A TEKS-aligned AI policy,subject by subject.
How AI use fits alongside the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills — where it supports the standard, and where it undermines it.
This guide is for Texas curriculum directors, department chairs, and instructional leaders translating district AI policy into classroom-level guidance. It covers what TEKS alignment actually means, how AI use interacts with assessment integrity, and the subject-specific patterns that hold up for ELA, STEM, and social studies.
What TEKS-aligned means
TEKS specifies what students must know and be able to do at each grade level. It does not specify what tools students use to demonstrate the standard. TEKS alignment for AI use comes down to one question: on a given task, does AI use preserve or erode the student's demonstration of the standard?
For tasks where the standard is the student's own thinking (a persuasive essay, an original lab analysis, an argumentative DBQ), AI use that generates the thinking erodes the demonstration. For tasks where the standard is production or accessibility (a formatted report, a multilingual summary), AI-assisted production is usually compatible. The gradient matters more than the binary.
TEKS and assessment integrity
Assessment integrity under TEKS is about whether the assessment actually measures the standard. An assessment that permits AI use on a task whose standard is independent analysis no longer measures the standard. A TEKS-aligned AI policy names the assessments that require AI-free demonstration and distinguishes them from assessments that can accommodate AI assistance.
The practical output for teachers: label each assessment as AI-prohibited, AI-permitted-with-disclosure, or AI-integrated. Communicate the label to students in writing with the assignment. Enforce the label consistently across the department.
Policy Excerpt
Student Use · K–12 District
Jombli-generated excerpt for a hypothetical Texas district.
At the middle school level, AI is used under teacher supervision with explicit scaffolding to support structured planning and verification. Students may not use AI on quizzes, tests, or graded assessments unless the teacher has explicitly authorized AI for that specific task and described what part of the task AI may support.
Permitted uses:
- Outline a persuasive essay in English/Language Arts using a teacher-provided template, then draft independently.
- Summarize scientific articles in Science, verified against two class-approved sources.
- Generate historical timelines in Social Studies, reviewed with a peer using the annotation checklist.
- Develop math problem sets in Mathematics, checked against the assignment rubric before submission.
TEKS ELA implications
TEKS ELA standards expect students to draft, revise, and edit their own writing; to analyze texts and author's craft; to compose for specific audiences. AI-assisted brainstorming and editing feedback are compatible with these standards when the student does the drafting and revision. AI-generated drafts are not compatible — they replace the process the standard is measuring.
A TEKS-aligned ELA guideline typically allows AI for idea generation, outline scaffolding, and editing feedback with disclosure; restricts AI for drafting graded essays; and integrates AI into revision instruction (students critique and revise AI-generated drafts as a TEKS-compatible skill).
TEKS STEM implications
TEKS science standards expect students to design experiments, analyze data, and construct explanations from evidence. AI is commonly allowed for literature review summarization and lab report scaffolding, but not for data fabrication or analysis students are expected to perform themselves. The student's own data analysis is the TEKS-critical skill.
TEKS mathematics standards expect students to reason about and solve problems — often with multiple solution paths. AI use that produces the solution bypasses the standard. AI use that explains a solution path after the student has attempted the problem is compatible and sometimes pedagogically useful. Districts typically restrict AI on timed mathematical assessments and allow it during practice and review with disclosure.
TEKS social studies implications
TEKS social studies standards expect students to analyze primary and secondary sources, construct arguments from evidence, and evaluate historical significance. AI use for source summarization is often allowed with disclosure; AI use for primary analysis or argumentation the standard expects the student to produce is not compatible.
The DBQ (document-based question) is the canonical example. A DBQ measures student analysis of primary sources; an AI-generated DBQ response does not demonstrate that analysis. Most TEKS-aligned social studies guidelines make DBQs explicitly AI-prohibited and communicate that to students in writing.
Teacher per-assignment framing
At the teacher level, TEKS-aligned AI decisioning is a per-assignment question. The teacher identifies which TEKS the assignment measures, decides whether AI use would erode the demonstration of those TEKS, and labels the assignment accordingly. The district policy sets the ceiling for permissiveness; the teacher sets the floor for any given assignment within that ceiling.
Policy Excerpt
Student Use · 9–12 High School
Jombli-generated excerpt for a hypothetical Texas district.
At the high school level, AI serves as a tool for independent application with evaluative and synthesis work, fostering critical thinking and advanced problem-solving skills. Students may use AI on assessments unless the assignment directions expressly prohibit it; substantial AI use must be disclosed.
Permitted uses:
- Draft essays in English / Language Arts by synthesizing AI-generated counterarguments with primary-source evidence the class gathered, then evaluate each counterargument against the originality-and-evidence rubric before drafting.
- Solve complex problems in Mathematics by using AI to generate step-by-step solutions, then verify accuracy against class-taught methods and document the verification process.
- Develop research questions in Science by generating AI-assisted hypotheses, then refine them based on experimental feasibility and class constraints.
Implementation at the district
Implementation is usually led by curriculum, not by IT. The most effective pattern: a cross-department working group (department chairs plus a curriculum director) produces subject-specific classroom guidance derived from the adopted policy, and that guidance becomes part of the teacher handbook. Without subject-specific guidance, teachers default to inconsistent per-classroom rules and the policy's TEKS alignment exists on paper but not in practice.
Compliance checklist
What Texas districts specifically document and retain to show that AI use remains TEKS-aligned across classrooms.
- Map the TEKS strands most affected by AI use. ELA composition, mathematics problem-solving, science data analysis, and social studies DBQs are the usual load-bearing strands.
- Label each department’s high-stakes assessments as AI-prohibited, AI-permitted-with-disclosure, or AI-integrated. Department chairs make the initial call, not individual teachers.
- Document the labeling decision in department curriculum folders. Retain alongside existing TEKS alignment records.
- Communicate the assessment labels to students in writing on each affected assignment.
- Retain drafting-history evidence. LMS revision records and timestamped work for any assignment where AI disclosure or misuse is likely to surface.
- Keep an AI-free assessment cycle each semester for DBQs and essay-based TEKS assessments. This protects the TEKS demonstration.
- Log academic integrity incidents under the existing student code of conduct. Reference the TEKS standard that was affected.
- Include a TEKS alignment sentence in every AI-related teacher handbook entry. Makes the “why” visible on a quick read.
- Schedule a department-chair review each semester. Adjust labels based on what actually came up.
- Document adaptations for students with IEPs. AI use that is a legitimate accommodation belongs on record per IDEA / Section 504.