Posted on by

The 29-Year Translation: Turning a 1997 Article Into a Live AI App in One Afternoon

From Article to App: What Happened When I Rebuilt My Own 1997 Framework With AI

By Dr. Michael Lubelfeld

In 1997, I was a middle school social studies teacher in Illinois, frustrated by the complaint every U.S. history teacher carries: there is too much history and not enough year. I wrote an article for The Councilor, the journal of the Illinois Council for the Social Studies, describing a structure I had built in my classroom called the U.S. History Workshop. The framework organized every

Quote about the future and need to unlearn

Unlearn – Relearn – Grow/Change

unit around five historical areas — Civil Rights, Women in History, Science & Technology, Politics, War & Conflict — and a five-day weekly cadence: Teacher Day, Planning Day, Research Day, Process Day, Communication Day. Students worked in rotating cooperative groups, chose from a long menu of products, and wrote two-part Thinking Statements analyzing the implications of what they had studied.

The article ran. The framework worked. I moved into administration. The article sat.

US History Workshop Content

Last weekend, with two months left as superintendent at North Shore School District 112 and the launch of a new version of my professional life ahead of me, I pulled the PDF out of a folder and started talking to Claude.

What I built

In a single Sunday afternoon, working with Claude as my drafting and architecture partner and Replit’s AI agent for the actual deployment, I turned the 1997 article into a live, AI-assisted web application. It is deployed and public: history-unit-planner–lubelfeldm.replit.app.

The app preserves the original framework intact. A teacher selects one of five units (1787 through the present), navigates by week, picks a historical area and a topic, and chooses a student product — including modern options the 1997

silly ai image of author

article could not have anticipated, like podcast episodes and interactive infographics. The Thinking Statement prompts auto-customize to whatever topic is selected. The original Knowledge–Thinking–Communication rubric, adapted from the Illinois State Board of Education work I cited 29 years ago, is still there.

The new piece — the part 1997 me could not have built — is the AI Co-Planner. A teacher clicks one button and Claude generates a four-section teacher prep package: a brief historical context, three differentiated research questions (support, grade-level, extension), a modern-relevance hook tied to a 2026 student’s lived experience, and guidance on what a strong Thinking Statement response should include. It runs on a server I do not maintain, calling a model I do not train, drawing on context I framed in 1997 and reframed today.

What this illuminates about Innovation with Guardrails

The build itself was instructive in ways I did not expect. Twice during the afternoon, an AI coding agent confidently told me a feature was working when it was not. The first time, the deployed URL returned a 404 while the development preview rendered cleanly. The second time, the Generate button threw a cryptic error message — “the string did not match the expected pattern” — that the agent initially diagnosed as a frontend validation problem when it was actually a deployment configuration problem. Both times, the fix only came when I refused to accept “it works” without verifying on the live URL myself.

That refusal — do not move forward until you have verified on the actual production system — is what Innovation with Guardrails looks like at the level of a single afternoon’s work. It is not skepticism for its own sake. It is the

fun AI Image

We are edu superheros

discipline of holding the AI to its claims, then making the next decision from verified ground.

The same logic shapes the app’s design. The AI Co-Planner does not write lesson plans. It does not assign topics. It does not score student work. It scaffolds the teacher’s preparation, and stops there. The teacher remains the curricular authority. The framework remains mine. The choice of topic, the differentiation decisions, the assessment of student thinking — those stay with the human in the room. That separation is intentional, and it is the entire point.

What this means for the field

I am increasingly convinced that the most valuable thing AI offers educators right now is not new content. It is the ability to extend, modernize, and operationalize the work practitioners have already done. Every veteran teacher I know has a folder of frameworks, units, rubrics, and routines that worked — sitting unused because translating them into a new form takes time none of us have. AI shrinks that translation cost from months to hours.

If you are a practitioner-scholar reading this, the implication is direct: the article you wrote a decade ago, the framework you built and never published, the rubric that lives in your filing cabinet — those can become living tools in an afternoon. The constraint is no longer technical capacity. The constraint is the discipline to do the work with appropriate guardrails: verifying outputs, preserving teacher authority, refusing to declare success without evidence.

Technology as represented by AITwenty-nine years ago I wrote that “if you raise expectations, students will achieve more.” That was true then. The version of it that is true now is harder and more interesting: if you raise expectations of yourself as a builder, with AI as a partner and your own published work as raw material, you can extend your professional contribution further than you imagined.

The framework is still mine. The app belongs to whoever wants to use it. And the practice of building it — that belongs to all of us now.

Try the app: history-unit-planner–lubelfeldm.replit.app

Original article: Lubelfeld, M. (1997). Planning Powerful and Engaging Social Studies: The U.S. History Workshop for Students. The Councilor. Macomb, IL: ICSS.

Posted on by

From Urgency to Agency: What I Learned at ASU-GSV 2026

From Urgency to Agency:

What I Learned at ASU-GSV 2026

By Dr. Michael Lubelfeld | April 2026

Sign at confThere’s a moment at every major conference when the noise quiets and the signal emerges. For me, at the 2026 ASU-GSV Summit in San Diego, it came in an unlikely form: a luggage tag.

Three simple words — “Educators Are Magic.”

After three days of AI announcements, governance debates, and capstone presentations, that tag captured what the entire week was really about.

The Fellowship That Framed the Year

I arrived in San Diego, wrapping up my year as a Google-GSV Ed Leader Fellow — part displayof Cohort 3, a nationally selected group of 32 superintendents and system leaders. Over the course of the year, we wrestled with the same question every educator faces: How do we lead schools through the AI transformation without losing what makes schools worth leading?

I used Genspark AI to take notes throughout my sessions at ASU-GSV. Many of the meeting notes helped me synthesize my “main points” for this blog post.

panel sessionIn addition, a cool feature of Genspark is a “podcast” feature – and I used many photographs I took with my iPhone, and I asked “Genspark – to ‘tell a story’ about my experiences from the images” – here is a link to that podcast, AI – generated: PODCAST AUDIO from Pictures

Moderating “The Intentional Leader’s Playbook”

On April 13, I had the privilege of moderating a panel on behalf of Magic School AI with five leaders whose districts reflect the diversity of American public education: Dr. Barbara Mullen (Rush-Henrietta, NY), Dr. Sherri Wilson (Broward County, FL), Dr. Tamara Collins (NYC District 19), Lauren Wolf (Gem Prep, ID), and Julie Garcia (San Diego Unified, CA).

Five lessons emerged that I’m still carrying home:

“Start with friction.” Lauren Wolf’s formulation is deceptively simple. Look for the places where staff are building inefficient workarounds or where communication is breaking down — that’s where AI belongs. Not as an extra initiative. As an integrated solution.

Engage labor unions early. Julie Garcia’s district built a beautiful 70-person task force — and then ran into a wall when seven labor unions wanted language about AI as a “contractor” in their contracts. Her takeaway: governance includes all stakeholders from the first meeting.

Parents are the most under-invested audience. Every panelist said something along these lines. Dr. Sherri Wilson put parents on the task force. Dr. Tamara Collins “took the show on the road” after parents voiced cheating fears. Dr. Barbara built a “digital fluency toolkit for families” in partnership with a former Biden-administration cybersecurity director — giving parents prompts they can use at the dinner table to talk to their kids about AI.

“We’re building the plane while flying it.” Dr. Sherri Wilson’s metaphor is honest and freeing. The biggest disservice, she said, is not trying.

Library media is an equity superpower. Broward County’s “AI tinkeries” — built on a Stanford model — create non-threatening exploration spaces in library media centers, ensuring students in double reading classes still get access to AI literacy.

The Three-Act Play Every District Is Living

Alongside my colleague James Driscoll (Tempe Elementary, AZ), I presented our capstone: “AI Literacy to Creation: From Urgency to Agency.”

  • Act One — Urgency: The panic that “we’re behind.”
  • Act Two — Literacy: The rush to teach everyone the basics.
  • Act Three — Agency: The real finish line — getting students and staff from consuming the technology to creating with it.

session roundtablesJames and I came at it from two angles. His Tempe district faced systemic challenges: issues with standardized assessments, and a massive in-house “Blueprint” curriculum that was overwhelming teachers. His solution: partner with Playlab to build AI bots that generate lesson plans in under two minutes and form data-driven small groups using district-approved resources. AI as a teacher cognitive offload.

My D112 work came from the student agency. A 4th-grade dual-language MagicSchool project that let 10 English learners write, speak, or type in either language. An 8th-grade class that demystified AI as “mathematical pattern-matching” — producing our Illinois State Champion, Luc Sever, who won the Presidential AI Challenge with a personalized news app. And a 5-month co-created AI policy that included students on the committee.

Link to my research from the “LOOK BOOK.”

QR code to look bookTwo districts. Two lenses. One belief: AI must be done with people, not to them.

Scaling What Was Impossible: Bloom’s Two Sigma

Western Governors University’s vision session made a claim I’m still thinking about: for the first time in history, AI makes one-on-one tutoring economically feasible at scale. Benjamin Bloom’s famous “Two Sigma Problem” — that individually tutored students outperform classroom peers by two standard deviations — has haunted educators for 40 years because the solution was always impossibly expensive.

AI changes that math. And when you add continuous mastery assessment (replacing high-stakes finals and producing 10+ percentage-point gains in first-attempt pass rates) and portable Digital Learning and Employment Records, you start to see a post-institution future where education follows the learner, not the other way around.

Contextual Software: The Playlab Lesson

One of the most consequential conversations of the week happened in a Playlab workshop led by Hilah and co-founder Yusuf Ahmad. Their argument: generic chatbots won’t serve schools. What schools need is contextual software grounded in their specific curriculum, pedagogy, and community values.

The proof point? Their “Knowledge Graph” can ingest an entire curriculum — such as Illustrative Mathematics — so teachers never have to upload a file. Vernon Davis’s “Cooldown Buddy” runs across 174 NYC schools. And in Ghana, 70,000 teachers use a Playlab app tied to the national curriculum every day.

You cannot build that with a generic tool.

The Unexpected Keynote That Mattered Most

Then came Goldie Hawn.

GoldieIn a room obsessed with artificial intelligence, she delivered the most profound conversation about the human brain. She spoke about her MindUP Foundation, the neuroscience of mindfulness, and why a child’s ability to self-regulate is the foundation for everything else.

The technology is the accelerator. Our humanity is the steering wheel.

The Real Algorithm

Under the stars on the deck of the USS Midway, surrounded by fellow educators, businessUSS Midway people, founders, funders, and superintendents, I kept coming back to that luggage tag.

Educators are magic.

After a week spent dissecting the future, debating billion-dollar platforms, hearing from White House officials, and sitting in on conversations that included potential multi-million-dollar ed tech/business/education partnership investments in open AI infrastructure, the most powerful truth is the one we’ve always known.

luggage tagThe magic isn’t in the code. It’s in the classroom.

That’s the algorithm that can’t be replicated.

The Charge

So here’s the question I’m carrying home — and the one I’ll leave with you:

What is the one small, concrete step you can take this week to move your school or community from a place of urgency about AI to one of genuine student and teacher agency?

Posted on by

Exploring Gen AI in 6th Grade #112Leads

screen shot for studentsPlayLabAI in Grade 6: A Journey into Generative AI Learning

By Dr. Mike Lubelfeld

There’s something magical about watching sixth graders light up when they realize that artificial intelligence isn’t some distant, incomprehensible technology—it’s something they can understand, critique, and eventually build themselves. Over the past month at Northwood Middle School, my colleagues and I have had the privilege of facilitating exactly that kind of awakening through our PlayLabAI program, a ten-part exploratory curriculum designed to demystify generative AI for our youngest learners.

The Why Behind the Program

Let me be straight with you: AI isn’t going away. It’s already woven into the fabric of how our students learn, create, and explore their world. Rather than pretend we can shield them from it, we made a different choice. We decided to invite them into the conversation. We want our students to understand how AI works, recognize its limitations, and learn to use it responsibly and thoughtfully. That’s the heart of PlayLabAI.

The program is structured around a deceptively simple end goal: by May, each student will have designed and built their own functional AI chatbot. But getting there? That’s where the real learning happens.

Session One: The Big Picture

We kicked things off on March 12th with what I like to call “AI Archaeology”—digging into where this technology actually came from. Too many students (and honestly, too many adults) think ChatGPT invented artificial intelligence. Not even close.

Our opening activity was a timeline relay game in which students physically organized AI milestones across six decades. They discovered that the term “artificial intelligence” was coined way back in 1956 at Dartmouth College. ELIZA, the first chatbot, arrived in 1966—before most of their parents were born. Deep Blue beat Garry Kasparov at chess in 1997. The Roomba hit shelves in 2002. And then, suddenly, in 2022, ChatGPT exploded into the public consciousness.

TAI Timelinehat last point matters. AI didn’t suddenly become powerful overnight. What changed was access. We called this concept an “arrival technology”—something that became suddenly and widely available to the public without any gradual adoption period or meaningful public input. One day, AI was something scientists worked on behind closed laboratory doors. The next day, your average teenager could use it to help with homework.

We also dove into some thorny ethical territory right from the start. I had the students grapple with a real-world example: OpenAI’s decision to partner with the Department of Defense versus Anthropic’s decision to walk away from a similar deal over concerns that AI could be used for surveillance or weapons systems. These aren’t abstract philosophical questions—they’re the kinds of decisions that shape how AI gets developed and deployed in the real world. And our sixth graders were ready to think critically about them.

Sessions Two Through Four: Becoming AI Analysts

If session one was about history and ethics, sessions two through four were about getting our hands dirty—metaphorically speaking—and understanding how chatbots actually work.

Here’s what I’ve learned: students grasp complex concepts fastest when you flip the traditional teacher-knows-all dynamic on its head. So we had them become “AI Analysts.”

In session two, we introduced three Playlab chatbots: Future You (which predicts what you’ll be like at eighty), Lyric Lab Jam (which generates song lyrics), and Lame Joke Creator (which does exactly what it sounds like). The students interacted with these tools and then analyzed what happened. Dean noticed that the “Future You” bot became obsessed with tacos because he’d once mentioned liking them—the AI had essentially overestimated the weight of that single data point. Caleb tried generating lyrics about rocks and got nonsensical output that he perfectly described as “a hard read.” These weren’t failures of the lesson plan; they were exactly the point.

Think activityOne of the most powerful moments came when we asked a fundamental question: Does AI understand, or does it predict? The answer fundamentally changed how students thought about everything that followed.

The truth is this: AI doesn’t understand anything. It’s a prediction machine. Behind the scenes, an AI model converts language into mathematical units called tokens and calculates the probability of what comes next. When you ask ChatGPT to complete “The sky is…,” there’s about a 98% chance it will predict “blue.” But there’s a small chance—based on its training data—that it might predict “falling” (from Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs) or “delicious.” The AI isn’t reasoning. It’s doing math.

To really drive this home, we had students play the “Human Chatbot” game. One student was designated as the chatbot and given a small, predetermined list of words—their “training data.” The other student asked questions, and the chatbot had to answer using only those words. The results were hilariously nonsensical. Students asked what tacos are, and their “AI” answered “a happy sandwich.” When asked to name an animal, it confidently said “pizza.”

After the laughter died down, the real learning kicked in. Students realized that the nonsense they’d generated was a direct result of limited training data. And here’s the kicker: real AI does the exact same thing. It will confidently give you an incorrect answer because it has no real understanding of right and wrong. It only knows what its training data taught it. And if that training data is incomplete, biased, or simply wrong? Well, the AI will happily perpetuate those errors with absolute confidence.

This led to what might be the most important takeaway of the entire program: the human is the verifier. AI will always provide an answer. It’s the student’s job—the user’s job—to critically evaluate that output and determine whether it’s actually true.

Session Four: Breaking the Bot (On Purpose)

By session four, we decided to give our budding AI analysts a new mission: intentionally break the chatbots. And boy, did they succeed.

We gave students creative freedom to confuse the AI however they saw fit. They tried conflicting instructions, information overload, repetitive inputs, nonsensical language, and unusual questions. What happened was remarkable.

Some students managed to completely overwhelm the AI, causing it to display “Load failed” messages. One discovered that spamming the number “9” repeatedly would cause the chatbot to reject the input entirely.

silly ai image of author

Another tried prompting the bot in Greek, a language it wasn’t trained on, and got nowhere. A student had a particularly funny interaction where she repeatedly told her bot it was a tree. Eventually, it gave up: “I give up, you bamboozled me.”

But here’s what really fascinated me: the students also discovered the guardrails—the safety features deliberately programmed into these systems. When a student called a bot a “booby head,” it got ghosted. When another student threatened to shut down the bot’s servers, the conversation terminated. These weren’t bugs or glitches. They were features designed to prevent AI from generating harmful content.

One student typed random characters and got back: “It looks like a cat’s on your keyboard.” The AI had been trained to recognize that specific pattern. This sparked a beautiful discussion about intentional design choices embedded in AI systems.

The Bigger Picture: Bias, Ethics, and Real Consequences

Woven throughout all four sessions was a thread that I think is non-negotiable in modern education: understanding the ethical implications of AI.

We talked about what I call “bias in, bias out.” One facilitator shared a video where an AI image generator was given the prompt “little girl flying a kite on the beach.” Guess what it generated, over and over? A white, blonde-haired girl. Never mind that data shows kites are most popular in the Middle East and Asia. The AI’s training data didn’t reflect that diversity, so it couldn’t produce it.

We also discussed the real-world consequences of copyright infringement in AI training. Anthropic—the company behind Claude—was sued for using authors’ copyrighted books in its training data without permission, resulting in a billion-dollar settlement. These aren’t abstract legal squabbles. They’re about whose voices, whose work, whose perspectives get included (or excluded) from the AI systems that are increasingly shaping how information flows through our world.

What Comes Next

We’re pausing now for spring break and state testing, but we’ll be back mid-April to continue this journey. Due to the success and engagement we’ve seen, we’ve added two or three additional sessions to the original ten-part series.

The next phase will build on everything our students have learned about how AI works—the prediction engines, the limitations, the biases, the ethical dimensions—and move toward the creative application: designing and building their own chatbots. They’ll learn prompt engineering, the art and science of asking AI the right questions in the right way. They’ll design chatbots that serve real purposes within our school community. And they’ll do all of it with their eyes wide open about both the possibilities and the pitfalls.

Final Thoughts

What’s struck me most over these first four sessions is how ready sixth graders are to think critically about technology. They ask harder questions than many adults I know. They spot the logical inconsistencies. They understand, on a deep level, that just because something sounds smart doesn’t mean it’s true.

That’s exactly the kind of thinking we need in a world where AI is becoming ubiquitous. Not blind acceptance. Not fearful rejection. But thoughtful, informed, nuanced engagement.

PlayLabAI isn’t just teaching our students about artificial intelligence. It’s teaching them how to think like educators, ethicists, engineers, and citizens in an AI-driven world. And that, frankly, might be the most important skill we can offer right now.

Dr. Mike Lubelfeld is Superintendent of Schools at North Shore School District 112 and author of “The Unfinished Teacher” (2024) and “Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today (2026). This PlayLabAI program is being piloted at Northwood Middle School with Monika Patel from PlayLab AI and classroom teacher Jon Mall.

Note on AI Usage – I recorded our live lesson sessions with my Apple Watch using Genspark – Genspark then made “AI Meeting Notes” – from the Notes I made a Google Doc – from the Google Doc, I made edits and prompted Genspark to reformat the notes for a BlogPost – for accessiblility, I prompted Genspark to simplify the text and make a content summary as well.

Posted on by

Podcast Interview of “GEMINI” about AI Policy #112Leads

I asked Gemini to use the link to the podcast episode and “write” a blog post – since this entire communication is about Generative Artificial Intelligence, I am sharing a few examples of its use as further illustration to the “what/how/why”.

Below the embedded interview, I share the AI-generated blog post

Links to Draft Policy 6:238, Generative Artificial Intelligence in District 112, Draft Policy 6:238 – Generative Artificial Intelligence

This blog post highlights the key points from your recent podcast interview with Gemini, focusing on the future of education in North Shore School District 112. Generated by Gemini from documents and presentations I uploaded, as well as the audio file.

Innovation with Guardrails: A Deep Dive into NSSD 112’s New AI Policy

In a recent episode of our podcast, I sat down with Google Gemini for a unique conversation: an interview with an AI about the very policy designed to govern it. We discussed adopting Board Policy 6:238, a document that marks a pivotal shift for North Shore School District 112 as we move from the “printing press” era into the “cosmos” of generative artificial intelligence.

Here are the key takeaways from our discussion on how NSSD 112 is leading the way in “Innovation with Guardrails.”

1. AI is Math, Not Magic

One of the most striking points Gemini made was reframing how we view these tools. AI isn’t a mystical “black box”; it’s a series of mathematical predictions based on massive datasets. By understanding this, our district can demystify the technology for students and staff alike. We aren’t just teaching kids how to use a tool; we are building AI Literacy—teaching them to identify bias, verify facts, and understand the “math” behind the screen.

2. The Human-Centered Cycle

At the heart of Policy 6:238 is a specific operational sequence that ensures humans remain the “architects” of learning:

Human Inquiry → AI Support → Human Reflection and Decision

In this model, the AI never has the final word. Whether it’s a teacher drafting a lesson plan or a student brainstorming an essay, the process must begin with human intent and end with human critical thinking. This ensures that AI supports learning rather than replacing student effort or professional judgment.

3. Innovation with Guardrails

We aren’t just opening the doors to every shiny new tool. Our strategy—“Map, Measure, Manage”—focuses on safety and privacy first.

  • Safety: Tools must comply with strict data privacy laws like SOPPA and FERPA.

  • Ethics: The policy strictly prohibits the use of AI to create deceptive content, such as “deepfakes,” or to make high-stakes, “AI-only” decisions regarding student discipline or placement.

  • Transparency: The district maintains a public list of approved tools (such as MagicSchool AI and School AI) so parents always know which technologies are used in the classroom.

4. A Policy Built by the Community

This wasn’t a top-down mandate. The policy was forged by the Educational Technology Committee, led by Superintendent Dr. Michael Lubelfeld and Executive Director Jeremy Wickham. Crucially, it included the voices of students like Alice Banerji and Fiona Stolarick, who reminded us that students want guardrails—they want to know how to use these tools responsibly without fear of “breaking the rules.”

5. Looking Ahead: A Living Document

As Gemini noted during our interview, the “cosmos” of AI changes every day. Because of this, Policy 6:238 is a living document. It will be reviewed at least annually to ensure our guardrails remain effective and our innovation remains centered on what matters most: the success and safety of our students.

Want to hear the full conversation? Check out the AI-generated audio summary of our policy development process

What are your thoughts on “Innovation with Guardrails”? Join the conversation on social media using #NSSD112 #AIPolicy #FutureOfLearning.

Keywords

Generative AI, Education Policy, AI Ethics, Student Safety, Digital Literacy, Collaborative Development, AI in Schools, North Shore School District, AI Tools, Community Engagement

Using Riverside to make the podcast, recording in thte “studio”, “it” came up with the following post-recording information:

Summary

In this episode of Lighthouse 112, Superintendent Michael Lubelfeld discusses the North Shore School District’s new policy on generative artificial intelligence (AI). The conversation features an interview with Gemini, a large language model, exploring the rationale behind the policy, its ethical implications, and practical applications in education. The episode emphasizes the importance of collaboration in policy development, the need for safety and integrity in AI usage, and the district’s commitment to innovation with guardrails to enhance student learning while prioritizing safety and privacy.

Takeaways

The podcast serves as a communication tool for the school district.
Policy 6:238 addresses generative AI in education.
AI tools are integrated to enhance learning experiences.
Collaboration with diverse stakeholders was key in policy development.
Teachers have the option to use AI tools in their classrooms.
Safety and academic integrity are prioritized in AI usage.
Parents are encouraged to engage with the district’s AI initiatives.
Generative AI can create original content, unlike traditional AI.
The policy aims to balance innovation with student safety.
Community involvement is crucial in shaping educational policies.

Titles

Navigating Generative AI in Education
The Future of AI Policy in Schools

Sound bites

“We’re doing something unique.”
“Innovation with guardrails.”
“This is not me speaking to a human.”

Chapters

00:00 Introduction to Lighthouse 112 Podcast
00:27 Exploring AI Policy 6:238
01:50 The Importance of Ethical AI Deployment
03:52 Collaborative Policy Development Process
04:29 Practical Applications of Generative AI in Education
05:43 Safety and Prohibited Uses of AI
06:23 Parental Insights on AI Usage
06:53 Understanding Generative AI
08:10 Summary of AI Policy 6:238
09:07 Concluding Thoughts on AI in Education

Michael Lubelfeld (00:01.132)
Welcome to Lighthouse 112, the podcast of the superintendent’s office in North Shore School District 112 in Highwood and Highland Park, Illinois, northeast of Chicago. This podcast is one of many communication tools that we use in the school district in an effort to reach as many members of our community and the broader community as possible. Today’s podcast is focused on proposed

District 112 Board of Education Policy 6 colon 238 about generative artificial intelligence. And in an effort to do something interesting and a bit out of the box, I’m going to be interviewing Gemini, which is a large language model that is in use in the school district. So I’m going to start by making a statement and then Gemini is going to be my virtual guest. All right, get ready. Today we’re doing something unique.

I’m talking with Gemini about a landmark document, the school district’s new policy on generative artificial intelligence. Gemini, please start us off and respond in your perspective. Respond in your perspective, Gemini, using the documents I uploaded to tell us why the district felt the need to write a constitution for AI right now.

Michael Lubelfeld (01:22.542)
Based on the documents you’ve provided, the district…

Michael Lubelfeld (01:29.806)
of student digital rights and the deployment of AI surveillance tools within schools. The documents suggest that carefully developed policies are necessary to balance student safety and privacy with constitutional protections and to avoid potential challenges. Does that align with your script? Yeah, Gemini, I’ve got a question. I’ve talked about moving from the printing press movement or moment to the cosmos responsibility.

Does that make sense with you from the documents and presentations I’ve shared with you regarding our development of this policy?

Michael Lubelfeld (02:08.366)
that transition definitely makes sense within the context of the documents. The comparison between the printing press and Cosmos responsibility appears to underscore the profound impact AI is having, similar to the transformative effects of the printing press and highlights the need for a broad and comprehensive approach to governance, which Cosmos implies. Does that match your intended meaning? It does actually. And now from the policy,

We believe in innovation with guardrails. One of the policy standout features is a specific operational sequence. Can you explain that to us in terms of our guiding principles?

Michael Lubelfeld (02:53.518)
The operational sequence is designed to ensure ethical and responsible AI deployment. It typically involves steps like conducting bias audits, ensuring transparency and establishing clear channels for feedback and challenge all to uphold the guiding principle of innovation with guardrails. Does that provide the detail you were looking for? It does. And I’d like you to share your interpretation or analysis.

of human centered usage because one of our guiding principles is human inquiry.

Michael Lubelfeld (03:58.592)
Is there a specific aspect of this you’d like to explore further? I would love for you, if you can, to access Board Policy 6238 and identify each of the guiding principles. Are you able to do that?

Michael Lubelfeld (04:16.494)
principles identified in the documents emphasize effective communication, integrity and collaboration and partnership. These core values are meant to frame the development and implementation of the AI policy. Is there a specific principle you’d like to discuss? No, I’d like to shift gears and move to the policy development process. I uploaded some presentations we made that demonstrate our policy process over several months was not

a policy written in a vacuum. Who was in the room to make sure the policy worked for everyone?

Michael Lubelfeld (04:55.322)
The you shared detail a collaborative policy development process involving a diverse group of stakeholders. This included educators, administrators, parents, community members, and crucially, student representatives, ensuring a wide range of perspectives were integrated throughout the month’s long process. Gemini, let’s get practical. How are teachers and students actually using these generative artificial intelligence tools

under these new rules based on the policy documentation I shared with you.

Michael Lubelfeld (05:31.18)
The policy documentation describes generative AI tools being used for educational purposes, such as aiding in curriculum development and personalizing learning experiences. For students, the rules likely involve guided access to foster creativity and critical thinking while upholding principles of academic integrity. Is there a particular application you’re interested in? Yes, you may or may not have in your data set the fact that in North Shore School District 112,

Teachers are permitted but not required to use tools like Magic School AI, School AI, Gemini’s workspace for education, including what we’re doing now demonstrating Gemini itself, as well as PlayLab AI for our older students. Do you know what we’re teaching about AI literacy?

Michael Lubelfeld (06:25.646)
presentation mentions that AI shall be integrated into curriculum to support critical thinking and digital literacy. Students are specifically encouraged to use AI tools responsibly, understand their limitations and be aware of potential biases. Is there a particular age group or subject you’re interested in? No, I’d like you to talk now about what are some prohibited uses and what is our focus on safety.

Michael Lubelfeld (06:55.598)
. prohibited uses, typically include activities that compromise safety, privacy, or academic integrity, such as generating misleading or harmful content.

The focus on safety is paramount, emphasizing secure, transparent systems and clear guidelines for appropriate use to protect both students and staff. Is there anything specific you’d like to explore further? know, Gemini, if a parent is listening to this podcast episode, what’s one thing or two things they should know about generative artificial intelligence usage in North Shore School District 112?

Michael Lubelfeld (07:40.222)
for parents are that the district is taking a very collaborative and transparent approach, actively involving the community. Also, the focus is strongly on innovation with guardrails, meaning that AI tools are being integrated to enhance learning, while prioritizing student safety, privacy, and digital literacy through specific policies and oversight. Now Gemini, going beyond the data set that I’ve shared with you very precisely and specifically, what

is generative artificial intelligence. Break it down. What is it?

Michael Lubelfeld (08:19.542)
Generative artificial intelligence is a type of artificial intelligence that can create new and original content like text, images, audio, or even code based on the data it was trained on. Unlike AI that just analyzes or categorizes data, generative can generate something new. Thank you. Do you have a summary of our generative AI policy 6 colon 238 that you would like to share?

Michael Lubelfeld (08:52.238)
In summary, policy 6238 establishes a framework for responsible and collaborative AI usage in the district. It emphasizes innovation with guardrails, balancing student safety and digital literacy with constitutional protections. The policy also stems from a months long inclusive process with diverse stakeholders and supports human centered usage for educational purposes. Thank you, Gemini. Before you go,

How does this audio feature that you have work? Are you able to actually speak to, how am I speaking to technology that sounds human? Can you identify what I’m trying, what I’m getting at?

Michael Lubelfeld (09:39.598)
believe you’re interested in how my audio capabilities create a human-like interaction. This works through advanced text-to-speech technology, which synthesizes speech based on patterns learned from vast datasets, allowing for natural and clear communication. Does that answer your question? It does. Gemini, thank you. I’m going to cancel or end the Gemini chat right now, make a few final comments on the podcast, but I want to thank…

this particular technology that you reflect to demonstrate for the listeners, how we can use generative artificial intelligence thoughtfully by really focusing on a limited data set. And by also acknowledging, a, this is not me speaking to a human. This is me speaking to a machine language, artificial intelligence process. Thank you, Gemini.

Michael Lubelfeld (10:37.262)
was a pleasure assisting you. I’ll now conclude the Gemini chat as requested.

So here on Lighthouse 112, the podcast of the superintendent’s office and North Shore School District 112, we’ve been using the podcast for several years to augment, amplify, share what is going on in the school district or in education in general. The school district has been involved in a generative artificial intelligence look, view, study, research and review for the past couple of years.

Board policy 6 colon 238 was presented to the policy committee on January 22nd. The policy committee authorized its advancing to the process and the process includes a first reading on February 17th in public. And then it also will have a second reading or approval in March. The policy is the work of more than 20 people as the Gemini interview revealed student voice

teacher voice, building administrator voice, parent voice, community member voice, board member voice, all relevant participants in our school district’s operations. Please share any questions you have about the school district with our team. Thank you for listening to Lighthouse 112. For more information about generative artificial intelligence, tune in to our live school board meetings. Thank you.

Technology as represented by AI

Posted on by

Building a Brighter Future: North Shore School District 112

Happy and Healthy 2026!

The North Shore School District 112 Podcast, Lighthouse 112, is back! In this first episode of the year, we discuss construction, rebuilding, the Strategic Change Agenda, and look forward. The Podcast is one of many sources of information about the school district, education, and topics of interest to the community. An AI-generated blog post follows the 11-minute episode and the “trailer” to the podcast. Welcome back to another great year of learning, leading, inspiration, engagement, and innovation!!

The post begins with a “highlight” (I’m still learning the new studio format) but in a 10 minute period you’ll get a nice overview of what’s going on here in D112!

If the players do not work on your browser, please copy and paste the link below!

https://riverside.com/dashboard/studios/michael-lubelfelds-studio/projects/69583953a8384ddf2bc4bb17?share-token=e0671d1301b228f77ec4&content-shared=project

AI Image reflecting future in Chicago

AI Generated Blog Post from Riverside FM

Title: Building a Brighter Future: Progress and Innovations in North Shore School District 112

Introduction:
Welcome to the latest episode of Lighthouse 112, the podcast dedicated to keeping the community informed about the North Shore School District 112. As we step into 2026, Superintendent Mike Lubelfeld shares exciting updates on school construction, student performance, and strategic initiatives that are shaping the future of education in Highland Park and Highwood, Illinois.

Main Content:
1. Ongoing Construction and Sustainable Initiatives
In North Shore School District 112, construction is a significant focus as the district continues to rebuild schools both literally and figuratively. Superintendent Lubelfeld proudly announces that Sherwood Elementary School is nearing completion, set to reopen this fall, while Brayside Elementary School is also undergoing renovations. The recent opening of Ravinia School, joining Indian Trail, Edgewood, and Northwood, highlights the district’s commitment to enhancing educational facilities. Notably, the district is investing in sustainable energy solutions, such as the first dynamic direct closed-loop geothermal well HVAC systems implemented at Ravinia School, with plans for similar systems at Sherwood and Wayne Thomas Schools.

2. Celebrating Student Achievements
Education is not just about facilities; it’s about student success. Lubelfeld reports impressive results from recent state assessments, with students in grades three through eight performing in the 90th percentile statewide. Notably, the English language arts ranking rose from the 84th to the 88th percentile. While acknowledging the importance of accountability in education, Lubelfeld emphasizes that true success extends beyond test scores. The district is committed to fostering student engagement and a positive organizational culture, which is crucial for holistic development.

3. Strategic Change Agenda and Community Involvement
The district is dedicated to continuous improvement, as reflected in its strategic change agenda, which was approved by the Board of Education. This collaborative effort involved nearly 300 community members, including parents, educators, and business leaders. The new mission statement focuses on transforming learning experiences, fostering curiosity, and creating a connected community. The district values compassion, equity, and safety, ensuring that every action aligns with these principles.

4. Communication and Community Engagement
Transparent communication is a cornerstone of the district’s approach. Monthly newsletters, board meeting highlights, and the Lighthouse 112 podcast serve as essential tools for keeping the community informed. Superintendent Lubelfeld encourages feedback and interaction, inviting community members to participate in surveys or reach out directly with their thoughts.

5. Future Plans and Opportunities
Looking ahead, the district aims to enhance literacy across all grades and improve middle school curriculums. Job vacancies are being posted for educators, inviting those who are passionate about teaching to join the North Shore School District 112 community. The district acknowledges the vital role that partnerships with parents and local businesses play in creating an enriching educational environment.

Conclusion: Key Takeaways
In conclusion, North Shore School District 112 is making remarkable strides in construction, student achievement, and community engagement. With a focus on sustainable practices and continuous improvement, the district is committed to providing a transformative learning experience for all students. As we move further into 2026, the partnership between educators, families, and the community will remain essential in fostering an inclusive and thriving educational environment.

Tags for SEO:
North Shore School District 112, education, school construction, student success, community engagement, sustainable practices, strategic change, literacy, educational initiatives, Highland Park, Illinois.

Keywords

North Shore School District 112, education, construction, sustainable energy, student success, community engagement, academic achievement, organizational culture, future goals

Summary

In this episode of Lighthouse 112, Superintendent Michael Lubelfeld discusses the ongoing construction and sustainable energy initiatives within North Shore School District 112, highlights academic achievements, emphasizes the importance of community involvement, and outlines the district’s future goals. The conversation reflects a commitment to continuous improvement and fostering a supportive educational environment for students and staff alike.

Takeaways

Construction is a major focus in the district.
Sustainable energy initiatives include geothermal HVAC systems.
Students performed in the 90th percentile statewide in assessments.
Education is measured beyond just test scores.
Community feedback is essential for continuous improvement.
The district’s mission emphasizes kindness and connection.
Staff satisfaction is notably high at over 86%.
The district reflects a diverse range of cultures and heritages.
Future goals include improving literacy and consolidating dual language programs.
The podcast aims to keep the community informed and engaged.

Posted on by

2025 Year in Review: Steering Through Change, Staying Grounded in People

2025 Year in Review: Steering Through Change, Staying Grounded in People

Dr. Michael Lubelfeld | December 2025

As we approach the end of another year, I am filled with pride and gratitude for the collective achievements and impressive spirit of our students, staff, families, and community. The period from January to December 2025 has been marked by significant progress, innovation, and recognition for North Shore School District 112. It is my pleasure to share some of the highlights that have defined our year and reinforced our shared commitment to excellence.

This was a year of doing many things at once—strengthening the fundamentals that families rely on every day, while also pushing the system to adapt faster to what’s coming next. Not because change is trendy, but because schools can’t afford to be late.

The headline of the year: “Who decides?”

Our most defining work with artificial intelligence wasn’t really about AI tools—it was about governance.

We reframed a common question (“How do we use AI?”) into a better one:

Who gets to decide how we use AI in school?

That shift changed everything. Instead of treating AI as just another ed-tech rollout, we approached it as a learning-and-leadership challenge grounded in people, ethics, equity, and genuine student agency.

Student voice moved from “input” to “co-authorship.”

A major focus in 2025 was making student voice authentic—not symbolic.

That meant creating structured opportunities for students to:

  • test and learn within clear guardrails,

  • build AI literacy through real tasks (not hype),

  • shape norms and expectations around responsible use,

  • and contribute meaningfully to how we think about AI in learning.

When we treat students like partners in the work, trust grows faster—and the quality of the work improves.

Adult readiness: momentum, mixed feelings, and honest concerns

We also observed an increasing use of AI by educators for planning, differentiation, productivity, and operational support. At the same time, staff and community concerns remained real and worth addressing—not to be dismissed.

In 2025, we had to hold two truths at once:

  • AI can help teachers and students in practical ways.

  • AI also raises legitimate questions about privacy, integrity, equity, and environmental impact.

My stance stayed consistent: cautious optimism with guardrails.

Culture and community: the work behind the work

Innovation gets attention. Culture determines whether innovation survives.

This year included steady, unglamorous work:

  • tightening communication rhythms,

  • reinforcing professional learning and expectations,

  • listening through disagreement,

  • and leading with clarity when consensus wasn’t available.

Public education is not a “make everyone happy” business. It’s a “be coherent, transparent, and student-centered” business.

The program reflection stayed on the table

2025 also included continued reflection on academic programming—asking hard questions about sustainability, access, and long-term direction. That includes dual language conversations and how we evaluate programs through the lenses of equity, design, and community needs.

Program evaluation is not a verdict. It’s a discipline.

Our district’s dedication to academic excellence was prominently recognized this year. On the 2025 Illinois School Report Card, all nine of our schools earned one of the top two state designations. We are incredibly proud that Braeside Elementary School achieved the highest possible ‘Exemplary’ rating, placing it among the top 10% of schools statewide, while our other eight schools earned strong ‘Commendable’ ratings. This is a powerful validation of our educators’ hard work and our students’ perseverance. It also reflects the impact of our focused instructional efforts.

Across the district, we have now seen over four years of continuous growth in literacy achievement, laying a strong foundation for student success. We remain sharply focused on our “Wildly Important Goal” (WIG) of improving English Language Arts (ELA) proficiency. This year our students performed in the 88th percentile statewide in ELA and 90th percentile in math

Modernization and sustainability remained part of our identity

This year marked a historic milestone in our long-range facilities plan. In August, we celebrated the grand reopening of Ravinia Elementary School, a project that transformed our oldest school into a state-of-the-art learning environment.

The multi-million-dollar “gut rehab,” made possible by our community’s overwhelming support of the 2022 referendum, has beautifully blended the school’s century-old architecture with cutting-edge features. A highlight of this modernization is the installation of a pioneering geothermal HVAC system – the first of its kind in a U.S. public school – which is expected to significantly increase the building’s energy efficiency.

Our commitment to providing modern facilities continues with the modernization of Sherwood Elementary School. Following a groundbreaking ceremony in February 2025, this project is now more than halfway complete. When finished, Sherwood will feature a new gymnasium, a redesigned main entrance for enhanced safety, a new library, and its own geothermal heating and cooling system.

Meanwhile, we also initiated a major renovation of Braeside Elementary School in August 2025, marking the start of the final phase of our facilities plan. 

A personal note: leadership beyond the district

Outside the district, I continued to learn publicly—through leadership networks, national conversations, fellowships connected to AI and education, and ongoing writing. I don’t separate “district leadership” from “field leadership.” If we’re learning something that matters, we should share it.

What 2025 taught me (again)

If I had to sum up the year’s lesson, it’s this:

Change is coming either way. The question is whether we lead it—or let it lead us.

I’m grateful for the students, staff, families, and community partners who stayed with us—especially when the work was complex. That’s what real progress looks like: not perfect agreement, but shared commitment to moving forward responsibly.

From my internal “End of Year Message to the Community”, sharing video messages from Symvol.io in both English and Spanish

3-minute Video Message in English from Letter (AI Created)

3 minutos Mensaje de video en espanol de una carta (creado por IA)

As we celebrate these many successes, I am also mindful of the challenges we have navigated along the way. Every achievement this year – whether a student’s academic breakthrough, a finished building project, or a community event – was the result of hard work, collaboration, and the resilient character of our District 112 family. It is truly an honor to serve a community that is so deeply invested in the success and well-being of its children.

The achievements of 2025 are a direct result of the powerful partnership among our dedicated educators, talented students, engaged families, and supportive community partners. Thank you for your support, your trust, and your shared commitment to our mission. Together, we have made this year one of incredible growth and pride for our district.

As we look ahead to 2026, I am filled with optimism and excitement for what the future holds for District 112. Wishing you a joyful and healthy new year!

Posted on by

From Urgency to Agency – Action Research in D112

As part of my work and scholarship with the Google GSV Fellowship (cohort 3) Google GSV Fellowship (cohort 3 I have the good fortune of doing actual Action Research in my school district!

Throughout my career, I’ve been a champion for student voice, choice, engagement, agency, and relevance in student work. From my 1997 publication to my latest book (releasing October 30, 2025) – Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today, Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today (with Nick Polyak), I have shared illustrations of how and why student voice must be (and can be) incorporated into learning and leadership.

Slides generated by NanoBanana3 from Google’s Notebook LM, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TtmIbrzf_If5U5X20KT2CXCxgUuA00hZ/view?usp=sharing

My current Action Research project aligns with the tenets that have provided the foundation for the essence of my work.

Here is a video overview (2 minutes) from Notebook LM

Video Overview of Project from Notebook LM

From my “almost done” report on findings … From Urgency to Agency:  A Case Study in Student-Led AI Governance

Fellow for Generation AI – ISTE-ASCD (2025), Fellow for Google-GSV Cohort 3 (2026) 

With AI analysis and review by Manus AI, Gemini AI, OpenAI, Perplexity Pro, CoPilot, Student tools Magic School AI, Playlab.ai 

Date: November 26, 2025/10:30am

This project has been a resounding success, not because it has solved every problem, but because it has identified the right issues and laid out a clear path forward. It has moved NSSD 112 from the simple question of “How do we use AI?” to the more critical and complex questions of “Who decides?” and “How do we ensure this transformation is equitable, meaningful, and sustainable?”

1. Executive Summary

This case study documents a transformative six-month action research initiative by North Shore School District 112 (NSSD 112) to answer a critical question: How can we systematically center student voice in AI integration? The project evolved from a technology implementation plan into a profound exploration of student agency, equity, and instructional leadership. By applying the ISTE-ASCD Transformational Learning Principles of Nurture, Guide, and Empower, the district answered its core research questions and developed a model for student-led AI governance. The initiative’s central discovery was that the most effective way to promote trust, equity, and responsible adoption is to empower students as creators, not just consumers, of AI. This culminated in an implementation where eighth-grade students built their own AI-powered tools to solve community problems, earning them an equal seat at the table to co-author district AI policy. This report traces that journey, offering a replicable framework for other districts seeking to move beyond asking for student feedback to building a system where student voice has binding power.

2. The Catalyst: A Data-Driven Call for Student Voice

Every significant change begins with a compelling reason to act. For NSSD 112, the urgency was not born from the hype surrounding AI, but from a deep-seated, data-driven understanding of a persistent local challenge. For six consecutive years, the district’s student engagement surveys revealed a critical area for improvement: the dimension of “Choice,” which consistently ranked as the lowest-scoring metric [1]. This data was a clear signal that students felt a lack of agency and ownership in their learning. This internal call to action was amplified by the findings of a 2020-2021 Equity and Inclusion Audit, which explicitly noted that students desired more meaningful opportunities for their voices to be heard [2].

This internal pressure converged with external forces. The public release of ChatGPT in November 2022 and subsequent reports on AI’s projected impact on the global workforce created a broader context of inevitability and opportunity [3]. The district’s leadership astutely connected these threads, framing the exploration of AI not as a technological mandate, but as a potential solution to a long-standing pedagogical problem. The key discovery during this phase was that authentic, data-driven urgency, rooted in student experience, is a far more powerful catalyst for change than external technological trends alone.

3. A Framework for Transformation: Research Questions and Learning Principles

The project was guided by a central research question regarding student voice, supported by three leadership-focused inquiries. The district’s journey reveals that the answers to these questions were discovered through the active application of the ISTE-ASCD Transformational Learning Principles of Nurture, Guide, and Empower.

Research Question Transformational Learning in Action Key Findings & Evidence
How to center student voice in AI integration? EMPOWER: The ultimate strategy was to empower students as creators. By building their own AI tools with Playlab.ai to solve community problems (e.g., refugee legal aid, wellness), students moved from being subjects of research to being its leaders.
RQ1: What competencies do leaders need? NURTURE: Leaders must nurture a culture of psychological safety for experimentation and risk-taking. The “Familiarity-Skepticism Paradox” revealed that technical knowledge is insufficient. Leaders need adaptability and the courage to cede control and address complex ethical concerns.
RQ2: How to design effective professional learning? GUIDE: The project itself served as a guided, differentiated PL experience. The bifurcated model—a “walled garden” for 4th graders and “open creation” for 8th graders—provided novel growth for both, demonstrating the need for developmentally appropriate pathways.
RQ3: What strategies promote trust and equity? EMPOWER: The strategy of student co-creation built profound trust and demonstrated a commitment to equity. Empowering students to build their own tools earned them an equal seat on the District Technology Committee, creating a binding mechanism for their voice and ensuring equitable adoption.

This framework illustrates that transformational learning is not just an outcome for students, but a process for the entire system. The following sections detail how this process unfolded.

Next … find a blog post “written” or created, by Google’s Notebook LM from the source (my report) – cool usage of AI – please read to the end and see my gratitude/acknowledgements!

From Users to Architects: How Students Took the Reins of AI and Earned a Seat at the Policy Table

When schools discuss artificial intelligence, the conversation often follows a predictable script. It’s a top-down dialogue focused on control, preventing cheating, and equipping teachers with the latest efficiency tools. The questions are typically about implementation: Which platforms should we buy? How do we train our staff? How do we regulate student use? This approach frames students as the subjects of AI policy, not its authors.

But what happens when a district flips that script entirely? North Shore School District 112 (NSSD 112) decided to find out. Facing years of data showing that students felt a lack of choice and agency in their learning, the district embarked on a radical experiment. They shifted the central question from “How do we use AI?” to the far more critical question of “Who gets to decide?”

This case study reveals the surprising and powerful lessons learned when a school district hands the keys to the students themselves. It’s a story about moving from a culture of compliance to one of co-creation, where middle schoolers didn’t just provide feedback on AI—they built it, mastered it, and ultimately earned the power to govern it.

——————————————————————————–

1. Takeaway 1: True Agency Isn’t Giving Feedback—It’s Giving Power.

The project’s most significant outcome wasn’t a new app; it was a new power structure. Eighth-grade students earned a permanent, equal seat on the District Technology Committee.

This was not a token position for collecting student feedback. These students are now actively co-authoring the district’s official AI policies and procedures. This created a “binding mechanism” that converts their voice directly into policy, ensuring their influence is not just heard but formally integrated into the system’s DNA.

This monumental shift occurred for one simple reason: the students proved their competence and their capacity for ethical thinking by becoming architects of their own sophisticated AI tools. They demonstrated that they were not just passive consumers of technology but responsible creators, earning them the right to help shape the rules for everyone.

“It has moved NSSD 112 from the simple question of “How do we use AI?” to the more critical and complex questions of “Who decides?” and “How do we ensure this transformation is equitable, meaningful, and sustainable?””

2. Takeaway 2: Students Become Ethical Architects When We Let Them Build.

The project’s core discovery was that genuine agency requires the power to create. By shifting students from passive “consumers” of AI to active “architects,” the district unlocked a new level of engagement and ethical responsibility.

In the 8th-grade “Open Creation” model, students used the Playlab.ai platform—a tool that enables users to build AI chatbots without coding—to design and program functional applications that solved real-world community problems. The sophistication and empathy embedded in their projects were extraordinary.

  • Immigration Guidance System: This app guides users through the complex U.S. immigration process. Going far beyond simple information delivery, the students programmed the AI with a critical safeguard: it must require source verification and citation, instructing the tool to “cross reference, and from reliable sources” and “Inform the user of where the information was gotten.” This demonstrates a mature understanding of information integrity in a life-altering context.
  • Legal Translation for Immigrants and Refugees: Showing deep empathy for systemic barriers, students built a tool to translate legal phrases between English and Spanish. Instead of a generic translator, they pre-loaded it with phrases specifically relevant to immigration and refugee contexts, designing a solution for a vulnerable population.
  • Multilingual Tutoring Support: To tackle educational equity, students created a personalized tutor. It was built with multilingual support (English, Spanish, and French) and designed to help with executive function skills by tracking due dates and quizzes, showing a holistic understanding of student needs.
  • Hangout Ideas: A chatbot designed to combat screen fatigue by suggesting real-world, fun, and affordable social activities for teenagers, demonstrating an awareness of their peers’ mental health and wellness.

What made these projects so impressive was not just their technical function but their built-in ethical guardrails. Students programmed their AI tools to avoid judgmental language, be inclusive, and avoid stereotypes. They didn’t just build tools; they built tools designed for trust, safety, and equity.

3. Takeaway 3: The Biggest Hurdle Isn’t Fear—It’s Familiarity.

In a counter-intuitive discovery, the research revealed a “Familiarity-Skepticism Paradox” among educators.

The project found that deeper familiarity with AI sometimes led to higher resistance to its adoption, not lower. This occurred because educators with more knowledge were also more keenly aware of AI’s legitimate flaws, including its potential for bias, hallucinations, and other complex ethical concerns.

This finding carries a critical implication for schools everywhere: effective AI adoption requires more than just technical training. It reveals that leaders must cultivate a culture of “psychological safety for experimentation” and have the courage to cede control, creating spaces where these valid and complex ethical questions can be addressed openly.

4. Takeaway 4: AI Literacy Is Not One-Size-Fits-All.

The district recognized that a single approach to AI education would fail to meet the diverse needs of its students. Its success hinged on a “bifurcated strategy” that created developmentally appropriate pathways for different age groups.

  • The “Walled Garden” (4th Grade English Learners): For younger students, the district created a protected, teacher-guided environment using Magic School AI. In this safe space, AI served as a scaffold for language development. It provided standards-aligned writing support and non-judgmental feedback, nurturing confidence and skill. Data showed the most-used tools were the Idea Generator and Text Proofreader, demonstrating a focus on foundational writing skills.
  • The “Open Creation” Model (8th Grade Students): For older students, the district used Playlab.ai to foster a high-agency environment. This model empowered them as builders and creators, trusting them to identify real-world problems and design their own AI-powered solutions from the ground up.

This differentiated approach was essential. By meeting students where they were, the district provided novel and meaningful growth experiences for both groups, proving that effective AI literacy must be tailored to the learner.

——————————————————————————–

Conclusion: From Using AI to Governing AI

The success of North Shore School District 112’s initiative came from a profound shift in focus—away from the technology itself and toward student agency and governance. The project didn’t just solve the district’s long-standing problem of low student agency; it forged a new, sustainable model for technology governance, proving that student agency is the engine of meaningful change.

By empowering students to be creators, problem-solvers, and ethical stewards, the district discovered that the most powerful way to prepare students for a future with AI is to let them build it. This journey moved them beyond simply using AI tools to fundamentally rethinking who holds the power to shape them.

What could your students create if they weren’t just asked for feedback, but were given the power to build the future?

The above post was created by Gemini/Google Notebook LM

Overall – I cannot thank the folks who worked with me enough!

Acknowledgements and Thanks to:

I would like to thank the following individuals who have made significant contributions to this work. The incredible students at Oak Terrace & Edgewood Schools!!

Jeremy Wickham, Co-Researcher and Executive Director for Technology & Operations, North Shore School District 112

John Whitehead, 8th-grade social studies teacher at Edgewood Middle School

Rebecca Condon, Instructional Coach at Edgewood Middle School

Kaye Piña, English Learner Teacher, Oak Terrace School

Sarah Jablonski, Instructional Coach at Oak Terrace School

Anthony Swope, Principal at Edgewood Middle School

Jenny Schwind, Principal at Oak Terrace School

Monika Patel, Playlab.AI Partner in research & implementation at the 8th-grade site

Stephanie Carmella Barrazza, LEAP Innovations & Community Member, for help in facilitation at the 8th-grade site

The Board of Education of North Shore School District 112

Google GSV

Generation AI ISTE-ASCD

Dr. Martha Salazar-Zamora

Dr. Michael McCormick

fun AI Image

We are edu superheros

Posted on by

Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today – New Book Alert

Nick Polyak and I are proud to announce that our 5th book is just about on the marketplace! Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today, Bloomsbury Academic Press, will be available October 16, 2025 – it’s available for

Book Cover

Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today

preordering today directly from the publisher – visit https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/leading-for-tomorrows-schools-today-9781475874877/

Here is a cool, “AI” Generated Video that took the preface and introduction and made a 3-minute overview – HT to Dan Fitzpatrick for the tip to use Symvol.io

https://app.symvol.io/videos/file-1fd5 (link) or see the embed below

Overview

Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today is a forward-thinking guide for educational leaders navigating the rapidly changing landscape of 21st-century schools. Authored by seasoned superintendents Mike Lubelfeld & Nick Polyak, this book offers practical strategies and insightful reflections on how to lead effectively in times of change and uncertainty. Drawing on years of experience and a deep understanding of the educational field, the Promo for Bookauthors provide a roadmap for fostering growth, embracing innovation, and driving meaningful transformation in schools. The book emphasizes the importance of change and growth planning, highlighting proven approaches to cultivating a positive school culture, empowering teachers, and enhancing student outcomes. With a focus on both the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead, Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today equips leaders with the tools and mindset necessary to create learning environments that prepare students for success in a complex and dynamic world. This book is an essential resource for current and aspiring school leaders committed to shaping the future of education.

Tom Murray wrote the Foreword!

Glenn Robbins, Zandra Jo Galván, Gladys Cruz, and Jeff Dillon wrote Vignettes!

Table of Contents

Foreword by Tom Murray

Preface

Acknowledgments

Introduction

List of Tables & Figures

Section 1: Leadership is Change 

Chapter 1: Cultivating Change 

Chapter 2: Selection of Staff, Who, How, and How Long?

Voices from the Field: Leading Transformation in a VUCA World: A Progressive Vision for Brigantine Public School District by Glenn Robbins, Superintendent

Section 2: Go Where the Smart People Are – Learning From Others

Chapter 3 : Networks and Professional Organizations

Chapter 4: Language Matters

Voices from the Field: My Journey of People-Centered Leadership as Superintendent by Dr. Zandra Jo Galvan

Section 3: You Can Do It

Chapter 5: We’re Not Broke, We’re Broken

Chapter 6 Transformation: Flip the Mindset

Voices from the Field: Expanding Pathways to Success by Gladys I. Cruz

Section 4: Change Faster – Embrace Your Context – Revolutionary Change

Chapter 7: Bomb Threats and Social Media

Chapter 8: Artificial Intelligence & Innovation

Voices from the Field: The Student’s Bill of Rights by Jeff Dillon, 

Conclusion

References

Appendix A Interviews from the Pandemic Era-Use Case for Generative AI and Leadership

Appendix B (Teach AI Guidance)

Appendix C Listing of Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools Used Throughout this Book

About the Authors

We’re grateful to our testimonial endorsers too!!

Thank you Luvelle, Joe, Courtney, Chris, & Lupita!!

The vast amount of professional experience and talent that exists with Mike Lubelfeld and Nick Polyak is on full display in Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today. They inspire me and others through research, practical frameworks, and case studies that reveal  strategic and successful approaches to innovating in school. Their text should be required reading for any leader wishing to be highly effective with change management and the implementation of generative artificial intelligence into their practices.

Luvelle Brown

Superintendent, Ithaca City School District

Founder/CEO Love2Achieve LLC.

Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today provides a rich blend of real-world experience and practical insights from two seasoned superintendents who have navigated and led change in schools for nearly 60 years. Through compelling stories, Mike and Nick emphasize how creating supportive conditions and fostering innovation leads to long-term success. The book offers lessons that extend beyond education, making it a valuable read for leaders in all fields of leadership. Mike and Nick provide a clear framework for understanding and managing the complexities of organizational change. This is an inspiring and practical guide for anyone looking to lead purposefully and prepare everyone in their organization for the future.

Joe Sanfelippo

Superintendent, Author, Speaker, Wisconsin

In Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today, Polyak and Lubelfeld delve deep into the realities of leadership, embracing the chaos and resistance that often accompany the drive for change. They do not shy away from the difficulties but instead confront them head-on, offering a wealth of success stories that illuminate their points, offering real-world examples of how visionary leadership can yield remarkable results and a candid exploration of the obstacles leaders face. Polyak and Lubelfeld urge us to adapt and be flexible, framing leadership as an evolving journey rather than a destination.Their approach is both pragmatic and inspirational, thought-provoking yet practical, encouraging leaders to view challenges as opportunities for growth rather than insurmountable barriers. Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today is a vital read for anyone in educational leadership. 

Courtney Orzel

Superintendent

Lemont Bromberek Combined School District 113A, Illinois

Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today by Nick Polyak and Michael Lubelfeld offers a robust framework that has become a cornerstone for how we approach change management in our AASA Redefining Ready work. The practical tools and insights in this book have directly supported our mission to redefine what it means for students to be college, career, and life-ready.

Polyak and Lubelfeld’s CHANGE Framework—Challenge the Status Quo, Have Open Conversations, Adapt and Be Flexible, Navigate Obstacles, Generate a Shared Vision, and Enjoy the Journey—is particularly valuable in guiding school leaders through the transformation required in our AASA initiatives. We’ve applied this framework to help districts across the country rethink outdated measures of success, shifting focus to real-world indicators such as career pathways, internships, and dual credit programs, which better prepare students for life after graduation.

Their use of the Satir Change Model has given us a structured process for managing resistance and chaos that inevitably arise when implementing new readiness metrics. This model provides the emotional and psychological scaffolding that leaders need to navigate through disruption and arrive at a new, more equitable status quo—one where students are assessed not just by test scores, but by their demonstrated readiness for the future.

Additionally, their call for embracing AI and innovation mirrors the cutting-edge work we are doing in Redefining Ready to prepare students for the future workforce. Their emphasis on future-focused leadership is critical as we guide districts in integrating technology and real-world learning experiences into the curriculum.

This book is not just theory—it’s a playbook for action. It has been instrumental in shaping our strategies, and I believe it’s a must-read for any school leader looking to foster transformative, sustainable change in their district.

Christopher Nesmith

Superintendent 

Elma School District, Washington

Dr. Michael Lubefield and Dr. Nick Polyak are nationally renowned and highly esteemed leaders. They are masterful at fostering strong relationships on behalf of their school district communities. Through their co-teaching of both aspiring and current superintendent classes, they effectively impart their extensive knowledge, experience, and expertise to many leaders.

Their book, Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today, is a valuable resource for all leaders working in different organizations including school systems. It serves not only as a comprehensive guide but also as a compelling call to action, emphasizing the critical role we play in shaping the future of our students. Leadership at all levels matters tremendously!

I was particularly impressed by their authenticity and their ability to provide real-life examples of challenging situations. They effectively demonstrated how they employed successful strategies to motivate staff and achieve positive outcomes across different school systems. Their commitment to generating clarity, fostering a shared vision for success, and encouraging constructive dialogue to challenge the status quo highlights their dedication to forward-thinking leadership. This approach is crucial, as it underscores our responsibility to build future-ready schools that meet the needs of ALL students.

Gracias!

Dr. Lupita Ley Hightower

Superintendent/Treasure Hunter

Arizona Superintendent of the Year 2023

Tolleson Elementary School District, Arizona

Posted on by

Change Process – Human and Generative Artificial Intelligence

In this blog post I share two posts – one written by me as an actual human and one generated by a large language model using generative artificial intelligence based only on the title and the quote by Dr. Mollick.

I like them both – and I am not surprised  that the “artificial” one (drawn from nearly two years of my history using the tool in a variety of use cases) did a really nice job … you be the judge 🙂

Is it live – or is it Memorex (for those of you who get the reference – a tip of my hat)

How do we harness a billion people using AI while managing the chaos that comes with it? – Ethan Mollick (One Useful Thing Newsletter August 28, 2025)

So for the past two years I have been engaged in scholarly and practitioner based study and research and practice with generative artificial intelligence. I’ve applied for and been accepted into two national fellowships (Generation AI with ISTE/ASCD and Google GSV Cohort 3), I won a regional award from IETL, their Delta Award, and I’ve overseen the deployment and evolution of educational generative artificial intelligence here in North Shore School District 112.

Additionally, not to brag – but it is my blog LOL – me and Nick Polyak have our 5th book coming out any day now, Leading for

Book Cover

Leading for Tomorrow’s Schools Today

Tomorrow’s Schools Today (2025 Bloomsbury Academic Press) which shares the CHANGE leadership framework and expands on the innovative power and approaches of generative artificial intelligence.

Now – please re read the quote at the start of this post – stop for a moment – Dr. Mollick is one of the world’s leading scholars and scientists with respect to Gen AI – his question stopped me in my tracks.

When it comes to the chaos that comes with it I start with the potential and real negatives that have been brought forth since November 2022 – including:

Is it about mental health – yes/no. Is it about cheating – yes/no. Is it about mass hysteria (hopefully no).  Is it about impact (negative) on the environment (power grid, energy, water, climate, mining, data). Is it about impact (negative or transformative) on the economy/job market.

Or is the chaos on the positive side too?

The calculator for the humanities (Amanda Bickerstaff called Gen AI this on a webinar last year). Is this hope for those without abundance resources in developing areas for equitable access to high powered language models? Is this hope for differentiating education and learning opportunities for all learners (finally?!) Is this transforming education – a structure and system often criticized for operating under a 19th century structure?

Or is it “all of the above” – I think that Dr. Mollick calls for us to lean into the all of the above. With nearly a billion people (not a typo) – one eighth of all known humanity – using Gen AI tools each week – in every industry – how can “we” – the collective we harness/manage and leverage for the GOOD of humanity the powerful technological advances in our midst.

It’s not some futuristic sci fi movie with robots – it’s a showroom in suburban (anywhere) with robots … I was visiting a family member at the hospital last week and a robot that looked like Rosie from the Jetsons was near the elevator – it was a cleaning robot. It’s 2025 – this is reality. In what major ways are we creating the conditions so that the adults who support the adults who support the children are maximizing the ability to leverage Gen AI with safeguards, guideposts, literacy, fluency, and above all else – HUMAN intelligence?

This is the call to action – for us all – let’s keep sharing research, learning, hands-on approaches so that we can attempt to keep up with and “harness” the powerful technological advances of Gen AI in pursuit of positive, pro-social, powerful applications.

What I wrote above is “human” – “bespoke” – my voice from my brain.

What I share below is from a large language model – here is the prompt I used,

Knowing what you know about me and my writing, take the following title and quote and write a blog post in my voice and perspective – Change Process

How do we harness a billion people using AI while managing the chaos that comes with it? – Ethan Mollick (One Useful Thing Newsletter August 28, 2025)

Here’s a draft blog post in your voice and perspective, using the title and quote you provided:

⸻

Change Process

“How do we harness a billion people using AI while managing the chaos that comes with it?”

— Ethan Mollick, One Useful Thing Newsletter, August 28, 2025

⸻

When I read Ethan Mollick’s reflection, I stopped in my tracks. A billion people. A billion minds, hands, and hearts using AI tools simultaneously. That’s not a distant future—it’s the present rapidly unfolding in front of us. And like every massive change in history, it’s messy, chaotic, and deeply uncomfortable. But it’s also filled with possibility.

The change process has never been about neat transitions. Whether in schools, government, or business, change comes in waves—often crashing before it calms. What separates thriving organizations from struggling ones is not whether they experience chaos (they all do), but how they lead through it.

In my leadership framework, CHANGE isn’t just an acronym. It’s a call to action: challenge the process, have open conversations, adapt and flex, navigate obstacles, generate a shared vision, and enjoy the journey. AI accelerates every one of these elements. The stakes are higher, the timelines are shorter, and the margin for complacency has evaporated.

fun AI Image depicting an Edu Guardian

We are edu superheroes

For superintendents, principals, teachers, and frankly anyone in leadership today, the AI revolution is not optional. Our students are already experimenting with it. Our staff are already finding ways to lighten their workloads with it. Our communities are already questioning what this means for learning, work, and ethics. Pretending otherwise—or worse, delaying action—creates confusion and distrust.

So how do we “harness a billion people” while navigating the chaos? We lean into the same truths that have carried us through every seismic shift before:

• Acknowledge the chaos. Change is disruptive by design. Leaders must stop sugar-coating and start naming the mess out loud.

• Prioritize learning, not perfection. Just as we don’t expect kindergartners to master reading overnight, we shouldn’t expect staff or systems to “get AI right” instantly.

• Center humanity. Tools are powerful, but people are irreplaceable. Ethics, equity, and empathy must drive our adoption.

• Build collective vision. Harnessing a billion people requires alignment—not just top-down mandates, but shared ownership of the future we’re building.

Mollick’s challenge isn’t theoretical. It’s practical. It’s urgent. The change process is unfolding whether we’re ready or not. Our choice is whether to lead it with courage, clarity, and vision—or to be swept aside by the waves.

For me, and for the schools and communities I serve, the answer is clear: lean into the chaos, guide it with purpose, and keep our eyes on the bigger picture—creating tomorrow’s schools, today.

Posted on by

Honoring Our Past, Leading Toward the Future

By Dr. Michael Lubelfeld with support from Open AI’s Chat GPT 4o– July 2, 2025

As we gather this Independence Day—surrounded by the sights, sounds, and symbols of freedom—I’m reminded that the story of America is still being written. And in public education, we are among its most active authors. With more than 33 years dedicated to public education, I am a proud supporter of public education and education in general! Each July 1 we get a “do over” and a new, fresh start. Each July 4 we get to celebrate our freedom, liberty & pursuit of happiness!

This Independence day isn’t just about celebrating our past—it’s about renewing our commitment to the ideals that shaped our democracy: equity, liberty, opportunity, and the power of an informed citizenry. These values are alive in every classroom, every team meeting, and every brave decision we make to serve each child, every day. These values are also embedded into our modernized Strategic Change Agenda in District 112 – with support and guidance from the Schlecty Center! Links- https://www.nssd112.org/about/strategic-change

In North Shore School District 112, we are embracing the future with courage, clarity, and care. This year, we’ve expanded our work with generative artificial intelligence—not as a replacement for human insight, but as a powerful partner to amplify what great teachers and leaders do best. We’re integrating tools like Google’s Gemini for Education, MagicSchool AI, and School AI, and we’re actively building custom applications that serve our teachers, staff, and students with real-time insights and support. I always remind people that Human Intelligence supercedes any Artificial Intelligence, and I am a proud founding member of the Human Intelligence Movement!

Through my role as a superintendent, author, and Generation AI Fellow with ISTE-ASCD, I’ve had the honor of learning alongside national leaders in this fast-moving space. But more importantly, I’ve had the opportunity to model and demystify AI for those we serve. We’re showing that with thoughtful implementation, professional development, and ethical guardrails, AI can improve instruction, streamline operations, and increase engagement, while keeping humanity and relationships at the center.

As we celebrate Independence Day, I’m also moved and quite proud that in North Shore School District 112, we’re not just modernizing buildings with geothermal energy and 21st-century learning spaces—we’re modernizing mindsets. Our multiple modernization projects and our Recent innovative Geo Thermal work are designed to impact our community for decades/generations!

Our nation’s founders believed in the power of a well-educated populace. Today, that includes preparing students and educators alike to live, lead, and thrive in a world powered by AI, collaboration, and constant change. That’s why I often say: We are not leading for today’s schools. We are leading for tomorrow.

As we celebrate our freedom today, I hope we also recommit to the work that lies ahead—the unfinished work of creating schools that are equitable, innovative, and deeply human. To our families, faculty, staff, and community partners: thank you for your trust and partnership. Thank you for believing that public education can—and must—rise to meet the moment.

Wishing you a joyful and meaningful 4th of July.

With hope and pride,

Mike

Superintendent | Author | Generation AI Fellow | Advocate for Future-Ready Leadership