Rush-Henrietta weighs AI’s place in education

At a recent Rush-Henrietta Central School District board meeting, two Rush-Henrietta Senior High School students spoke out against the school’s use of generative artificial intelligence in its curriculum.

Their statements reflect a broader debate fueled by rapid advances in AI technology.

The district began discussing the potential use of AI as an educational and administrative tool in early 2024 with the establishment of an AI steering committee, says Barbara Mullen, superintendent of RHCSD. The committee’s goals were to explore how AI could be aligned with the district’s broader aims outlined in Vision 2037, the district’s strategic plan. The group includes faculty and administrators from RHCSD and SUNY Geneseo’s School of Education. 

“When (the committee) talked about future-ready skills, we said generative AI is here, large language models are here, prompt engineering is here. How do we thoughtfully integrate that conversation into our strategic plan and the future-ready skills?” says Mullen. “As a part of our Pathways to Tomorrow strategic goal, which is Goal 2, we began thinking about what does that look like to build that literacy and digital identity in the age of AI for students?”

A draft framework for implementing AI in the district outlines how it could align with the district’s 2037 Vision Goals. The document argues that AI could tailor instruction to individual student needs, make classrooms more inclusive to students with disabilities and language barriers, and help dismantle systemic biases in education by identifying and addressing disparities in educational access.

Mullen also addressed risks associated with generative AI and its use by young people, including the technology’s correlation with mental health issues, exposure to inappropriate content produced by AI, and the spread of misinformation and deepfakes. 

“If students wanted to use any of that stuff (AI platforms that produce adult content or deepfakes) here on our system, it’s locked down. Cybersecurity is very tight,” says Mullen. “The school district is not providing access. They can’t get on Character AI, they can’t do ChatGPT, they can’t do any of that stuff with their student-facing accounts. It really is locked down. And so the biggest concern we have is what’s generated outside of school.”

In fall 2025, RHCSD launched Expedition AI, a districtwide initiative to educate parents, faculty, and some students on the potential benefits and risks of AI for young people. The initiative included a seminar on AI ethics and safety. 

Though the district has discussed the use of AI since 2024, an assembly at Rush-Henrietta Senior High School on May 14 drew criticism from students for including images generated with LumiStory AI. At the event, students in a public speaking class read personal stories to their classmates about an impactful person in their life. Stories shared by the students were paired with AI-generated artwork made with LumiStory.

LumiStory bills itself as an educational tool to help students visualize learning materials with AI-generated images. In attendance at the May 14 event was former NFL star, activist, and LumiStory founder Colin Kaepernick, who briefly spoke with students and handed out merchandise to promote his company.

An RHCSD Instagram post promoting the event was flooded with comments criticizing the use of AI. According to students Mariana Albino-Toro and Phillip Donk, many students chose to skip the event, while others showed up with protest signs.

“While I applaud my fellow students who had the courage to present stories in front of the assembly, the focus was shifted to the bright branding of Lumi, using banners, T-shirts, and celebrity endorsement,” said Donk in a statement read to the RHCSD board meeting on June 2, criticizing the May 14 event. 

“My question is, why remove the humanity? Why use AI to illustrate stories as opposed to the wonderful artists in our student body?”

Donk and Albino-Toro call attention to the impact AI has on the environment, the theft of artwork for generative AI models to use, and concerns about the technology’s impact on employment and on young people’s mental health and cognitive function.

“What came across as disappointing was not the stories being told themselves, but that each and every one of those students had been told to use this generative AI platform to complete their assignment,” says Albino-Toro. “The issue with generative AI is that it is actively harming the cognitive abilities of our society while stealing and regurgitating the art that humanity has produced.”

In response to the students’ criticisms, Mullen stresses that AI is not being fully integrated into the curriculum. However, as major tech brands begin immersing AI models into their products, it has become difficult for educators to keep the new technology entirely out of their classrooms. 

“Nowhere in our curriculum is the use of AI tools mandated, and we only have two that are student-facing. There are a lot of other tools that we use that do have an AI component, because that is just the nature of ed-tech and technology,” Mullen says, “As these companies begin upgrading and putting AI features in there, and using these kinds of internetworked models, we either say we’re going to divest from all technology or we understand what the implication of using that AI tool is.”

She urges students to continue making their voices heard.

“I fully expect students who are building their muscle around activism to challenge the things in the school district that don’t resonate with their values, and so that is a conversation kids are always welcome to have,” Mullen says.

David Wazana is a Rochester Beacon contributing writer and a member of the Oasis Project’s second cohort. 

The Beacon welcomes comments and letters from readers who adhere to our comment policy including use of their full, real name. See “Leave a Reply” below to discuss on this post. Comments of a general nature may be submitted to the Letters page by emailing [email protected].