Recap of the CSG West Education & Workforce Development session at the 78th CSG West Annual Meeting in Jackson, Wyoming
Navigating the Promise and Pitfalls of AI in Education
Artificial intelligence (AI) could transform education more than any previous technology—but only if schools proactively engage with it, said Jason Neiffer, Executive Director of the Montana Digital Academy and creator of the nation’s first AI help desk for educators.
While acknowledging that AI will be an “extraordinarily disruptive technology” in education, Neiffer emphasized that it also presents a chance to reimagine learning beyond simplistic narratives focused on time-saving or cheating concerns.
Still, challenges remain. Educators continue to wrestle with questions around screen time, privacy, bias, and reduced human interaction—and many feel unprepared to integrate AI effectively into classrooms.
Neiffer, who frequently speaks nationwide on AI and education, engaged committee and audience members in a discussion about viewing AI through the lens of “augmented intelligence”—an approach that enhances, rather than replaces, human teaching and learning.
AI’s Expanding Impact Across the Education Ecosystem
From teachers and administrators to parents, students, and legislators, AI is reshaping every corner of the education ecosystem. Its influence extends to:
- Curriculum development
- Teacher workload
- Instructional methods
- Student learning experiences
- Grading
Western states—many with small, rural school districts—stand to gain considerably if AI can help close resource gaps and scale personalized learning tools.
Key Insights and Takeaways from the Session
“We Don’t Know What We Don’t Know—Yet”
Neiffer noted that AI is transforming education faster than institutions can adapt. Evaluating its uses requires an all-hands-on-deck approach.
“I wish we had the same amount of time we had to deal with the Internet,” Neiffer said. “We had years to deal with the Internet. We’re going to have to have these discussions quickly—and probably in a different, more involved way than we used to. I think it’s only stronger when we bring everyone to the table, no matter what their opinion is about artificial intelligence.”
Think of AI as a Thought Partner
Viewing AI as “augmented intelligence” means using it to save time, allocate resources more effectively, and improve student outcomes. For example:
- A recent MIT study found that students who wrote an essay from scratch demonstrated higher brain activity than those who relied solely on AI. However, the highest activity occurred when students revised their original essays using AI, suggesting that teaching students to treat AI as a thought partner—rather than a shortcut—yields the best learning outcomes.
- Rather than reinforcing a one-size-fits-all approach, AI has the potential to personalize learning in ways that are otherwise too time-intensive for teachers—particularly valuable for small and rural schools in the West.
Neiffer echoed a theme heard throughout the conference: AI should not replace people but complement them.
“Schools that figure out how to use their newly productive teacher, administrator, and support staff workforce should be able to dominate any school that tries to keep their post-AI output the same as their pre-AI output—just with fewer people,” he said.
Policy Considerations for States
Neiffer’s central message to policymakers: Don’t ignore AI. Keep an open mind, bring diverse voices into the conversation, and support schools as they navigate this shift. That may mean forming task forces, developing guidelines, or launching pilot programs.
The Montana Legislature, for instance, funded the Frontier Learning Lab, an initiative designed to help students and teachers explore and experiment with AI. Neiffer encouraged attendees to visit the platform—even those outside Montana.
According to the Lab’s website, it is “anchored in the values of expanded access, strong privacy, and solid learning science,” serving as a central hub for tools, best practices, and innovation across the state—from urban classrooms to remote one-room schools.
Western policymakers and educators have the chance to define how this technology is used: as a shortcut, or as a springboard for creativity and enhanced learning. The future of education will depend not on whether AI enters classrooms—but how to shape its role once it does.
Session Part II: Is There Such Thing as Free College?
The Rising Challenge of College Affordability
As tuition costs continue to rise, access to higher education remais a pressing concern across the United States. While opinions on higher education may vary, research consistently shows broad public agreement that college is too expensive. According to David B. Monaghan, Associate Professor of Sociology at Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania, the issue is not just about affordability—it’s about opportunity.
“This wouldn’t matter so much if Americans saw college as a luxury they could forego without consequence,” Monaghan said. “But they don’t, and for good reason. Going to and completing college very clearly improves one’s economic prospects.”
Over the past two decades, many states have explored ways to make college more affordable, introducing initiatives known as “promise programs” that, in varying forms, provide tuition-free access to higher education.
The Expanding Reach of Free College Programs
Students, families, educators, and policymakers all have a stake in the cost of higher education. The first “free college” program began in Kalamazoo, Michigan, in 2005, offering full tuition to public institutions for local graduates through private financing. Nearly a decade later, Tennessee took the concept statewide, applying it to community colleges and structuring it as a “last-dollar” model—where funds cover remaining tuition costs after other aid is applied.
Today, similar programs exist across the country, each with unique eligibility requirements, funding models, and goals.
Do the Promises Deliver? Key Takeaways
Drawing on two decades of research, Monaghan examined how these programs have performed and what lessons have emerged. His findings highlight both the opportunties and limitations of current approaches:
| Mixed results: The evidence is weak and inconsistent that the programs reduce educational disparities or boost community economic development. |
| Perception gaps: Because college pricing remains complex and opaque, many Americans overestimate the actual cost of higher education—sometimes deterring potential applicants. In reality, net tuition and fees have decreased over time once aid is factored in. |
| Expanded access: The programs do succeed in increasing overall college attendance, thereby boosting human capital. |
| Clarifying affordability: Many free college initiatives target low-income students attending community colleges—yet tuition at these institutions is often already covered by existing aid. As a result, “free college” programs largely clarify the existing system. |
Considerations for Policymakers
Monaghan urged policymakers to focus on clarity and transparency in higher education financing. Simplifying how costs are presented to students and families could encourage broader participation and improve public understanding of college affordability.
As an example—though not an endorsement—Monaghan described Australia’s income-based repayment system, where tuition is set by the government and repaid through the tax system according to graduates’ earnings.
“This system makes the people who earn the most — who get the most out of college — pay the most forward,” Monaghan explained. “Meanwhile, people who enter fields that don’t pay as much, such as education, pay less toward their college education.
“It provides universal upfront access, which is probably what free college aims to achieve, and it has costs that are clear and reasonable. It hits all of the goals, but it’s not a free college program. It’s much cheaper, and it does make people pay some of what they owe.”
The CSG West Education & Workforce Development Committee will continue exploring issues related to college affordability and other key education policy topics throughout the 2025–2026 biennium.
