State lawmakers and school districts are rushing to establish artificial intelligence policies as student and educator adoption outpaces formal guidance. More than 134 bills were filed across 31 states this year to address data privacy, classroom restrictions, and literacy, highlighting a systemic scramble to manage a $391.2 million market expected to reach $9 billion by 2034.
A recent survey by the Center for Democracy & Technology found that 85% of teachers and 86% of students used AI during the 2024-25 school year. However, only about half reported receiving any training or information from their schools, and even fewer learned about the specific risks of these tools.
State legislatures draft patchwork rules
In Maryland, Democratic state Sen. Katie Fry Hester described K-12 AI policies as "all over the map." She sponsored legislation signed into law in May that mandates an AI coordinator in each school system, statewide professional development for teachers, and AI literacy within career readiness standards. "What we heard repeatedly is that the teachers were feeling like they had to navigate artificial intelligence entirely on their own," Hester said.
Other states are establishing hard deadlines and specific mandates. Ohio requires every school district to adopt an AI use policy by July 1, covering privacy, ethical use, and vendor agreements. Idaho enacted a law in March ensuring no AI tool "replaces or eliminates a human teacher," while Oklahoma mandates that teachers review any AI-generated content before classroom use and allows parents to opt their children out.
Age restrictions and foundational skills
Concerns about cognitive development are driving proposals to limit early AI exposure. New York Assemblymember Robert Carroll introduced legislation to prohibit most AI use in K-8 classrooms, with exceptions for diagnostic testing and disability support. "There's a difference between giving a tool to adults and giving a tool to children who have yet to master skills," Carroll said.
Similar legislative efforts have seen mixed results. Florida's proposal to restrict AI instructional tools before sixth grade passed the Senate but died in the House. Meanwhile, Connecticut added computer science to its public school curriculum but failed to pass a bill aimed at preventing AI from replacing educators.
Skepticism and the need for clear guidance
Despite a growing market for AI tutoring and automated grading, skepticism mirrors past concerns over social media and digital technology. The Center for Democracy & Technology survey noted that 70% of teachers worry AI use prevents students from learning important skills, and half of students feel less connected to their teachers when using these tools in class.
Sue Thotz, director of outreach for Common Sense Media, emphasized that AI literacy must go beyond basic operation. "When I talk about AI literacy, it's not how to use AI. It's understanding how AI is built," Thotz said. "Why is it being created? Who's profiting off of this?"
To address this gap, districts are increasingly seeking structured professional development, such as an AI Learning Path for Teachers, to help educators evaluate vendor products and establish ethical boundaries. Schools remain the primary environment where students can safely access emerging technology, making this training critical for classroom implementation.
Industry leaders echo the need for nuanced oversight rather than outright bans. Sophia Romee, general manager of the GenAI Studio at the College Board, noted that only about one in five districts allowing generative AI have a formal policy governing its use. "Students are far more self-aware about AI's risks than headlines suggest," Romee said, adding that adults must clarify where brainstorming crosses into cheating.
Why this matters for education professionals
Education leaders must balance the push for technological integration with the reality that policy frameworks remain highly experimental. Justin Reich, an associate professor of digital media at MIT, compared current AI regulation efforts to writing an aviation guide in 1905. Policymakers and district administrators should expect today's guidelines to require frequent revision as the technology and its pedagogical effects evolve.
Your membership also unlocks:
