maybe to do something in that space if we don't have the infrastructure to do that. So this is more of that regional lens rather than the statewide lens. And then lastly hosting an annual statewide summit designed to showcase postsecary
AI teaching tutoring advising projects. And this is really an opportunity for us to highlight the work that's being done at our college campuses about the uh to support the AI initiatives. >> Thank you. And I think this is just a a showing of kind of like what the
government the governance and management structure will actually look like. Um I think most importantly are probably those pillars in the middle because that's where the real work is probably going to get done. There's like the workforce development piece. there's, you know, partnership pieces and so
there might be subcommittees that are going to be developed from this AI project uh that will help focus on those specific areas um in particular. And then lastly, just the alignment with the Bessie strategic goals. I think it's important to know that the work that
we're doing out of the swamp project is aligned with these AI with your strategic goals at Bessie. One, um just making sure that everybody is at a is a partner, right? engaging K through 12, two-year, four-year workforce partners and state agencies. And we want to make
sure that it's a shared educational infrastructure. It does us no good to work in uh silos if we're not going to come together and share that information, especially as we're thinking about educating individuals in K through 12, getting them into higher ed, and then getting them into the
workforce. uh making sure that we have um you know competency pathways embedded across education and workforce systems through curriculum integration micro credentials. I know at LCTCS in particular we have Google micro credentials along with IBM micro
credentials and so how do we kind of embed those in maybe to the other classes that we have? How do you embed that credential into an English class for example so that those individuals are prepared when they move on? Um, and so really thinking about how someone who
is not traditionally used to using AI can then use AI in the classroom. Um, rapid upskilling and reskilling through two-year colleges serving as hubs for short-term employer alignment AI credentials. Um, as I mentioned before, LCTCS is working in that IBM um, space.
Right now, we're focused on cyber security and data analytics, but AI is coming. And so one of the things that IBM is looking about is looking at the employability of those individuals beyond that. So LCTCS is kind of going, okay, wait, let's teach them, but now we have to add that employment engagement
piece. So how do we embed that into the curriculum? How do we embed that into the classroom when we're teaching students? Because we want them to be able to get a job or get them or upskill so they can get a job or or a higher paying job. student success and
persistence. Um, of course, are there responsible ways of using AI to help with advising, student support services or career transitions? Um, sharing standards for responsible AI uh use and platforms. Um, I think it's really critical when we talk about, you
know, um, you know, embedding this in K through 12. We want them we want students to learn how to responsibly use AI so that when they come to college, they're not flagged for plagiarism, right, when they're trying to use this platform. And so teaching them how to responsibly use it, but not just teaching the students, teaching the individuals who are teaching those
courses how to use it as well. And then of course workforce alignment and funding readiness. You know, just making sure that we're positioned economically to to support students who have these these credentials. Um the other thing that I'd like to mention is that I think there's a lot of work being done across
the state in other areas at intersection with AI, right? We've got um LA Next. We have the fuel initiative. We have the broadband funding. So, there's a lot of intersection I see at both state and federal levels that will help with this
work, right? How do we embed AI into creating these network and networks? How do we embed AI into workforce development? Uh how do we use that for broadband expansion from an infrastructure standpoint? So, it's not just about curriculum development. about
how we can embed this in a lot of different areas as well that might not seem um kind of like top of mind. So, I'll turn it back over to Lindsay. Told you we were working in those two weeks. We had lots happen. Um I'm just going to leave you with two two quick
thoughts. Um the picture on my right is actually a picture of Alexander Granville's um first swamboat. I don't know if you know it or not, but he created the first
swamp boat in 1905. Raise your hand if you knew that. Well, that I told you, right? >> He was witty. >> So, Alexander Granbell did create this font boat. Um, it was used in World War
I for military purposes. It also is used now for workforce, of course, if you're in Louisiana. um everything from swamp boat tours to fishing to gator hunting. Um and then for a leisure um fun fact,
swamp boats move forward unless they are altered in some way um to allow them to go backwards. Only forward. And so we thought it was only fitting that we had this great analogy for the work we're doing and the way that AI is moving us
forward. We can't go back. We are moving forward. It's an education issue, a workforce issue, national security issue. Um, and it's a great opportunity for Louisiana. One of the things we hope you take away from this discussion is
that we're positioned and we have the resources and assets to truly meet the moment, do some great work here for our learners of all ages. Um, so finally, one quick quote from Secretary McMahon. This was actually in the RFP. Artificial
intelligence has the potential to revolutionize education and support improved outcomes for learners. It drives personalized learning, sharpens critical thinking, and prepares students with problem solving skills that are vital for tomorrow's challenges. So, our
swamp team invites you to hop on the boat with us and move forward. >> Thank you, >> Lindsay. That's phenomenal that you were able to do this in just a few short weeks divided by Thanksgiving is just just thank you for that. >> See, you could have bought a shirt in a
day, >> right? >> Before you have a good I wonder if any observations or questions from the committee. Yes, sir. >> Thank you. Um, y'all have done amazing work. It's great. My my question and it relates back to legislature probably more than
anything else is how do we integrate this effort with state legislative efforts, the governor's office leadership. How do we make it into a real thing that has legs and doesn't just as you some pointed out it just doesn't serve a short-term purpose and
then kind of dissipates. What's what's the next step? >> I have thoughts but not anything. I think that there's an opportunity to institutionalize what we're trying to accomplish here through the board of regions to create a multi-institutional center around AI
that has roots with Bessie as well as the LCTCS and everyone else as well that doesn't isn't grounded in one institution but is owned by the state and I think that kind of approach would give us the momentum and the size to be to truly move forward as well as I think it would give us some negotiation powers
with not just T-Mobile but with like Google's and the Metas and the other platforms as So I think if we had that kind of mechanism in place that would really help us. That's my perspective. >> I think we do need funding as well to support this. I mean we if we get this you know this grant this is one time
money that we'll use for an extended period of time but what happens when those funds go away and so you know if there is a financial and I think it has to be a dedicated fund not something go that goes into you know general fund that is supposed to be used for this initiative. It really should be
dedicated funding if it's important to the state first. >> Having served the legislature a long time and the way you accomplish that like everybody else would um is you integrate uh with agencies of state government. I mean they have to be it
can't just be a um an institution of higher education's function needs to be formal state function of which you all are integral partner. then you can go to the legislature and say, "Look, we need funding or we have a program or we have
a policy or something." >> I I agree with you and I think that there's a lot of other work that's being done in the state that would benefit from AI. So, think of one more initiative by Elevate Works. Um, you know, we've got a lot of other funding opportunities coming down the pike. So,
how do you use even AI in those spaces? So, it's how do you build AI into everything in the fabric of what we're doing in Louisiana, not just in K through 12 and higher education. >> Thank you. >> And and I would add one piece of information I made um note on that
timeline of our letters that support um LED Louisiana Works, Louisiana Department of Education, three perfect examples of full income match committed should this be funded. And so I think taking that level of support into those
other conversations to your point certainly would help us secure necessary funding to move it forward. >> Yeah. And I also heard you say that you're in favor and excited about this and will help us figure out a plan too. Is that what you said?
>> I was in the ROTC, not quite the army, but we learned one thing. Never volunteer. Oh, >> other thoughts or questions? >> Well, that's fantastic. One, just one idea. Instead of just the swamp boats,
you can also get a marsh master, which is ideal for duck hunters, designed and marketed by John Co, a graduate of Louisiana Tech University, manufactured out here in Baton Rouge. So, just something else you might want to put on. No,
>> thank you all very much. Our short >> that's exciting. >> Next on the agenda, uh, so I had the great fortune of somehow being put on the standards development committee for computer science. Uh, and and that's
when I first met Ashley Townsman and just a remarkable person to lead such an effort. I had no ideas all went into standards development for the department of education. I do now. Uh she used me a lot as the uh as the hammer or the the
leverage point in conversations to move things along even though she knew I had no knowledge base whatsoever to base those actions on. Uh but I asked Ashley if she would because focus today is really on standards alignment and since she is was the architect of the computer
science standards there's a lot of overlap between those standards and what we're trying to accomplish as an AI task force. So I asked her if she wouldn't mind going forward and talking through that and then transitioning to a conversation around AI index as well. But Ashley, thank you so much for joining us. >> Thank you for having me. Um Ashley
Townen with the Department of Education. So I do serve as assistant superintendent for policy and governmental affairs. I'm also a veteran teacher. So I'm a national board certified teacher with about 19 years of classroom experience. Um about 12 of those in Louisiana. And for about nine
of those years I taught computer science um both as a standalone STEM course and embedded into four project areas in English language arts, math and science in Louisiana public schools. So, it's really exciting and kind of a dream come true to get to be part of the work that has been going on for the last um four
or so years on working to scale computer science education statewide and being able to look forward into the future a little bit because as opposed to most of our other content areas where the content is static, there aren't too many recent developments in math happening
all the time. um to a content that is going to continue to change and being able to think about how we build such dynamic content into our standard structure. So for the I appreciate the opportunity to talk for a few minutes
about our um Louisiana computer science education plan, our edtech plan, our status of implementation, and how AI does fit into that framework that's currently in place. So um first of all about Louisiana's computer science ed
plan and ed's ed plan. So at 5:41 of the 2022 legislative session so coming up on four years now um that established the computer science education commission and that commission had two deliverables. One was to develop a
computer science education plan for Louisiana. Um there was a report that came out about it. it has several different key actions that um were supposed to be initiated as a result of that piece of legislation. So um then act 211 of the 2024 legislative session
came behind it and it established certain requirements for computer science to happen in schools which was really the first time that you saw this required content happening around digital literacy computer science education. We had ed tech standards that
were established in 2003, but there was not a statewide mandate to teach those necessarily. So you saw implementation vary greatly from school to school, district to district, teacher to teacher. And so this act two 211 of 2024
created a requirement for computer science instruction to be embedded into content in grades kindergarten through fifth grade starting with 27 28 school year. It requires schools to offer a computer science course to 6th through
8th graders and it requires students to teach computer science to grades 9th through 12th graders. And that graduation requirement is going to go into place with the 27 with the 26 27 cohort. 28 27 28 cohort. So that class
of 2031 will be the first group that you see coming out of high school with a computer science exam. Now this is a really big lift. So we've established this requirement. Now that means every kid in Louisiana is going to get computer science content. But when you did a landscape analysis where is this
possible? what is it going to look like to scale this up and out? You had about 40% a little less than 40% of the high schools in Louisiana were even offering computer science. That means we needed computer science teachers. We needed computer science resources for students.
We needed schools and districts to start thinking about how are they going to be able to offer this. And we needed a timeline that took into account what a lift that was to scale that statewide and be able to do it well and to be able to not just give lip service to it, but to really make sure that Louisiana kids
would exit high school ready for what was next. So, our team began the the work of implementing all of that. Um, our standards committee got together, developed those standards. They were approved by Bethy in October 2024. And for those of you who are relative
newcomers to education, I just want to emphasize the importance of standards. Everything that we do has to be grounded in standards. Not only does revised statute 174.4 require standards for required coursework, standards also give schools,
teachers, parents, the community clear understanding of what students should know and be able to do when it comes to the courses that they're going to take in school. So we want to make sure that anything we're going to require students is clearly delineated in the standards.
Now where that gets complicated for computer science is that standards are promulgated as bestie rule through the administrative procedure act. The standards are revised every seven years which is about three lifetimes when it comes to technology. So as we developed
out the computer science standards, we talked about AI. It existed very differently two years ago when we were developing those standards than it did today. So when you look at the computer science standards for those of you who are experts in AI and how that works,
you'll see those foundational concepts there. You'll see the framework there. You'll see it in the modeling and the simulation and the data representation and the data storage. and you'll see it in some of the um cyber security and the um community safeguards and things like
that. You'll see those concepts there. You won't see artificial intelligence. Why is that? That was an intentional decision. And the reason is that we know how fast that tech is going to continue to evolve. So the decision was made by that standards committee instead of
trying to run all the way through APA every time a new tech development emerges, which could be really often. um we decided to keep the standards with those core framework concepts there and then in guidance be able to navigate
those tech changes. We could have guidance that more specifically zoomed in on those individual standards and competencies that are in our computer science standards and those can be updated every year if we need to. Those are where we can bring in our different
agencies, our workforce commission, um interested tech experts, interested parties from other states who are aware of the um work going on there and how that's emerging. our teachers who are in the classroom are actually doing the work and seeing how kids are responding
to it and how it's progressing because we know too that our starting point for kids right now where that content's not being universally taught yet is going to be really different in a few years when kids come up having had six years of computer science through elementary
school plus exposure in junior high. What you can expect a nth grader to do is going to be really different eight years from now than it is right now. So that plan to um keep the standards um framework oriented and be able to
navigate those tech changes through guidance that could be updated every year or two. That was what the group went with. So >> ask a quick question. U so I think we're all clear that standards are what's required to be presented in the classroom. Uh is the guidance also
required or is that just something that's suggested? So the guidance will help teachers and parents and curriculum development development know um what those standards mean. So they're going to help zoom in on that and help and
help people see here's what this means today. Here's what this looks like today because it could change a whole lot from right now to 5 years from now, 3 years from now. Even just the fact that AI looks so different today than it did two
years ago is a great example of how now some guidance that is going to zoom in on a modeling standard is going to look really different now than it would have looked 2 years ago if we had decided to put that in the standards explicitly and that way.
So a few other things that have happened since then um we have teacher leader advisors specific to computer science and so because AI is embedded in the embedded in the standards are looking at this as well um they are creating resources and they're providing training
so they're doing things like taking our math content standards for elementary grades pairing them with computer science standards where those course those those contents can overlap and creating resources for teachers to come alongside their high quality instructional material. materials so they can see what it looks like to
incorporate that instruction into their classrooms. You've got um our SEAG grants, our computer science technical assistance grants where the legislature has has given about $3.3 million so far that has gone straight to school
systems. So we've had 70 awards so far impacting 578,262 students during two school years, last school year and this school year. They're really exciting. And then this year, we've opened up direct student services funding, which is going to make
available some federal dollars um for the 2526 um application cycle. And that's about $5.8 million that could go either to um making more tutoring available or um AI applications. And we have a couple that we vetted that are
there. School districts can also propose alternate evidence-based um platforms that they could use up for as well. Um we've established teacher training opportunities through Ignite and Energize with Southeastern and LSU. We've had um last I checked it was
almost a thousand teachers in each of those. So really exciting when you think about the number of teachers who didn't learn anything about computer science in college. For me I learned my first grade of computer science sitting on the floor having checked out the laptop cart with a bunch of kids. And so we've got teachers who are able to go through
training both for K5 and for 612 to help get them ready to teach um computer science content to their students. And we're just talking with um those partners even now about how can we continue to update that content with their technology. So how can we integrate AI in it? What else needs to
get integrated in their equity and make sure that that content remains relevant? We're also working with Louisiana Tech to create micro conventional opportunities which is going to be really exciting work. Um so thank y'all for that partnership. And then they're going to also partner with us along with
others at developing out that guidance. And so as we go along and we think about the um the regular cadence of updates that we're going to have to make to that guidance, one thing that we're thinking about is who needs to be part of that conversation? who who needs to weigh in
on that as we continue to look at that to make sure that we're staying relevant to um what the industry is going to expect as the kids graduate from high school. And then we're also continuing development on that guidance to zoom in on those key standards. Um looking to launch that in time to have training
sessions on it at our teacher leader summit. We have about 7,000 educators every year come to that. Um last year we really ramped up our edtech offerings. We had AI for student refer AI for teachers sessions, AI for leaders sessions. We're going to continue to
ramp that up this year and should be able to um include some of that time that will have our um updated guidance as well. So um let's talk a little bit about how AI fits into the framework that's currently in place. So I mentioned it briefly talking about the
standards. Um we also are looking at concepts and experiences. So, aside from required computer science course content, where else could students be exposed to this content? We've also updated our digital literacy guidelines to include artificial intelligence as
well as our edtech implementation for that plan has um been updated this year to incorporate AI and we're in the middle of revisions to our statewide edtech plan that's anticipated in 2026. So um you know we mentioned earlier that
um there was not a statewide effort to coordinate scale or sustain um AI. I would argue that it does exist in the form of our computer science education plan and that the plan is built in a way that it can be adaptable to those tech changes as they come up. Um, also number
six in our computer science education plan for statewide was um to examine funding strategies to support and maintain teacher and student training. One thing that I'm really excited about with a lot of these FIPSY proposals is they'll bring in our university partners
to do just that, to continue to develop ways that our students can have access to resources, our teachers can have access access to resources to make sure that they get the training that they'll need, they have opportunities available to be able to stay ahead of this work.
Um, so we've created a number of resources for teachers and districts and schools. Um, one, we were the 22nd state to release our AI guidance for schools. This was some very broad, highlevel guidance to help schools start thinking through it. So, we released this in
2024. After that, we continue developing additional resources. For example, we've got the create framework for effective AI prompting. This is designed for teachers. We've got guidance for teachers on how to implement this along with their high-quality instructional materials, which has been a key
component of Louisiana's historic education progress we've made in the last few years. If you haven't heard the news yet, I'd be happy to share some headlines with you afterward. Um, we've been working to support the development of AI support within those highquality
instructional materials, which will be really exciting work because that's where you make it possible to not be one extra thing, but to be a better way to do what you're already doing. So, really excited about that. As I mentioned, also building out additional teacher leader summit sessions. And one thing that our
team is really keeping top of mind is how to create a balance. How do we make sure that we can embed AI literacy where it makes sense into content areas, not make it isolated because we don't want to create this new initiative fatigue that happens sometimes, but we also
don't want to undermine key standards and core content areas. So, our team is working really hard to make sure that we protect development of those thinking skills and students along the way while still making sure that they graduate ready to compete in the marketplace. Um, a couple things I would just mention in
closing. Um, our digital literacy guidelines have several digital literacy core competencies. Um, there's one specifically about AI and emerging technologies. Um, we include some updates on our AI integration pro progress. I mentioned a few of those.
Um, additional educator professional learning. We've also have our monthly TED calls at TED calls, the best practice exchange. As we're in that part of implementation now, we really need to see teachers talking to teachers about what works and what doesn't work. And you're going to see a lot of growth as
teachers learn from each other about how things are working out in their classrooms, what kinds of student impacts they're seeing. So those tech calls are facilitating that process. Um we also have our micro credential work underway and we're continuing to work on
how to update those um digital literacy guidelines to incorporate latest technology and make sure we can stay ahead of updates there. And then um again a couple of ending notes. So as we look think about assessing progress, we should make sure that we have clear
developmental rubrics linked to a clear progression in alignment with each standard. And then we should make sure that our teacher training can be differentiated according to content and the knowledge that teachers might already have. Um it should include allowing when to use AI in accordance
with local policy and best practices expectations for modeling verification steps. Actually saw a teacher last week doing a great job with this. she had embedded AI into her computer science class throughout the year and she had a phrase that I really liked that she had taught her kids to use when engaging
with with with AI and it was without giving me the answer such and such and I thought that was just such a simple way for her to help her kids understand here's an appropriate way that you can use this in my class and she actually required it in the assignment that that we observed they had to engage with AI
with AI with AI on that assignment but they had to preface their question with with giving me the answer I thought That was so smart. Um, and then also recognition and design of assignment modifications that appropriately incorporate or limit AI use to um,
acknowledge that that um, that that good implementation of HQIN that we've been working so hard on releasing over the last few years. So that concludes my updates. I'm happy to take questions and really appreciate your time. >> Actually, thank you very much. It's a
lot of work that goes beyond what the standards are on the page, right? And you see some of the the collaboration and the broader thinking associated with implementation of standards. I think that's lawful. So, thank you for that. Some good questions for for Ashley. >> Yes, sir.
>> You got I got one. I'll do I'll go first. Is that okay? Sure. >> I'm just curious. So you you spoke about guidance a little bit around AI and and um and trying to figure out, you know, ways to incentivize learning around
these tools. Um how are you quantifying that and understanding your success in offering that guidance since the guidance maybe is outside of the traditional standards work? >> Can you clarify what you mean by success in offering guidance? >> Yeah. So, when you're offering guidance
on using AI tools, incorporating AI into lesson plans, um I'm just curious of how you are you looking at um who was adopting the guidance, how people are adopting it, what what statistics are you looking at
to say our guidance is working or is it working? >> So, two things. One, I would caution teachers from trying to arbitrarily incorporate AI into lesson plans. I did work at a school one time where we had to highlight the technology green in our lesson plans every week and I saw
teachers who completely missed their lesson that day cuz they were troubleshooting the tech the whole time and they couldn't figure out when to let it go and focus on the lesson. And um and then I saw other teachers who would do the text thing really quickly and then check the box and it wasn't really
um I guess embedded into making sure that that lesson was high quality. So we want to make sure that when we do implement we can do it well. Um and then second the the requirement to teach all this starts next year. So right now we are really focusing on getting school
school districts ready to do that. So we've got those 70 technical assistance grants um going out or that have gone out slash are going out. Um we're working on that technical assistance with school districts. We've got staff in the field today in a school district giving them some support on that because
next year we have to go from 40% of high schools offering computer science to 100%. And that that's big and we want to make sure that our school districts are poised for success with that. In the meantime, we know that we have some places who are doing this well already and they're excited about it. And you
know, I just think about me. I would always try to convince everybody just try coding for a minute. Just just sit and code with your kids. Just let them do it. You don't have to be good at it. let them learn it. And you know, so there are a lot of teachers who now are really excited that they're not going to be the only one in their school who does this, but the only one in their district
who's who does this. And so we're giving those teachers opportunities to engage and collaborate on getting those best practices out. You know, we had the queue last week with um so many teachers that were there and around and engaged and excited about talking how talking um
development like it's really happening next year. So trying to make it not a scary thing yet or a situation where somebody implements something and they don't do it well and it turns out to be of poor quality, but making sure that we set districts up for success, make those
teacher training opportunities available and again we're so thankful to our higher ed partners for doing that with us and then supporting where we can to create additional training opportunities which I think we'll really see with those VIPs grants and hoping for lots of celebrations on New York. And and just just a quick followup, it's like do you
when you see areas that maybe schools need extra support? H how do you determine that at this point because you're in that crux of the >> That's a great question. So at this time we're reviewing those computer science plans locally. So whenever they apply for a sestack or a computer science
technical assistance grant, part of that process is they're sharing that computer science implementation plan with us. And one thing that we told districts that first year that we were able to make the Ignite and Energize training options available, we told them, "Pick your person. Pick your your champion who's
going to be your um computer science implementation front runner and can help you figure out how to scale. Let's make it happen." Just send them to the training. Get somebody to come and see, okay, here's what it is. Let's start thinking about it. Get with people from other districts thinking through the same thing right now. And so we really
had opportunities to customize our engagement with school districts based on your two of those plans. >> I did appreciate when you said that there's so many things that we can do to elevate what we're already doing so we're not adding something to the plate. Um I also remember the professor from LSU saying that his son wanted to do AI
instead of French. Has there been any talk about what we can reduce in schools so that we can implement this more? Foreign language requirement tends to be one that um has come up in other states often and I'm just wondering if you've had any discussions about that. So it's there now. Um so the state legislation
for 2022 also made it possible for students to take certain computer science classes to satisfy the foreign language requirement. So again, not saying computer science is a foreign language, but certain computer science classes can satisfy that requirement. And that's something that um is a great
fit for some students. We know that some want to take both. And so one thing that I'm really excited about as one of the things that we had to do with developing the computer science standards is get courses ready. And so this went handinhand with act 211 from 2024 because we had to get courses that could
could be called computer science. So Bessie and border regions last week actually just approved the first set of courses for this and so we have courses. So these are all computer science courses that could count for a math credit. So you got statistical
reasoning, introduction to computational thinking, data science, quantum reasoning, and then these are computer science courses that count for a science credit, AP computer science principles, computer science one, data manipulation and analysis, modeling and simulation.
And then we also have those cyber security and federal IBC aligned courses that can count for CTE credit for students who are on that pathway. Really excited to add those too. >> Hi. So um I'm really impressed with the number of trains that end up happening
um in such a short time and I wonder with this field the experimentation is so important like as you were saying like oh it was just this one prompt and suddenly it changed kind of a lesson right so do you know ways to incentivize and share that knowledge right it could I mean
like a five minute video right rather than a full day training can help as things are changing so rapidly so I don't how you guys think about that. >> Yeah, that's a great idea. Especially when you think about if you get that initial base level understanding, which is what we've been working to scale up
across teachers right now, is do you have access to that initial training you're going to need just to feel confident enough to go do the thing, you know, but then what about as you move forward? How do you continue to learn? And I think about the year that I switched from just computer science over to computer science plus robotics. you
know, I didn't need to go learn all the things over again because there was a lot that was the same and a lot that carried over just fine, but there were some things that were different. And so, you know, I got to go teach myself a lot of it. And then I met people um at actually a UL professor who was fabulous and such a good mentor that I met at a
robotics competition who showed me a couple other little things. But it was really that engagement with you. There's a little bit of on my own asking questions and being confident enough to go find the answers to myself and then a little bit of engaging with other educators in the space who are willing to share. And so I think that some of
that will continue to come from our team as we build out resources, push out resources. We've got this, you know, teacher leader, adviserss now continuing to create resources. Um, some of that will come in our edtech calls, giving educators that little bit of space to engage. But I think too, you can't um
overstate the need for teachers to continue talking to each other. And that's why I think things like here are so important. You know, I I started presenting elementary robotics workshops because there weren't any. And I thought, you know what, other teachers need to know here's how you can write a grant to get some robots and teach math
with robots because you can't. You know, there's not anything about this. And so I think whenever you give teachers the opportunity to go present about what they're doing and lead um it's it's a good thing and they'll grow and you know I always have other people come up and say well I kind of had dabbled in it
before. Have you thought about this or that and I would learn from that too. So I think continuing to create spaces um through LU like things like that those organizations um I think that this summit talking about higher ed partners being able to share with each other about what they're doing is going to be
so valuable. And then at Teacher Leader Summit too, like I said, we have that commitment to continue expanding our tech offerings. We were excited about the demand for that. We think that'll increase too, especially as we're getting more demand now for content aligned um AI and computer science.
People see the need for it to be embedded in their content and they want to do it in a way that doesn't compromise the high quality of their instruction, but they know that their kids need that to be ready for what's next. So, we're here, of course, to help provide those resources and um continue to evaluate what else is needed. But
very thankful that we're not alone in this and for all of our partners that we have working alongside us with that. >> Uh just a quick question about resources. Um you'd mentioned for the direct student services that there was uh tutoring or AI applications like an
approved list. Is that available somewhere to and then the CTE courses that are the computer science? I'd be interested in both of those. Sure. Yeah. The um the the tutoring and AI resources that are boot, we've got some there that
are if you're doing this one, you're good to go. But school districts also have the opportunity to to request alternate evidence evidence-based options. If they've got something that they're working with already or interested in working with um they can um supply us that, you know, their justification for wanting to use that
alternate vendor, our team can review that as well. So yeah, do you want that? >> Yeah, for sure. Yeah. >> And then the um for so we also have a well another thing that our team's been working on a lot since the standards have been adopted um is looking at
materials. So we have a number of um vendors curriculum development um developers who've been submitting materials for us to review and our team has been reviewing for alignment with the standards. And we're excited to because one thing that was really important to me at least when we were
building the standards is I wanted them to be versatile enough that they could apply to several different areas. I wanted a kid to be able to take a computer science class that was robotics or take a computer science class that was cyber security and hit those computer science standards but there be enough flexibility to be able to really
dig into different areas of expertise or specialty. And so I really feel like we were able to accomplish that in those standards. And so now it's exciting to see some of those course proposals come in that are focusing on AI, focusing on some of those different strands where they're all computer science, but it
gives opportunities to really pick a pathway and explore it more. >> Yes, sir. >> Actually, we we just so much appreciate uh everything you bring to this conversation. So, thank you again for uh for all that you're sharing with us
today. Actually, I had four questions. So uh first one wanted to expand on this guy's comments about where we could save time or whatnot. I know that um I think I shared previously that I had visited with Dr. Deenetto
last year February kind of March time frame got some initial feedback from some of the teachers that had experience with the pilot projects that DOE had rolled out. Do you guys have any updates on that? In conversations, do you get engaged with teachers since then? What
kind of feedback have you gotten from the educators with regard to their experience with these closed loop applications? >> Yeah, you know, we've had um an item about this in our teacher advisory council meeting, not long the last one that we had, I think, and it was so
interesting to me how many teachers um were already using AI in their classrooms in different ways. And you know, our our teacher advisory council, there's a pretty good mix of different teachers from different grade levels and subject areas and parts of the state. And you know, we had a calculus teacher
talking about how she teaches her kids to use AI with fair content. And we had a kindergarten teacher talking about how she uses AI to customize and differentiate her lesson plans. We had a math teacher um say that she had she had actually gotten pretty good at um taking
her HQIM her curriculum and you know they had some different differentiation options that were alongside that resource and they weren't something that she typically would have time to go do but she saw one of them and she said this would be a really great project and so she had you know AI create create the
project for her and she said this is something that I would have spent hours after school doing or I would have said this was going to take hours after school to do and I wouldn't have done it. But this made it where I had an idea and I could make it happen really quickly. And so I thought that was that
was great. And I've also had even um you know some some teachers in different areas talk about some of the pilots that we've been running and some of them have used them for the first time this year. And it's really it's really fun to me to get to hear somebody's first reaction
after for example using a mirror. And you know, you kind of go through that initial, wow, this is so amazing with them every time. And even though I've had that conversation a few times now, I still get excited about it too because it is really cool. And you know, it's neat to hear too some of them who have
that trepidation about it at first. Like I did at first, too. You know, you think, oh, this is going to replace teachers jobs and we don't want to replace the teacher. And you get in there and you see it and you say, this is not replacing the teacher. you know, I always wish I had a clone of myself in the classroom and this is what the clones would have been doing. So, it
it's really neat to see people um you know, getting getting the the courage to try it and hearing about some good results from from colleagues and then trying it for themselves and being excited about it. So, it's been good. You know, I I think we do have to appreciate to the the reason that some
teachers might be hesitant to try different things. um the reason why we have early adopters or late adopters just in society as people um and be able to understand that some people are going to need to see their neighbor teacher do it for a minute before they feel comfortable getting in and being able to
do that well. Some people are going to have to feel really confident about their ability to implement a thing before they feel confident taking it in front of students. And so being able to um to support us as a state where we are right now, realizing that some people
are going from from zero to 60 on on offering computer science because it hasn't been done at their school before. They might not even know anybody who's done it. Um it's it's it's a bit of just understanding what it looks like to scale something statewide and make sure that it's successful. But I will say
too, you know, even going to um robotics um competition sometimes just just for fun. Um it's neat to see how the the complexity of the work that I'm seeing even from fourth and fifth graders has grown in the last 10 years since I first did that. I think um you know the kids
themselves are getting just a whole lot more skilled at what they can come up with and what they can do. And that's been before we even had a statewide um um implementation of computer science for elementary. So just the fact again I'm seeing parts of the state that
didn't used to have robotics entries have them now too. So on its own it's been growing and I'm really excited now that we're able to get this um systematic statewide implementation through our local plans and our statewide plan and the technical assistance we're able to provide. I
think it's really going to help ensure that all kids have access to these um opportunities. Exciting. >> Thank you for that. I always felt that the school systems that are able to um work with their faculty and their staff to get get the skill set uh
trained that they're going to have a competitive advantage for recruiting teachers because you've got a better working environment. Students are performing better. Uh I don't have to go and create a 100 papers tonight, right? Uh so I'm really excited about about hearing that kind of report. Okay,
question number two. Um, I just want to give you guys a kudos here. Uh, we heard from the swamp team this morning, but I know for a fact that you guys work through the holidays to provide letters of support for a number of other organizations or institutions or
whatever. So, just briefly, can you share with us a little bit of that so we can appreciate your work? >> Yeah, sure. So, you know, it was it was really exciting, I think, to read all those different proposals. And at first, just to be honest, when I heard everyone who was making their proposal, I thought, "Oh, no. They're all going to
wind up doing the same thing and they're going to mess up each other's applications cuz they're all going to be copies." And they weren't. You know, they they really represent so many different needed areas of the work. everything from taking current computer science training and then um upskilling
it to include AI now to making more courses available for students to take to teaching teachers to teach those courses to connecting teachers across the state and and higher ed institutions um to be able to collaborate on best practices and share I I I think it was a
really great to understanding landscape of what's needed I think it was a really great representation of for one that enough of the work exists everywhere that people had things to build off of in different ways and for two that it represents where we've been building and
now we're looking at how do we make this better? How do we fill these gaps? How do we think about what's next? You know, we're really not starting from ground zero. We're just taking something that um exists and everybody getting on board to make it better. So, really appreciated all the work. I know it was
a lot. It was a lot to read, too. Um, but it was I was happy that everybody, you know, wanted to get on board with with finding ways to help support. >> There were what, six or seven different uh letters of support providing >> that is a lot, right? So, thank thank
you again for that. Uh, question number three. Um, and and this one gets a little a little more depth, I guess. Um, there's a lot of concern about uh introducing this concept
appropriately at each grade level, right? Um, and you and I have had conversations, you know, we can recall I just love to keep it really simple and think about the calculator example, right? When the calculator was roll back in the day. Some of us can remember when
that happened. Um, and and at first a lot of people, you know, were really concerned about that. Kids are going to use it to cheat and we don't learn multiplication tables anymore. But over time, you know, we we educators and parents and everybody realize that a
calculator is a tool and we just have to know when and how to use the tool. And if I walk into a kindergarten classroom with a calculator, all the kids in the class are going to know that's the calculator. Can you give us one or two examples?
um you know at the I think it's easy at the higher grade levels but could you give us one or two examples how you guys are integrating this concept of AI in the lower grade levels >> sure so I used to start my second graders with the idea of AI and so back
in 2019 or so that was when I would do that now for them it made sense because by Novemberish of second grade they had already had two years of coding with me and so they understood how we could give commands to computers. They knew computers weren't that smart. They
really only knew what people tell them to do. They understood sequencing. They could create loops. They knew how to find a more efficient and less efficient way to create an algorithm. They knew that details in algorithms were really important because they were to find the difference between an algorithm that
would drive their bot in a square and an algorithm that would drive their bot in a rectangle. And they were able to connect that back to um you know attributes of those of those polygons. And so those those kids were ready to hear. You can teach a computer to do a thing. You can watch it do a thing and
then you can make adjustments based on how it's performing to what you told it to do. That idea made sense to seven and 8 year olds because of what they had done for two years prior to that. Now from then, you know, the kids continued learning about, you know, for loops and
variables. You know, we could make functions. And so by the time they got to fourth grade, they had learned how to create circuits in their science class. We had um learned about um engineering design process and user design and when and how those two process are used
differently. Um they had created um battery powered plans with a switch for specific markets and they had tried to sell those to Walmart to get to to get on the shelf. So they had done all those experiences. So by the time they got to fifth grade, it made sense for them to
use their block coding to build out a video game, create a user interface that was developed for a specific population within our school. They did market research. They hooked it with a little circuit board called a Mickey to their computer. We had a video game. We did market analysis. They created a promo
video and a user guide. And it it made sense because they knew what a user interface was and how to use the design process to create that and how what they learned about coding could connect with what they learned about science to create things for people for different purposes. So it would make sense I think
when they got into sixth grade as they switched to textbased coding and some more complex coding structures for them to look at more abstract user interface. That's all it is at that point. You know they've created a concrete user interface. Now let's switch over to different kinds of user interfaces. How
are those more abstract? How are companies using those? What market is this designed for? How do companies make changes to those? So I think where you introduce it right now, it's probably up for grades. But where you're where we
collectively are going to introduce it in a few years probably will change as our computer science plan rolls out and you start to see introduction to those key computer science concepts earlier on um because it'll make sense to the kids because they'll have had that foundational understanding of it. Now one thing I know that our team has
talked about we want to be careful of like with calculator you know you teach the kids there's when to use it when not to use it how to decide and that's a good thing they need to know that where we got in trouble with calculator is when the grown-ups decided the kids didn't need to learn the math facts
anymore because they were always going to have a calculator so it was really the adult response to the tool more than the kid response to the tool and so our team has been talking a lot about how to make sure we're critical with that do. Just because AI can do a thing doesn't
necessarily mean that we should teach the kids to use it for that before the kids are really good and fluent at applying that concept on their own. We don't want to make it where kids can't write a paragraph just because AI could do it for them. And so that's one thing that our team has been working a lot on
too is making sure that we integrate it responsibly. even though a kid may be capable of using AI for a thing, we want to make sure that we don't rule that out too early and compromise their ability to develop those core skills for themselves. >> Yeah. So, so my last question is sort of
along the same guidelines just progressing the conversation a little bit further. Um there there's obviously appropriate uh parental concerns about what it can be used for neg negatively, right? Um, and you know, we've seen some
of that, an example or two of that in our local communities. Um, so I kind of get back again to the same question and and that is at those lower grade levels, you know, second, third, fourth grade, middle
school, you know, we've got these concerns about the deep fake, right? um how do we address parents concerns about those type of misuse applications
for AI? What what if anything do we do in the school system um to address those concerns with our educators, with our students, with our school leaders? What's the appropriate age and how do
you do it? Yeah, those are great questions. And so I think it's really a multiaceted approach. Um, for one, you do need parents to know here's what you need to be aware of. Here's, you know, your kids can make apps that look like calculators or really do something else. Like parents need to know that. So we've
created a resource for parents and it's um to help them navigate the digital world with their kids. And so it addresses deep fakes on there. It addresses um ghost apps. And so we have it's not very long. It's like a couple pages links to some additional things. Um, and it talks a little bit about
different um, age bands and how parents might be able to use that. There's a link I think it's like a a contract that parents might make with their kids to be able to, you know, okay, you're going to have Oh, you're going to have to create such and such. So, some resources like that for parents. You also have um
schools. So, in the computer science teners, we've built in um ethical use guidelines um safety security. You know, I used to teach um the kindergarteners not to share their password with anybody. So, we were still, you know, some of them came and they didn't know what the numbers were to type it in. But
um but we talked to them as soon as you can get rid of the sticky note on your computer, we're going to throw it away and change, you know. So, we we we taught them that really long to protect that information. We talked about the difference when we got in second grade. We talked about personal information versus private information and how, you
know, telling somebody when your birthday is is different and telling somebody when your date of birth is and why that makes a difference. And so, um, little kids were able to to understand some of those things. When we got into, um, fourth grade, they would do a little more, you know, creative projects with
that with illustrating their knowledge of personal private information. Um, and we started talking about, you know, why somebody might let you get your Chromebook password and what would happen if they, you know, if if somebody who didn't like you got your Chromebook password and logged into your computer, what could they do that might get you in
trouble? 9-year-olds could have those conversations and and we used to have them in my class. And so I think um if you know like as I mentioned before those edtech standards from 2003 you really saw a lot of variety in the degree of implementation the computer science standards being required
content. Now I think you'll see a lot more um a lot more students getting access to that ethics and safe use um content earlier on because our teachers will be trained. It'll be required to be out there. So it's going to happen more.
Um, so that's really exciting. And then I think to school systems having accessible use policies. They're required to do that anyway, but right now we only have about 60% of our school systems that incorporate AI into their acceptable use policies. So looking to
see that number increase as well and just get them locally to think about what should this um look like in our school system. And then making sure that our um discipline policies are in place. you know, you've got discipline codes for um you know, cyber related
incidents, for you know, immoral ambition practices. You've got the codes that cover the the infractions generally. Um but I think a lot of, you know, school systems are just navigating different ways that they might see those disciplinary violations play out. So
just to close out my comment um I guess it's fair to say that this responsibility right is is partly uh on responsibility but but there's also some expectation that these concepts will be introduced in the school system uh and then the
school systems will have uh outreach opportunities to the parents as well to help the parents with education and guidance >> and I think it really is a community thing you know as a community We should have an expectation that we're kind to each other that we, you know, are are
good players in the digital world and that we, you know, can talk to each other respectfully. The other thing values our communities reinforce and so of course we can't expect the schools to do all of that on their own and you know we we would hope that that would start at home. Um, but we know that as a
communities we do allow to reinforce that with each other too, which was just what they what they see in us when they when they go out to >> And one last thing, I don't think we have any schoolboard members in in our group here today, at least that I've identified. Um, if uh as as school
boards are working through this conversation, um what kind of communications channel uh do you guys have with school boards? So when they consider a local policy and so forth, you know, we'll say I'm I'm a local schoolboard member. How how would I
engage with DOE to get some guidance on policy I might consider for my school district? >> So if if a school board member has questions about that, you get a point of contact. If you want to go to my email address, I can get them to the right person in the department because depending on which direction they're trying to go with it, that could be a different person. So but I'd be happy to
direct that. >> Thank you so much. potentially. >> Yeah, >> you you really did tap into a lot of my concerns. Um because I was going to ask around the guidance that you all give around safety, guard rails um to the
districts and then also really the platforms that you guys are engaging with um because yes, parents need to be responsible but so do the tech companies and the platform. So um are are some of all those things um implemented in Y's guidance? >> Right. you know, and you know, we've
been engaging with OTS a lot as well to think through the more technical aspects of a lot of that. So, appreciate their their partnership on that. Um, but yeah, making sure that and two, you know, I don't think it's smart to look to a list from LJ of these different products
because the textbooks can change so quickly. You know, we might say on Tuesday this or that thing is okay and then on Wednesday they release version 16.3 and it's totally different. And so we want to make sure that school districts have the tools that they need to continue evaluating for themselves what projects they're using and what
things to look out for. Um but yeah, we're we're happy to to serve as thought partners on that. We've got some guidance out there, but then we want to make sure that they can continue to to validate for themselves. Here are the different things we're looking at. This is what we're comfortable moving forward on. And Ashley, you always do a good
job. So >> So Ashley, I'm curious. And so 15 years ago, I walked into the chancellor's office, an institution that I was taking over, and my predecessor's computer was still set up, and there was this sticky note on it. They said, "If the screen is
black, wiggle the mouse. If it stays black, call it at this number." This man had been serving for 40 years in leadership and was exceptional. Did some remarkable work, but technology had had passed him by. I'm curious about the
professional development of of teachers, especially those that have been in the classroom for 10 years so long. This has been such a quickly evolving thing that OpenAI released changing team what in November of 23. Is that about right? Had 100 million
users in February 24. I mean it's that's so quick. How are how is department addressing that supporting professional development educators getting your comments? One thing I think that is is really important and so we have this built into our competencies for um
teacher candidates is that exposure to computer science principles and I've seen this done really well at a couple universities actually there's this one professor and I talked with a couple of people who had gone through his class and these teachers would come into school and they were ready to try things
and so if they if I said hey I know you're about to do your ecosystems unit and you always give kids a chance to make a poster or a diarama. Can I help you create a coding option for that? Your kids are really good at using events and I think they could use sequences to show the flow of energy
through an ecosystem. Teachers who had been through his class said, "Oh yeah, sure. Could you help me build that out? I'd love to do that." Whereas teachers, some some teachers, well, most of the rest of them were really hesitant to say, "Oh, yeah. I would be happy to try that." And so, um, when I met him, the
teachers who had been in his class had done a little bit of all of it. They had taught a little bit of robotics. They had taught a little bit of coding. They had learned a little bit of this in his class and they had tried it in their professional experiences. So, they came they came out into the workforce ready for me to challenge them with new ideas
about what the tech could do for them. And so, I'm excited that our teacher competencies with our universities that they'll have coming through those programs now is that general exposure to to those different experiences with computer science that will get them ready for that. So with that coupled
with our training that we have for inservice teachers and I saw some really great DIY proposals on this by the way to um to just continue developing that area and making more resources available for pre-ervice and inservice teachers. Um I think continuing that work will be really important um to get people that
again that that predisposition to being ready to try new things but then that engagement with teachers along the way. You know, I had my first goal whenever I got to start my STEM program was to work myself out of a job. I thought I'll just teach all the kids how to use the things. I'll write the grants and get all the things and then I'll show the
teachers how it works. They'll all do it themselves. You don't need me anymore. Um, but it didn't work that way because the a lot of the teachers I worked with were really scared to check out the Bbots and use them in their classrooms. And I had a kindergarten teacher come visit me one time and the kids were doing um storytelling with Billy Bros
Gruff and they had their pebbots and they were you know programming the pebbots to run through the sequence in the story and visit the characters in in the order that the that they appeared in the story and she watched them for a minute and she said I teach that story. I was like yeah you do. She said I could do that. Yeah you could. And you know
they had to come see it for a minute before they would be okay with trying it. And so for a lot of them it was a much harder cell. But if we can get it where more teachers are an easier cell and then there are resources for other teachers to see it in place realize it's not that scary. They can do it too. It
probably goes along really well with something they're already doing. I think that we'll see a lot more choose to opt in and be able to do it well as opposed to maybe forcing something that somebody's not quite ready to do yet and that makes them scared of robots forever. So
>> all right that's great. I think doing that at scale is key. There's a lot of folks that are out there. I I was on the cutting edge in technology in 1995 and it's changed. We're not using a lot of Unix programming in in our daily work now, but I still can't do shared
documents. They don't make sense to me. I always save it on my hard drive on my desktop where I have a thousand icons now to share. I mean, it just gets harder and harder to adapt to these new technologies. But the question I want to ask you about deals with the AI uh
innovation index that we talked about that at length and went through as as a as a task force last month and made a recommendation to Bessie to work with department on recommendations about adapting this. I know there were some
concerns that that you had. I wonder if you might talk through some of those and allow us to engage in that conversation. >> Sure. I was talking to join me because he's been helping and looking through this with us. So um so yeah, we Mr. more substitute, we would look through several different options that are out
there and just do some research into what they have to offer right now. You know, at this time, that particular index is not something that we would recommend because it's more subjective in nature and we're really looking for something that complements our work with the standards more objectively, but happy to to share, Mike.
>> Yeah. Thomas Slber, Department of Education, Assistant Superintendent for Assessment, Accountability, and Analytics. uh we want to be very cautious about selecting an instrument. Um if we're going to put it in front of children, uh if we're going to put it in front of adults, if we're going to put it in front of both these two groups or adults, uh seuite leaders, we want to
make sure that decisions that they're making are grounded in fact and not based off of a set of arbitrary percentages. The instrument that we received, we have not received any validity or reliability information on um we requested it, we did not receive it. Um, we've we've looked through the
survey design. The questions are uh not written at a level that we would expect that we would put in front of children. Um, they're not written at a level that we would put in front of adults. Um, and we're not comfortable with them at this point. We are doing additional research into what valid and reliable instruments exist, but the one that we were given is
not it would be my my quick review. Uh, we plan to do some more research between now and January and come back with some recommendations potentially. >> Very good. So, I know that North Carolina adopted it in September of this year and they had some caveats to it. They had had to be opted in by their
various educational units. Um, and and it was voluntary, right? So, do we understand anything of the analysis that North Carolina undertook to adopt it? >> I found no evidence online of any kind of analysis that was done. I found no
evidence of validity or reliability on this instrument. I've found zero evidence of how the cut scores were selected. Um, my cursory review of the questions wasn't cursory because it's three questions. The three questions are not particularly well written. One of
them has multi multiple parts to it that then expects a child between the ages of sixth grade and 12th grade to parse through four different things they're being asked and then put it on a liyker scale of 1 to five from strongly disagree to strongly agree. And then the
they use percentages to say you're an emerging, you're a progressive and it's not normative. There's there's it it >> I don't want to bad another state agency. >> No, no, no. I understand. I don't want to put you Well, I will, but I don't.
>> I mean, you're welcome to. Um, but we are doing more rigorous analysis. Um, I also run standardized assessment for the Department of Education. Uh before we put anything in front of a child, we put them in front of a group, a panel of educators. The question you ask a sixth grader looks very different from a seventh and eth all the way through 12th
grade. Um we also want to be cautious about the decisions that are made based off of the results that people get. They might make some decisions around their AI or computer science department chair based off of the fact that we're at 20% progressing. It might not actually mean
progressing. There's no criterion that seems to be associated with the sales. We want to make sure that the thing that we're selecting is something that is good. There's some empirical research behind it um and it can actually be a useful tool for everybody and not just a 30 secondond poll survey that we do
every year to say that we have some data to make a decision on if that data is not actually very good. So in a in a very broad sense I think how do we know where we are as a state in terms of familiarity usage comfort
comfortableness comfort comfortability whatever the word is I'm trying to find that you can figure out context is with AI and AI tools across the spectrum prek all the way up through our our teachers. Yeah, I um my job is to generally uh say
something's more complicated than folks think that it is. It's more than one question, right? Like what is comfort? What is capability? Right? Like the there's a set of fundamental skills that people need in order to successfully engage with AI and AI tools. Um many of
those skills actually sound a lot like the skills that you need to just generally engage in the world today, right? critical thinking, ability to identify bias in the person who's giving you the information, ability to parse through and ask clarifying questions. Those things are not unique to AI. And
if you look at our standards and our ELA and our math and our science and our social studies standards, you're going to see those things carry through. The things that you don't necessarily see in there are, well, you might see them in the computer science standards, but that you're you're not going to see the
specific AI implementation question. Um, but but I don't have an answer to your question of how do we know how ready people are. I will tell you that we're not ready in terms of young people's ability to critically think at a level to be truly successful in this
enterprise. Um, so I think we know the answer to that is we're not. We are looking for an instrument that would support doing that. But we also have some pretty helpful data from our standardized assessments that beyond those baseline ethical questions and all of those things that we want young
people to know. Um we know that they're lacking these other skills that are going to keep them from being successful in the future world with AI or without AI. Um and we are focused on moving the needle on those things as well. So we, you know, in in the abstract, this task
force is trying to lay out some recommendations or some deliverables that that put Louisiana in a leading position in the nation in preparing our citizenry to live and work in AI
enhanced world. I don't know if there is a technological advance that has been so fundamental in shifting the landscape like AI has. So that's why I think it's one of the reasons why it's it's it's elevated in the discourse.
How do we know five years from now how the work of this task force has done that? How do we measure that? Um I think I would ask you what is AI going to look like in 5 years? And and I ask you that question not flippantly. I
ask you that question because you are working toward an unknown. And when I work towards solving problems that are unknown, which is what we do in education a lot, I tend to think about the things that I know that are not going to be different. And I start from that point. And the place my analysis
has led me has been these fundamental critical thinking skills and ability to engage with that information. when you get into the helping young people get jobs where they are building the AI, if we grant for a second that those jobs
still exist because it could become the Borg and go off and do its thing. Um, but but if we're trying to prepare young people for that, one thing that I do know is they need much stronger math skills than what we're preparing the vast majority of our young people to do. And they need stronger computer science
skills. So, um, I'm not I don't want to sound like a stick in the mud or a fuddy duddy, but I do want to make sure that if that's y'all's goal, the task force is to prepare young people for a future world that we're not certain of. I would sit back and go, what about what am I
like 95% certain isn't going to change? And then how do we leverage AI in this moment to make our young people more competitive? And the most compelling conversations that I have heard is around identifying ways to lighten teachers workloads so that they can more
effectively give feedback on a timely, quick, responsive basis. So that teacher can then turn around and go, I have eight kids in my class that the the AI algorithm is telling me that they're struggling in this writing area. I've looked at it. I agree with it. I'm
differentiating instruction in this way. I think that that is probably your single biggest investment point helping teachers see what those tools are. I can tell you that the risk there is there are a lot of people who claim that their AI engine can do things that it can't.
So, uh the the evaluation of those things when they come to you to go show me your study that has a high effect size that's showing me that it actually does what it purports to do and it has a really low fail rate. That's the work that that a lot of really smart people
are working on and should be doing to help move forward our workforce so that they are better able to critically think, work through problems, ask questions, engage. I I couldn't agree more. Those are the core competencies we know will prepare people for the future and predicting the future is difficult.
I think it was 1932 that John Mayard Kane's coin to term technological unemployment because technology had advanced so quickly by the early 30s that there would not be enough work left to keep people employed and we know that every advance in
technology has actually led to an increase in employment until we reach artificial intelligence which is an exponential advance that continues a curve that can almost become vertical. But I agree with you that those core competencies are key. Blake, did you
have a question? >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Um, so a few questions. Uh, the the first one um was clarifying uh this kind of question of I think what we were looking at the innovation index on is um
systemwide kind of um uh agency of using these tools. And that wasn't just on students. In fact, um, Mr. Kumi when he was here mentioned that the student piece is kind of more of an aspirational piece of it. Where we were really
focused on were superintendent, school leaders, and that is also where we heard um, other states were doing most value at. I'm curious if you could touch on on on that like we put the lens put I I totally understand and understand your
concerns about um students using it and especially what your questions are. I think Aaron touched on it by saying you know these are sample questions with the students but I'm curious about your relationship with the teacher leaders and or or the the systemwide leaders. Um
my concerns about the system in the sea suite is a little bit different. Um the same risks that the one for students present um I don't want to sound obnoxious but um I probably will like a a person who writes instruments would
look at it and go this one isn't right either but its problems are actually like diametrically opposite of the other one. This one's potentially too long. it doesn't appear to have any kind of um controls in place to uh address a word
that somebody here who is a PhD is going to know s uh there's a there's a a heristic that people will tend to lighten their cognitive load while questioning is going on sat satisfaction it's a it's like a combination of
satisfaction and something else but basically it's this idea that you ask them a bunch of questions that have a high cognitive load and they find a place to offload that cognitive load. And normally that's in giving you junk information. Um the fastest route to the answer. Um and I don't see anything in
here that that checks for that, right? Like you might have experienced a survey that asks you a question strongly agree all the way to disagree and then ask you the opposite question a little bit later like to just see if you're paying attention. Like those types of things are one way of addressing that concern
in the survey design. Um, but I don't see that in here. And we've requested their technical report of how they came to these questions to just understand like what does this tell us? Right? You're asking them about uh teacher usage. Why are you asking about that? What is that 40% that you're saying if
40% say strongly agree? What does that equate to? Like what is the outcome that you're hoping for? Is it you're linking that 40% to a 10% reduction in staff time worth papers? like what is the criterion that you're pegging this scale
to otherwise it's kind of arbitrary um but without the technical specifications of the report I can't really like some of those concerns might go away if they provide that >> so uh just to kind of clarify where it would be with the seauite I'm trying to see if there is a place that this can be
useful um from from your point of view and I I I think just to regurgitate what I I think I hear is that you don't quite understand the the rationality behind a some of the the questions and so it
might have a heristic but you don't really understand where it's optimizing towards if you were to to >> I think that's right but I also you can look at it and see when they go back to the the standards like what they're trying to ask about my question is are
they actually asking about that thing in a way that when people respond to it you're going to get real answers as opposed to people like they they've been told they have to do this twice a year. The the other thing that you see over time with pulse surveys is fatigue around
questions, right? Like you see the same question twice a year by is it by year three that suddenly they're like >> bam bam bam bam bam all the way down I all survey fatigue. >> Yeah, survey fatigue. So I I just want
to make sure that if we select something, one, we select the right thing. Two, it might be a different survey instrument by school district based off of what their baseline is. Right? Like one of the challenges here is that it's attempting to to ask a
series of questions, put it on a scale of five, and then bucket people into categories. And it it lacks the depth to be able to tell you, well, why are you there? Like why aren't young people being prompted? Right? like a better set of questions might be like it it might be a differentiated survey that asks
them a question that asks a subset or a sample of those respondents which of these most explains why you didn't or why you haven't and it could be access to technology the computer scares me that like whatever the thing is to then be able to address that concern.
>> Yeah. So related to kind of the instrument um part of the reason why I I brought this initially to the table and what I was impressed when I was seeing in Utah North Carolina isn't the only one. There's a lot of folks around the
country using it and um the biggest utility that came out of well there's two major utilities that that I've seen. one is it elevates um uh the concern within a system. It's a communication
tool more than anything of saying look let's let's have these furistics and let's start thinking about AI literacy from just some general whole space. The second piece and this is something that that Mr. Morris has brought up and and and and I again and again as a
fundraiser and as someone who is trying to see students succeed with these tools um we need a baseline to start communicating the fact that we are here and we maybe need to get to here. Um
that baseline is really really useful in a lot of different ways. Um the the biggest way right now when we're in this initial I would call like innovation phase is to raise money to say we just did this poll survey whether
the questions were great or not. Um we we and and and this is what it said and we need to get to here. Um, my concern by not adopting anything right now, even of something that is flawed and and I recognize I appreciate everything that
you said is that Louisiana becomes disadvantaged because Utah and North Carolina and Kansas and other states adopting similar messages methods and also the entire Europe OECD adopted a very very similar framework. um are able
to say these things and then we have to catch up again and say oh wait we have to do it some kind of imperfect test. Um and so my question to you is with the pressing concern of getting dollars and
attention towards this important issue um what would you recommend that we use to grab that baseline that we can compare to other people and compare nationally internationally we want so that we are the leader because the the the the necessity on the table right now
is to get part of the be part of the conversation and not have to play catchup afterwards. There are a lot of ways to get information that don't involve surveying everybody. One, so if you grant that the survey is fine, which I would say it's not, um, you could do a
sample. You could sample. It could be really well done. A university partner could do it. Um, the university partner would laugh if you brought them the survey to do. They'd rewrite it. And then it gets to this other question of if you're going to say we're trying to compare, if that's a legitimate point,
then you need some kind of comparability between the instruments. And I don't know that you're going to find comparability between this one and the one that Europe adopted, but I'm happy to dig into that as well between now and then. Um, I also I've worked with a lot of funders and
they tend to be pretty smart when they're looking at data and information and I don't think that I think that when they're reading your report, they're probably going to have more questions about the survey instrument that you're using and whether it actually tells them anything. So, it might get you like a short-term incremental boost like while
this is kind of the wild wild west and folks are all grasping for like that that one little little advantage. But I don't think that it's long-term advantage. And I think that uh the risk is you adopt something. It's the wrong thing. And once you adopt something, if the long thing, it's really hard to ring
that bell and adopt the right thing, especially if the right thing is a minute longer. And people go, "Well, the old thing was 30 seconds. Why is this a minute and 30 seconds?" Like I I live this world of we want to add one minute to this this particular question and then it's you're adding a
minute to standardized testing, which we don't want to do. We want to like get it right from the beginning. >> And what what just I think it's my final question because you you mentioned you just kind of gave a nod to the European OECD does have they've adopted a literacy framework. Um
if we were to relook at this and look at the heristics that OECD has adopted, I think our friends at code.org have also been pretty instrumental in a lot of things. Um, would that be something that uh I I'm
trying to figure out what the way to move way way forward is on a goal of by March and and I I put these timelines in because it it's really necessary to have a timeline um uh on on something as
paramount as or as as basic as as a start of a of a metric that we judge success. And we also define literacy by like should we be as a like guide us as a work group to say this is what you should do. This is what I think would be
the right place to move forward for. I understand the time concerns. They are a real concern. We all want Louisiana lead. What should we do? >> Um I would start off by saying that a baseline is only as good as the tools
choosing to collect it. So I would encourage that we not set a baseline off something that isn't very good. The second thing that I would say is um I didn't bring up Europe on my own. I was repeating something that you said. I have not looked at Europe's OEC align instrument but I am happy to look at it.
Like I said um I don't have a clear path forward for you. Um what I do have is uh the commitment that we will dig into the tools that exist to see what is valid and reliable out there on artificial intelligence. Um and uh whether that is
behavioral attitudes to artificial intelligence or concrete core skills uh for all I know uh this example that you that y'all provided they're going to come back and give me uh no reason for pause on their instrumentation. A good example would be if they asked every
student um or a sample of students who answered question two strongly agree and then they gave them a performance task and there was a significant connection between strongly agree and successfully completed the AI performance task that produces some of the concerns. The fact
that none of that information is on the internet tells me that it probably doesn't um that they probably haven't done that but we want to find the right thing. There are a lot of tools out there that it that gauge technology readiness. AI is such a nent field. This is one of those places where uh there
are people that are working to create these that are at a disadvantage because they're trying to create the right one and other people are out there putting out the wrong one. >> And would my I guess the last question is the last one. would you be open to h working with us
to define these things find a tool move forward something by March and I I put that there like can we do it let's do it >> who's us so let me ask one of our deliverables is to recommend an AI index that defines competency levels and tracks proficiency growth across roles
and so that's actually going to be assigned to to one of the subcommittees we'll talk about at the end but you make yourself available to them for for counsel and feedback on as they start their towards that recommendation. >> Um I would have to meet with uh our staff and make sure that that that is
something that I am clear to do. Um as far as as far as like uh actually participating in the task force or participating in that subgroup of the task force, um I will tell you that we we will go look for something that meets those criteria. Even the thing that was
just described of like proficiency and targets and all of that, the thing that was brought doesn't do that. like it it literally might it might check a box of being a heristic, but it does not check any of the other ones. And I would say that the thing that y'all are asking for
is a pretty significant lift in terms of creating an instrument that is going to do that from kind of non-existence, right? Um it it I don't think that one that does all of the things that y'all described actually exists at this moment. So, we're happy to be supportive
um and and help think through some of these challenges, but I have to get back to you on my like time. >> Of course. No, they're not asking you to to take on a new job. Just to be available for >> Thank you. Um first, let me say that I respect Mr. Kennedy's work greatly. Uh
but, uh Dr. L is Dr. L. >> Okay. >> I finished my last class this week. >> Well, congratulations, Mr. Lambert. I'll call you maybe next year. So, uh, some of the things that Mr. Lambert here said today was part of the reasons that I
offered the friendly amendment that was made that the statement adopted this tool and put it in the department of education. Uh but the other piece that that I want to first say >> uh and then I'm going to ask a question is
>> I think if this board comes up with a tool that the department of education is not the proper place to have that tool administered. I think we have different post-secary institutions here. we have different private uh nonprofit entities
that if they are interested in this work that one of those entities should should take that on of administering the the tool whatever it may be and reason being fits into my question uh that I would offer to uh I've been a pass employee so
and I've done an assessment so I understand where you're coming from >> the the question I have for the committee as a whole and them also is that whenever the DOE does it, it becomes a compliance tool. >> It becomes something that whether we
like it or not, schools are judged on. So my question is to this group is what if you have a school or you have a section of the state or a region of state but does poorly on this, what then do we expect the DOE to do about it? And
if the question if the answer to that is we don't have any expectations around that that further u reinforces my thoughts that this should not be a POE activity appreciate that
>> sir I apologize I didn't want people to catch all but um my thoughts don't I appreciate your feedback um couple thoughts here I just have a concern that u perfect is going to be an impediment
to progress. Um I I don't think we're looking for perfection here. This isn't to me this is a relativity a relativity tool. You know it's a subjective tool that we're looking for. Uh and and with that subjectivity there's obviously
potential for huge margin of error but but it's not an exact science. It's a standardization standard metric used for comparison or or as I understand it, it's it's a tool that can be used uh in in a funding application to provide some
indication of benchmarking and and potential pathway for progress. So, I just want to um express my concern that uh we don't we don't want to go looking for the wrong thing trying trying to
find perfection when we're not looking for perfection. Uh this is a subjective tool and um and we're not asking the department to create anything. I I agree. If you're going to try to create something from scratch, it's going to
check all the boxes that you talked about, then that's a project. We're not asking for a project. What we're asking for is uh uh to to have information
uh available to us that um uh for global research. It gives some appreciation for what other other countries, other states have already got in place because whether it's AI or if it's um if it's
instrumentation at the refinery down the street, you know, at some point in time the standard was put in place and everything's going to be 4 to 20 milliamps and you're going to scale it to that, right? But there there was a standardization put in place. It took a
while to get to that particular standard, but along the way there were three or four or five or six different ways to to to uh calibrate that instrumentation. Eventually they landed on a standard. It's a global standard
and we go from there. In my mind today, we're at a stage in this uh extremely fastm moving process that we're we're basically plowing the field and we're planting
seeds. We don't have a real clear vision on on what the fruit looks like, what the quality of the fruit is going to look like, what the volume of the fruit is going to look like on this particular acre. But but going in we can go in we can do a subjective assessment. We can
take soil samples. We can consider the weather. We can consider labor resources and other things like that at this preliminary stage in the process. And personally I think that's the kind of tool that we're looking for. I'm not
looking for an objective tool that's that's driven by uh data really strong evidence to take a position on significant research or personnel investment. Um but what I'm hearing from this group is the tool is is really
primarily u something that external resources are looking for. Do you have it or not? and and are you engaging with your school systems, your school districts and this is some demonstration that you've done
that and and to your earlier point can it can be done by taking uh an appropriate sample size. they don't have to have 100 particip 100 100% participation for every school district uh every school in every school district um and and basically you're providing
for outside parties uh the fact that hey we have that level of engagement we have some appreciation relative to other states what what our benchmarking looks like it's not an exact science but it is a standard in in Europe or it's a
standard in North Carolina or Utah or whatever So we got some comparative basis and and and I don't know that that the tool is is going to be something that the department uh puts a whole lot of value in. It was really put together
for the purpose of satisfying external uh investors or uh or or even other states to get some appreciation for where they are relative to Louisiana. So, um, just want to express my personal opinion. I'm not advocating for one tool
versus another, but but I do think it's appropriate that we do have some indication, some feedback mechanism uh, with regard to where we are and and so we have some appreciation for where we want to go and how long it might take us
to get there. So, just my personal opinion and just just wanted to share that. So, thank you. Yes sir. >> Can you give me an example like um a good metric or something that's similar to this? Something that you can say oh this was a something we could that was
the right thing. >> The department does not do surveys. >> Okay. >> Generally we do not do surveys. Surveys are an area that's pretty far outside of the bounds of what we do. Um my experience in this is because I've just completed a whole bunch of hours of
graduate work related to survey instrumentation. >> Um >> sure. >> So just say >> but just say too you know we've we've been fiercely protecting instructional time and making sure that teachers have
time to teach. That was something we heard from lots of teachers across the state was that they didn't have time to teach the things that they needed to teach. And so, you know, with with the the um help of the legislature and our state board and just everybody across the state, we've made monuments beans of
literacy. We have a screener for that. It doesn't ask students if they think they're good readers or if they enjoy reading, but it measures specific things that we have used to secure funding and develop initiatives and give technical assistance to districts and teachers and
tutors and all develop tutoring initiatives on. So, we've done so much because we really did have good solid data that we could do something with. And so just want to take caution to if we're if we're going to do something that's going to take even even a bit of distraction from primary focus of
instruction, even a bit of instructional time away, I want to make sure that it's purposeful and intentional. And it's something that that we can um point to to teachers and to schools. This is why this is doing this. This is why it's linked in with what you have to do already. Here's the here's the purpose
of it. It's good validated. We can we can do these things with it. And for literacy that's been not not anything subjective. >> So so literacy there's something when they're reading and judge how they're reading and there's it's not a survey, >> right? It has to kind of feel about it
or >> how long did that take to put together to get to the point? >> Um there's a group that's been running a literacy assessment since the 70s. Um
insurance do take a little bit of time to >> um >> I don't I don't know that >> it's not going to be from the 1970s to now, right? It was it was within a very short period of time. um they have very very good clarity on what it is that
they believe that young people need to know in order to be not at risk or at risk, right? And um some of this I mean what y'all are asking for is essentially a standardized test, right? Like >> no
but what I heard >> what I heard was you want an assessment that tells us the baseline of where young people are as it relates to artificial intelligence. If you want to be able to actually answer that question, you need a set of standardized
questions. It could be five, it could be 10, but they're a performance task of some sort. It's not a set of feelings about how a young person feels they are at a particular thing. >> I I think just to clarify and maybe it
was just a directive was was miss um and this is again a personal piece. I won't speak for the rest of the of the committee, but what we're looking for is a signaling tool. Um, and a signaling tool is a little bit different than a standardized test. Signaling tool is
something that you can say we're thinking about this not perfect. Um, and so that's that's where I think the focus is on. >> So, it's not about measuring it, it's about making people think about >> which is which is different.
>> It's not about it's it's there is there are measurements in place. they're all measurements in place, but it becomes a signaling tool that then you can say here's this here's this this initial piece and then we're moving to this piece. So I think one of the one of the challenges is that this the AI movement in the last three years has been one of
the most disruptive things society families there's a lot of inequities there's a lot of challenges with and it's a major change in environment and what this type of tool is is designed to measure is people's
comfort to that I think there is value to that it's not measuring their confluency it's not measuring them their comfort in there is going to give you some insight into that how are they adapting to this new reality that is ubiquitous and and crafts department has
been not the right group to to administer this but I do think it's it's something that's worth further discussion and we've got actually a committee that's assigned to that >> which is this is so convenient that you're actually >> I just want to say I mean so it said recommend an AI index that defines
compet competency levels and tracks proficiency growth and so I think that based on this convers ation here that that language needs to be completely scrapped. are truly just trying to get a baseline how do I feel about AI that
that's not what >> that doesn't align with defining competency level and tracking proficiency >> right the the assignment that I have been getting is not matching what is being said now which is why I said what y'all have described is criterion
reference assessment that assesses skills not feelings about skills and not a uh It's not a survey tool. The the task this task force provided to us sounds a lot more like criterion reference testing than it does a lyker
scale. Um so thank thank you for the assist Dr. >> but I agree that it should be out you know again if if it's not being used to get different results like if a school is in this low percentage then they have to do this. if they're in the high
percentage, you know, if it's not being used for anything other than just pulse and for for fundraising purposes, then LDOE shouldn't be involved because what if LDOE is going to issue it and they're they either don't take action on it,
which then why am I doing the survey if LD I'm not going to get anything out of it or they do take action on it and then this, you know, the schools are scared that they're performing low and that they need to be higher. So, I think that having it run external as a survey as a
pulse um is something to strongly consider. >> I uh I think I told Ashley make her do more like 15 minutes and so we got one person and then we're going to let you go. But thank you so much. >> Yeah. Well, first I just want to thank
everyone for coming together. I think this is really important for students and I especially want to thank the LOE. I'm really excited about the computer science standards because I know a lot of kids who don't realize they love computer science until they take it class. So, I think that's really exciting. And as to the AI tool, I do
agree with Dr. Henderson that it can be really helpful to figure out how students feel about AI. But I would discourage our task force from making this something that's required of students because I can just tell you in a public school if we give the student, hey, just do this survey or whatever in there, how do you feel? I'm telling you,
everyone's just gonna be like boom, boom, boom, and get it done. So, yeah, but I I really think we're on the right track and thank you. >> My son shared some of his answers to his survey questions at UL yet, and I'm horrified
with no personal identifiers on one second. >> Yes, sir. So, real quick, 10 seconds. Um there's a lot of uh issues in in the social media realm on 247 news channels
coming out of the leaders tech leaders about the dangers of AI and the fear I'll call it the iroot syndrome. Um, has I know it's Bessie, I haven't heard anything from parents or school boards,
but has Bessie had any feedback from parents or school boards with great concerns about us pushing forward with AI education? I'm just curious. >> I I've heard it on both sides. I've heard parents um excited, thank you, our kids are going to be ready, we can't
wait to go, the kids need this, you know, those those kinds of feelings. And then I've heard the other side of it's too much, the kids aren't ready for it. that I've been able to think. You hear both sides. So, they're definitely um that and then I know just in my engagement with other states, I don't know about yours, I I really feel like
we're ahead. You know, the um a meeting I was in recently, you know, there were a couple other states who were working to revise their computer science standards to incorporate AI the way that we did in ours, which is makes it more more adaptable long term. And some of them had older computer science
standards because we were a little bit later to that game than some. But the advantage was that we were able to think about how to incorporate AI into ours. And so there are a couple other states who are working to copy us on that right now, which is kind of neat. And then I heard a few state departments say we're not doing anything with it right now. We
don't have a single second to speak about that. We we can't think about it. And then I heard a few states say, "Oh no, our our governor, our legis, our our, you know, our department has told us don't touch AI. It's not okay. It's not safe. We're we're banning it essentially." So, I feel like, you know,
a lot of the states that I talked to were really impressed with the work that we had done so far. They were, you know, looking to buy some some pages from our notes. And so, it was kind of neat to see them dating at X. So, we still like that. I don't know if your kids have been the same. >> Yes.
>> I can give you a quick fact. Um, and it's from Ben Franklin, so it's a you know, different sample, but when we launched Kamigo for um the freshman class a couple years ago, we allowed parents to opt out. I'd have to look up the exact number, but it was maybe seven to 10 out of 250ish.
>> A lot of you hear all saying AI is dangerous. It's going to ruin the world. >> People believe that. >> Yeah. I think there's the social media like buzz and the feelings and the things that get like clickbait feelings and then there's like the actual right,
>> you know, the actual data from my school says no, parents want their kids to learn, >> right? And if I could just say I'm so glad Franklin's here. Hello Falcon. I love you. Thank you very much. >> You guys me I appreciate that was really
a robust conversation. I think it's very very important. It's going to inform the work of of our subcommittees. But I wanted to to to transition to the next thing I shared with y'all, a couple articles that Representative Schlaggel shared with me that I thought do a great job of of of
uh of talking about um the relationship between technology, its application and the climate and some indications of cognitive decline associated with that and and and and so I want to give a chance to to talk about that. Rome also shared the the latest executive order
from the White House of creating a federal regulatory environment around AI and and trying to get ahead of these 50 states with their their hodgepodge of different AI policies and regulations.
And there is some very very strong language in there about a review of of the legal environment, the regulatory environment for both Justice Department, Department of Commerce, Federal uh Trade Commission. Uh and so to say that we're grappling with some some very important
issues. Uh if you needed more evidence of that, that that executive order can can take you down a lot of rabbit holes. And I have not slept since I read it, but it's good. But repres I don't know if you need to weigh in on those articles and and the reason why you know
it's important to share them. >> Sure. There was just a few recent articles one is in the Atlantic one was in the free press um around how technology there some of the data trends are showing all the technology in the classroom with students that actually showed a negative effect. And then
Atlantic just um theirs was the colleges labemizing their students because they did I think it was MIT that did the study with students that used GBT then they had some that used Google search and then some that just went and did the research and there was actually cognitive decline on those that use chat
GBT and so I was just stressing because we have seen and the department did a great job and they do made me feel more comfortable with the direction that they're heading because our big thing was getting back to the basics And that's what actually has shown our growth is that we actually went back to
did some of the progress that we did in education. And now we're actually seeing growth in our literacy rates by getting back to the basics, letting teachers teach. And so my concern was just as we go forth just like technology flow into the classroom. Um you know, I went
toward Jesuit with my son and they don't use technology and they're like we educate our kids. We have the most national um as semi- finalists. I just want to make sure that we look towards just having some guard rails around this
conversation and um that was just sort of the and making sure we actually um put guard rails around our the critical thinking of our kids um when when we we discuss these things. >> Yeah, I think I think those concerns are right on the money. I remember uh in
2006 I inherited an aspect of higher education in Louisiana that had struggled after week two the email system had gone down for a third time couldn't communicate and I was the only still fresh from the private sector so we reacted pretty strongly I told guy
name Jimmy Sautell to book his tickets to California San Jose California we went from to the campus of Google to talk to them about a solution there three days later and said I want to move all of our email
to Google but I want to keep our extensions so that no one sees it's a seamless thing but at least I'll have solid they moved mountains to do that we became the first public entity to be on Gmail with our own extension I thought what a noble
altruistic thing that they had just done but what did they do they just quickly they just got 75 5,000 new dedicated emerged users Google technologies. This is when Google was not we were still using Alta Vista and LOS and these kinds
of things as opposed to Google. That's one aspect of this. We have to keep in mind that there's now been this is one of our business providers a $400 billion educational technology industry players all trying to accumulate as much data as they can as
many dedicated early users so that they don't necessarily a negative thing. something to keep in mind and it's one of the reasons why you'll see some strong pushes in certain directions um because there is a financial benefit in so I think that's an important
consideration I don't know if there's other thoughts on those articles concerns I appreciate you bringing them to uh to light I I think that um some of the the the pieces around privacy are are really
sensitive and there are very specific concerns that I think are no different than any technology that we're talking about. Then there are the existential concerns that seem a little bit different, but they're also messaging concerns. So, it's it's kind of helpful
to look at those two different things. And then related to Google and kind of trying to bring in the conversation we're having around metrics. One of the things that I've seen in other states I'll sing Utah because they've done a really good job of this is they have said like hey this is a hotbed for
future workforce future business. Um if we if we look at all the investment that has been to date in AI like this is going to be an important part of our economy. um and have having these conversations that we're having right now and being
part of hopefully metrics that are uh uh global will help us be in that conversation and by being that conversation we can also have conversations with the Googles with the the Facebooks with these partners and saying I'm already having these conversations and I'm amazed by just
telling people that we're doing this all of a sudden a door opens uh WordPress for instance um open their door to to me and said, "Hey, we have this IDC that we haven't released yet. We also have 500,000 jobs that have not been filled. Um, would Louisiana be interested?" It's
only because we're having these conversations. So, I want to underscore a lot of this is saying like, "Yes, we can get on the ground floor. We definitely need to think about privacy. We definitely need to think about security. We also have to realize the value of innovation. Being innovative will allow us to open these doors to
have these conversations with the the big workforce providers right now. Thank you for that. So, I appreciate everybody spending now two and a half hours in this conversation. The last thing on here is uh we've got these six deliverables. Uh just in our second
meeting, we'll meet again in January where we have folks from Utah. >> Matt W. >> Matt Winters from Utah and some folks from there coming to talk about some of their process and some of their advance in this same work. I think that's going to be great. I thought it would also be
helpful if if we developed these subcommittees around these deliverables to help create a context for us in the deliver in the creation of these deliverables that by February we're in a position to have some draft
answers to send to the the the board of elder and secondary education. And so if you're agreeable to that u we actually created six subcommittees. did not include members of Bessie or the legislature in the subcommittees. Not to exclude you, just not to further weigh
you down on some of these policy discussions, but you're certainly u able or are capable of of weighing it if you would so choose. But on our first deliverable, which is to develop the policy and implementation recommendations supporting LDOE's AI
comprehensive plan and advancing Bessie's August resolution, Thetus Zombberger has agreed to chair that. Thank you so much. >> You're so welcome. >> Rebecca will be with that committee and Rachel Parker. Rachel here.
>> She's good. Well, she just follows this one. >> She'll do it. >> Uh on number two, let's recommend a statewide AI literacy framework for educators, students, and system leaders. Eveina Brousard from governor's office. Thank you for chairing that with
Beijing. You don't mind being a part? >> I'd love to. Ben Blake, >> thank you for agreeing on that. Number three is establish the criteria for state approved clearing house embedded AI tools to ensure safe effective classroom use. This is an easy one.
Stephen from Capital Bank. We'll do that with Matthew, Vince, and Anthony Owen. It's okay. I'm for recommend an AI index which will be easy uh that defines competency levels to track proficiency growth across roles. Vanessa, thank you
for for participating that on Jackson Durks. Jackson's not here today, but will be there. Chuck Crabtree and Todd Wedgeworth. So uh number five is and this is one that incorporates some of the things we just talked about Paula but to develop a strategy for alignment and collaboration
among K- through2 education higher education industry technology partners workforce commission department of economic development state legislators and the governor Paula Calderon from Southeastern will lead that with Osmar Padilla Dustin Gasbart and Andy Qu
and then the last one that he he has no idea and he's not here today But identify a position in Louisiana for federal and private funding opportunities to scale AI integration statewide. Trade Godfrey uh is one of positions to have with Aaron Kada and Aaron Curry.
And so the hope is is that between now and our January meeting that these groups will meet virtually, you know, conversations over email and start to create a framework for the deliverable uh that was reported on in January and then about February to actually have crafted drafts on the deliverable
themselves. That make sense? Everybody's comfortable with this? Okay. And so beyond that, are there any other uh remarks for the committee? May sir, Miss Williams, could you send us
the digital version of this small proposal? I can't read this. >> It's too small. >> You know, Lindsay wanted to share there was a green background. >> That's the other problem. It's just like if it was a fancy place that not that's
wrong. Other comments or thoughts? If not, again, thank you all for your time. I thought that was a very fruitful conversation. Certainly help my develop my understanding, advance this work. U we would now entertain a motion to adjourn.
>> Second. All in favor? Thank you. I mean it's harder. All right. Very nice. on the char looking at his face Yeah. Yes. previous system.