A focused workshop
A hands-on session built around a real educator workflow. Staff practice using AI to reduce repeat work or strengthen teaching, then leave with something they can use.
AI training for educators
Practical AI learning.
Visible progress.
Work confidently. Protect sensitive information.
Put useful ideas into practice.
I’m Chris: 15 years teaching, three in school leadership. I help educators put AI to work.
Would this help
my students?
- Keep the learning objective.
- Check what the tool changed.
- Make the next revision yours.
The teacher stays in the work.
What your staff
learn to do.
Five areas we can build learning around. Not five separate programs or a required sequence. We choose the focus together.
Getting started safely and confidently
Know what to share, what to protect and when AI is not the right tool. Questions and skepticism are welcome.
Planning with AI
Draft instructions, examples and checks for understanding from a lesson you already teach.
Adapting materials
Change the reading demand or format. Keep the learning goal intact.
Automating daily workflows
Turn meeting notes into action lists, draft routine emails and organize recurring reports. Automate the repeat steps, with staff review before anything is sent or used.
Building tools for your team
Create reusable tools for teaching teams, departments, campuses or districts, with guided practice and support.
Start focused.
Build from there.
A workshop, a planning day, or a partnership that brings it all together.
A full-day planning consultation
Meet with stakeholders, agree on AI priorities and leave with a direction, owners and first steps.
On-site within 60 miles of Orange County, virtual, or on-site anywhere with travel costs covered.
Recommended for ongoing support
A long-term learning partnership
One connected program, built around your district.
- Plan together. Multiple consultation meetings to set direction and adjust it.
- Learn together. Launch workshops and follow-up sessions that build on staff practice.
- Keep learning between sessions. An LMS I build for your needs, with tailored activities and a leadership dashboard.
Built for your staff.
Visible to your leaders.
I design and build your district’s LMS. The design, layout, branding, content and reporting would all be built around your school’s priorities and district-wide goals.
Fictional LMS sample. Not a fixed template.
Cedar Grove Unified, its staff and all results are fictional. Explore the learner homepage, a sample lesson and leadership reporting. This is not a live platform or results from your answers.
Cedar Grove UnifiedStaff Learning PortalMy learning
Welcome back, Maya.
Grade 6 teacher Cedar Grove Middle
Assigned course PL-101
AI in everyday practice
2 of 3 complete
- Complete
Safe starting points
Knowledge check: 4 of 4
- Complete
Context in AI
Knowledge check: 2 of 2
- Not started
Review & improve
Check the output. Make it usable.
Next up: Review & improve
Practice checking an AI draft before using it.
Preview the next module
Module outline · Sample only
Would you use this with your class?
Review an AI-generated exit ticket against its source passage and learning goal.
- Check: Does each question test the intended learning?
- Verify: Can you support the answer key with the source?
- Revise: Improve one weak question and explain your change.
In a full course, you would submit your revision for feedback. This preview shows the outline only.
Learning progress
AI in everyday practice · Fictional pilot cohort
Example staff record · Cedar Grove Middle
Maya Chen
Teacher- Grade taught
- 6
- Campus
- Cedar Grove Middle
2 of 3 lessons complete. One assignment needs changes before it can pass.
Assignment to update
Changes neededPlan a staff meeting with AI
Rubric score: 6 of 8
- Maya submitted
- Her prompt, an AI-generated agenda and notes explaining what she checked.
- What needs fixing
- The agenda says any AI tool is allowed by district policy. Maya needs to verify that claim against the actual policy before using the plan.
See the scoring breakdown
- 2 of 2
- Audience and intended outcome are clear.
- 2 of 2
- Time and device limits are specified.
- 2 of 2
- Activities fit the brief.
- 0 of 2
- Policy claims have not been verified.
- To pass
- At least 6 of 8 points, including both points for checking claims. Each category earns 0 for missing, 1 for partly done, or 2 for complete.
Lessons and quiz results
Course: AI in everyday practice| Lesson | Progress | Quiz score |
|---|---|---|
| Safe starting points | Complete | 4 of 4 correct |
| Context in AI | Complete | 2 of 2 correct |
| Review & improve | Not started | Not taken |
Finishing a lesson does not automatically pass its assignment. Submitted work is scored separately.
Completed workshop activity
One lesson, less repeat prep
- Assignment
- Create a lesson exit ticket
- Reviewed by
- Chris · Second submission
- Checks passed
- 3 of 3
- Matches the learning goalPassed
- Questions are clearPassed
- Answers were verifiedPassed
See what Maya improved
- Original question
- “Name the evidence.” This asked for recall, but the lesson goal was reasoning.
- Maya’s updated question
- “Choose one piece of evidence and explain how it supports the claim.” She also checked the answer key against the source.
- Instructor’s decision
- Chris checked the updated work. All three checks passed; this activity is complete.
Sample lesson: context in AI.
Sample lessonIllustrative preview, not a full course.2–3 min
Why context mattersStep 1 of 4
What changes when you add context?
Start with a simple request. Then tell AI how much time you have, what happened and what everyone should leave with.
Read each row below: a detail added to the request → an example of how the meeting plan changes.
Your first message to AI · Fictional school example
“Plan a staff meeting.”
Time
“We have 20 minutes.”
The agenda now has time limits:5 min: review what happened.
10 min: agree on a fix.
5 min: practice it together.
10 min: agree on a fix.
5 min: practice it together.
A recent event
“At Thursday’s open house, families got lost between the front desk and the classrooms.”
The discussion gets a specific task:“Look at the school map. Mark where families took a wrong turn and decide where to add signs.”
A takeaway for everyone
“Every staff member should leave able to give families the same clear directions.”
The final 5 minutes become a rehearsal:Agree on and practice a shared script, such as: “Check in at the front desk, then follow the blue signs to your classroom.”
These are example changes to look for, not guaranteed results. You still check the answer.
Same task. A better brief.
Watch a vague request become a plan that fits. 32 seconds, no sound needed.
Prepared demonstration with example answers, not a recording of a live AI tool. Silent, with on-screen explanations.
Read the walkthrough instead
The request: “Plan a staff meeting about AI.” The example draft assumes a 60-minute tool tour, including creating accounts.
The missing context: “We have 20 minutes, no devices. Teachers have tried AI. Help each person choose one low-risk task to try.”
What changes: The revised example uses 3 minutes to name a repetitive task, 7 to compare printed AI drafts, 6 to discuss errors and risks, and 4 to choose a task to try. Those activities fit the stated constraints. You still need to check the plan and choose suitable examples.
Make the call.
Two decisions from a fictional school. Each is worth one point. Answer both to see your score. The sample target is two correct; you can revise your answers or skip ahead.
The brief
“Plan a 20-minute staff meeting about AI. Teachers have tried it. No devices will be available.”
Choose an answer to see what it would change.
Choose an answer to see the review reasoning.
Optional: apply this to your own task
Use a fictional example. Nothing sent or saved. Written responses are not scored in this demo.Your score. Your next step.
Your knowledge check
Not yet scored0 of 2 answered
Sample target: 2 of 2 correct. One point per question.
Answer both questions to get your score. Skipped questions are not recorded as failures.
Question 1: ContextNot attempted
Question 2: ReviewNot attempted
Your optional written response
No draft added.
Not scored in this demo. The example below shows how a submitted task could be assessed.
Fictional example · Scored by Chris · First submission
Maya’s assignment
Plan a staff meeting with AI6 of 8Changes needed
Chris asked Maya to check the agenda’s policy claim and send back a corrected version. He will score the updated work again.
See how the task was scored
Each criterion: 0 = not demonstrated, 1 = partly demonstrated, 2 = met.
- Audience and intended outcome
- 2 of 2Names the staff audience and what they should leave able to do.
- Useful constraints
- 2 of 2Sets a 20-minute limit and plans without devices.
- Fit of the final plan
- 2 of 2Activities fit the time, resources and intended outcome.
- Verification of claims
- 0 of 2An unsupported district-policy claim was left unchecked.
Example completion rule: at least 6 of 8 points, including 2 of 2 for verification. This task needs revision despite reaching the points target.
What to improvePrepared example only. This score and feedback are not an assessment of your written response.
“Check the actual guidance. Correct the claim and any affected activities, then explain what you changed.”
Quiz scores show understanding. Rubric scores show application. Both inform the learning record, with clear next steps. We agree on criteria and targets with your district.
What does this tell a leader?
Workshop tasks and asynchronous learning feed the same record. Leaders can see participation, knowledge-check scores, rubric-assessed work and where follow-up is needed, by staff member, team or site. We agree on the measures together. Missing evidence is not a failing score; completion alone does not prove growth.
Chris BaarstadThe experience
behind the work.
I’m Chris Baarstad. I spent 15 years teaching and three in school leadership. Now I combine that experience with practical AI training and custom software development.
Teaching adults about AI
I delivered technology and AI training for Johnson & Johnson in 2025 and 2026. The 2026 session explored AI in family life through practical scenarios and discussion.
Building learning software
I designed and built a custom LMS to move a business off a larger corporate platform that didn’t meet its needs. The new system was built specifically around its staff and training workflows. I’d take the same approach with your district.
You work directly with me, from planning the training to building the tools.
Let’s talk about your schoolA few useful questions.
How do you approach privacy and AI concerns?
Questions and skepticism are welcome. I teach faculty and staff why privacy matters in AI and how to handle information thoughtfully. When I build systems around a district’s needs, protecting faculty and staff information is a core design consideration.
I’m also developing a student-facing program. It is not ready for a demo yet. Privacy and student safety guide those decisions from the start.
Will our staff need to learn a new platform?
Not necessarily. I build tools around your district’s needs and existing systems, rather than asking your staff to fit a one-size-fits-all product.
Where needs overlap, some learning content may start from a shared template. The tools, training and setup are shaped around your district and how your people work.
Our staff have very different starting points. Is that a problem?
No. We plan around experience: a useful start for newcomers, deeper work for confident users. The five areas are not five mandatory courses.
Is this for teachers, or school leaders too?
Both, plus support staff. Tasks are tailored to their roles. A partnership brings workshop evidence and asynchronous learning into a shared picture of progress and follow-up needs.
How do we agree on the scope and cost?
An initial conversation is free. I then propose the format, scope and fee, including course curation and consultation cadence where relevant.
What would make
this useful?
Tell me about your staff and what gets in their way.
chris@baarstadconsultancy.comFree initial conversation. Workshops, full-day planning and ongoing partnerships are paid engagements. No private staff or student details, please.