Illinois Wrote AI Guidance. Somebody Still Has to Teach the Judgment.

Education Intelligence

Artificial intelligence is already in the classroom.

Whether a school has formally adopted it or not, students know what ChatGPT is. Teachers are experimenting with AI tools. Families are trying to figure out what counts as help and what counts as cheating. Administrators are thinking about privacy, policy, academic integrity, and what all of this means for education.

Illinois has now entered that conversation more formally.

In July 2026, the Illinois State Board of Education released statewide guidance for artificial intelligence in K–12 education. The guidance grew out of Public Act 104-0399, which directed ISBE to address issues including AI literacy, privacy, bias, transparency, accessibility, student-data protections, and responsible use.

But as I read through it, I kept coming back to one thought:

The state can write the guidance. Somebody still has to teach the judgment.

Knowing How to Use AI Is Not Enough

I use technology.

I believe in technology.

I believe artificial intelligence can make information more accessible, help people brainstorm, support research, improve workflows, and expose young people to tools they will likely encounter in college and the workplace.

But knowing how to type a prompt does not make somebody digitally literate.

A young person also needs to know:

Should I use AI for this?

Can I trust what it gave me?

How do I verify it?

What information should I never put into this system?

Whose ideas am I using?

Where did this answer come from?

Did I actually learn something, or did I simply generate something?

Those are judgment questions.

And judgment requires more than software.

Illinois Put Human Relationships in the Middle

One thing that stands out in ISBE's framework is its emphasis on people.

The state's guidance says teaching and learning are shaped by human relationships and that AI should be a means of informing teaching and learning rather than becoming the purpose of education itself. It also emphasizes locally determined, context-sensitive decisions about how AI is used.

That matters.

Because I do not want us to become so impressed by what technology can do that we stop asking what a child needs to learn how to do.

AI can generate a résumé.

A mentor can teach you how to explain the experiences behind it.

AI can help draft a speech.

A teacher can help you develop the confidence to stand in front of people and deliver it.

AI can suggest a business idea.

A business owner can teach you what happens when a customer says no.

Technology can provide information.

Human relationships help us develop wisdom.

We need both.

This Is a Mentoring Issue

I believe AI education should become part of mentorship.

Sit beside a young person and use the tool together.

Ask them why they accepted one answer and questioned another.

Have them compare an AI response with a credible source.

Ask what information they would be comfortable sharing.

Show them what bias can look like.

Let them use AI to develop an idea, but then require them to defend the idea themselves.

That last part matters to me.

If AI creates everything for a young person, we may accidentally rob them of the struggle that develops skill.

Sometimes figuring it out is part of the education.

Business Has a Role Here Too

Businesses should be involved because students will encounter AI beyond school.

Employers are already deciding where automation makes sense and where human judgment still matters.

Students need exposure to those decisions.

Bring professionals into classrooms.

Let students see how AI is actually being used in marketing, finance, healthcare, education, technology, entrepreneurship, and operations.

Then let them ask the harder question:

What can the technology do—and what should still require a person?

That is career preparation.

Your Journal Work

Whether you are an educator, parent, mentor, business owner, or student, think about your relationship with AI.

Ask yourself:

Am I using AI to strengthen my thinking or replace it?

Do I verify information before repeating it?

What personal information am I willing to share with technology?

What skills do I still need to know how to perform without AI?

What would responsible AI use look like for a young person I mentor?

Illinois' law requires statewide guidance that addresses responsible and ethical AI literacy, privacy, accessibility, bias, and support for different student populations.

That gives schools a framework.

But a framework cannot make the decision for a child.

Somebody still has to teach them how to pause.

How to question.

How to verify.

How to decide.

How to recognize when convenience is costing them understanding.

And how to use a powerful tool without allowing the tool to become more powerful than their own ability to think.

AI may be part of their future.

Our responsibility is to make sure judgment is too.

"If they can generate anything but can't decide whether they should, you didn't teach AI literacy."