AI in the Teacher’s Toolkit: What Helps and What Gets in the Way
by Nate Eklund
When you look back at it, AI feels like it kind of showed up out of nowhere. One month, teachers were reminding their kids to just read the Google Classroom announcements, and the next month, students were turning in essays written by bots that a lot of educators didn’t even know existed.
Looking at you, Snapchat AI.
It’s not altogether dissimilar to how we felt at the dawn of the internet itself. I remember department meetings where we gnashed our teeth about how we were going to “reign in Google” so students wouldn’t “cheat” on assignments. How did that go?!
AI changed so much so quickly. Teachers found that it hadn’t entered the classroom as a friendly and ready-to-use resource. It arrived messy and fast. It got into students’ hands via social media before schools had any real guardrails in place to address its use, leaving educators to figure out (in real time) what this technology meant for learning, assessment, and academic integrity. And since then, teachers and administrators have been trying to decide whether AI actually helps or simply rearranges their work.
Though most agree on one point. Like it or not, AI is here to stay.
In some schools, it hasn’t necessarily created more time. Instead, it has changed where some of that time goes. Teachers are now responsible for monitoring how students use these tools, and, unfortunately, many are having to redesign digital learning tasks that used to be relatively straightforward. So in that sense, AI hasn’t really reduced anything at all. It has simply shifted duties into another part of their job.
Not to say that teachers are not open to the use of AI in the classroom, but they’re also tired of tools that promise to simplify their work and then hand them a new set of problems to untangle.
That being said, and hear me out, AI isn’t equally good or bad on its own. For most educators, the real question is practical. Does it lighten the day or make it heavier? If a tool gives back time, it has value. If it does not, it becomes just one more thing to manage.
Recent studies help illustrate that reality. A national report from RAND shows that teachers are experimenting with AI at a growing rate, but most say the technology hasn’t meaningfully reduced their workload yet. Some see gains in lesson planning or differentiation, but not enough to change the pace of the week. The Minnesota Department of Education’s 2024 AI guidance makes a similar point. They note that AI can support planning and creativity, but only when teachers have clear expectations from school leaders about how to use it responsibly and, most importantly, what to do when issues arise.
In the schools we support, one particular theme stands out. Teachers want AI to strengthen learning, not replace it. They want tools that help them plan faster and adapt materials for different learners, but they also want to trust that the work students submit reflects their own thinking. They want reliable ways to check authenticity without treating every assignment like an investigation. And they want students to build the skills they’re trying to teach, not outsource them.
There is an emotional layer to this as well. Teachers want to feel confident in their choices. Many feel unsure because there is no shared definition of what “appropriate use” looks like. Some schools have drafted thoughtful guardrails. Others are waiting for guidance from the state. Most are somewhere in the middle, figuring it out in real time.
Clear expectations make the difference. When leadership sets a few stable norms and stays consistent, teachers can stop worrying about whether they’re “using AI correctly” and start paying attention to the parts that actually support students.
The most encouraging stories come from schools where AI is framed in that support. Teachers tell us they feel more capable when they use it as a planning tool and more creative when they aren’t starting every new unit, lesson, or activity from a blank doc. AI can give them a foundation to build upon, and having a ready-made space to create something much bigger can be healthy for both new and seasoned teachers.
And that’s the accurate measure of a useful tool, whether it restores human energy to the people doing the work.
If AI is going to stay in the teacher’s toolkit, it has to return time to the adults who shape learning. Most importantly, it has to support the conditions that give teachers relief, so they can get back to the real work of teaching humans.
Your turn: Leaders, It what ways does AI actually help your staff, and where does it add noise? Ask a few teachers or coworkers this week. Their answers will tell you where clarity and support are most needed.
