by Lindsay Matts-Benson

Since the advent of generative artificial intelligence, large language models (LLMs), and deepfake technologies, waves of new content have flooded the Internet, eroding public trust in the information ecosystem.

For Lindsay Matts-Benson, a teaching and learning program lead at the University of Minnesota Libraries, AI isn’t a technology problem; it’s a literacy problem.

Recently, her kids’ school district started encouraging students to use AI in their writing projects, and she was worried that these tools could threaten student privacy. She spoke with school leadership about what training teachers received for generative AI tools and found it a little lacking.

Teachers don’t often have the time or funds to attend training sessions and workshops, so Matts-Benson developed a workshop for K-12 educators around AI technology and literacy, where teachers could be paid for their time and build a community with other educators.

On June 11, 2026, the University of Minnesota Libraries, along with partners from the AI Hub and Academic Technology Support Services, hosted a full-day workshop titled “AI Literacy for K-12 Educators” at Walter Library.

Designed specifically for media specialists, technology integrationists, and school leadership, the event gathered 19 participants representing 17 different school districts, schools, or service cooperatives from across the state of Minnesota to establish a shared framework for AI literacy.

The workshop was collaboratively created and facilitated by Matts-Benson, teaching and learning program lead; Rebecca George-Burrs, academic technologist with Academic Technology Support Services; and Tia Clasen, education and outreach coordinator with the AI Hub.

The day started with opening remarks by Dean Lisa German of the University Libraries, who funded this workshop through an award from the Wendy Pradt Lougee Fund for Libraries Innovation.

Matts-Benson grounded the session by framing AI literacy as an information literacy challenge rather than a challenge of technological facility. With our information landscapes changing, trust in our information systems is breaking down, and AI literacy has become an essential skill for all.

Joe Finnegan, manager of the AI Makerspace, led an overview focused on developing “algorithmic awareness” and how AI is changing the way we learn. This segment dissected the inner workings of large language models (LLMs) and exposed why hallucinations occur due to the probabilistic nature of generative AI tools.

Clasen led a structured read of the Minnesota School Boards Association (MSBA) Model Policy 625. Educators engaged in a close-reading exercise to label items that were strictly mandated, items that flagged potential loopholes or red flags, and elements highly open to interpretation based on what they learned about AI in the opening sessions.

The afternoon sessions started with participants exploring how generative AI alters human information-seeking behavior. Matts-Benson presented evaluation frameworks, including the CLEAR Prompt Framework (Concise, Logical, Explicit, Adaptive, Reflective) and the CLEAR Source Evaluation Tool (Credible, Language, Evidence, Audience, Relevance) to teach students how to counter bias and confidently detect automated errors.

George-Burrs facilitated a session on the central academic challenge of the AI era: “What does it mean to know something?” Highlighting research that students cheat primarily when boundaries are poorly defined, the session advocated for authentic assessments, process-based check-ins, revision phases, and oral components to prioritize the student’s learning journey over a final, off-loadable product.

The final session saw participants split into groups for an interactive policy creation jam. Using localized templates, teams drafted 3 to 5 key tenets for school-level AI policies, embedding Human-AI-Human (H-AI-H) protocols to guarantee human oversight at every tier of classroom or district-wide AI use. The day concluded with a 3-2-1 reflective share-out, defining next steps, and the distribution of professional development certificates.

“Thank you for making things interesting and respecting our time by packing in a lot of things, building in stretch and connection breaks, and opening up space to get excited about some aspects while being honest about discussing our concerns,” said one participant in a post-workshop survey.