Formative Spaces
The Newsroom
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2026
Beyond the headline
FORMATIVESPACES.COM

Research files / K–12 policy

AI in Schools

Compare official AI policies for students, families and schools.

Reviewed file · October 6, 2026 Sources & Notes

The Visual Edition

School AI rules in charts

Compare student use, family notice and legal deadlines in 16 charts. Read the official sources. Download and share branded graphics.

Open the visual edition →

New research reports

Who Sets the Rules for Classroom AI

State law, district approval and teacher permission can set separate limits on classroom AI. Family choices and human-review requirements also vary.

Find a policy

More filters

Date filters use exact start dates that official sources establish. They exclude dates given only as a month or school year, and dates the source does not specify.

Reset

9 matching documents

Current documents & guidance · Student data & AI training. Clear all filters

Official AI policy instruments, including scope, document status, timing, and links to sources
Place & authorityWhat it saysWho / what it coversStatus & timingDetails
CaliforniaCalifornia Department of EducationModel policy: artificial intelligence in education

California offers an optional model policy for local adoption, including student-data safeguards and disclosure of AI use.

Local school boards, educators, and students considering district policy. The model itself is optional.

GuidanceCurrent model checked October 6, 2026Read record: Model policy: artificial intelligence in education, California →
ConnecticutConnecticut Commission for Educational TechnologyGuidance on artificial intelligence

The guidance recommends assessing the breadth and type of data AI tools collect. Leaders may form an advisory group to encourage learning and transparency about AI use.

These state recommendations cover local K–12 practices. District policies may add requirements.

GuidanceGuidance checked October 6, 2026Read record: Guidance on artificial intelligence, Connecticut →
Fairfax County Public SchoolsFairfax County Public SchoolsAI guidance for faculty and staff

FCPS tells staff to verify tool approval, protect confidential information, and explain when students may use AI on assignments.

The page covers Fairfax County Public Schools faculty and staff and school-related student work. It distinguishes local instructions from students’ optional use on personal devices outside school.

GuidanceCurrent guidance checked October 6, 2026Read record: AI guidance for faculty and staff, Fairfax County Public Schools →
OregonOregon Department of EducationGenerative AI in K–12 classrooms, version 2

Schools and districts should regularly review vendors’ usage and privacy policies. The resource supports local development of classroom generative-AI policies.

These state recommendations cover local K–12 practices. District policies may add requirements.

GuidanceGuidance checked October 6, 2026Read record: Generative AI in K–12 classrooms, version 2, Oregon →
United StatesFederal Trade CommissionChildren’s online privacy: 2025 final amendments

The COPPA amendments limit covered operators’ retention of children’s personal information and require a written retention policy. The rule has distinct effective and compliance dates.

The rule covers websites and online services that meet its definitions and collect personal information from children under 13. It does not cover every school or every AI product.

Final ruleThe rule took effect June 23, 2025. The general compliance date is April 22, 2026.Read record: Children’s online privacy: 2025 final amendments, United States →
United StatesFederal Trade CommissionCOPPA policy statement on education technology

The FTC explains COPPA limits on unnecessary data collection and unrelated commercial use when covered education-technology operators rely on school authorization.

The statement covers COPPA-covered education-technology operators and children covered by COPPA. School authorization is limited to the requested educational service. The statement does not create a new AI-specific rule.

Agency interpretationPublished statement checked October 6, 2026Read record: COPPA policy statement on education technology, United States →
United StatesNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyGenerative AI risk management profile

NIST’s voluntary generative-AI risk profile describes privacy risks from training-data exposure and sensitive-data inference. It provides context for evaluating tools, without creating a school mandate.

Cross-sector AI developers, deployers, evaluators, and governance teams. The profile is not specific to K–12 and does not approve products or impose district duties.

Voluntary frameworkJuly 2024 voluntary cross-sector profileRead record: Generative AI risk management profile, United States →
West VirginiaWest Virginia Department of EducationAI guidance, considerations, and intentions, version 1.2

The guidance’s educator commitments caution against sharing identifiable information with consumer AI systems. The guidance calls for teachers to explain when and how AI may be used on assignments.

These state recommendations cover local K–12 practices. District policies may add requirements.

GuidanceMarch 2025, version 1.2Read record: AI guidance, considerations, and intentions, version 1.2, West Virginia →
WyomingWyoming Department of EducationGuidance for AI policy development

Wyoming’s guidance supports local district development of AI-use policies. The guidance identifies privacy, security, safety, data ownership, and child protection as areas to address.

These state recommendations cover local K–12 practices. District policies may add requirements.

GuidanceGuidance checked October 6, 2026Read record: Guidance for AI policy development, Wyoming →

Compare one question

Select 2–4 documents. The comparison uses the same topic, actor, grade, use, and date filters for each.

Result sources

California: Model policy: artificial intelligence in education

A district may adopt its own binding policy. This state model does not prove that every district has adopted it.

  1. Model Policy: Artificial Intelligence In Education - Professional Learning (CA Dept of Education): https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/pl/aipolicy.asp · Introduction. Checked October 6, 2026
Connecticut: Guidance on artificial intelligence

This record describes the issuing authority’s guidance. References to underlying laws are not independently restated as legal requirements. Local adoption and current approved tools should be checked with the district.

  1. Guidance on Artificial Intelligence (AI)search: https://portal.ct.gov/das/ctedtech/commission-for-educational-technology/initiatives/artificial-intelligence?language=en_US · Official page text. Checked October 6, 2026
Fairfax County Public Schools: AI guidance for faculty and staff

This is the current district guidance page, not the March 17 draft policy. The published page does not establish an exact enactment or commencement date. Its expectations are presented as guidance here, without inferring a state-law duty.

  1. Artificial Intelligence Guidance for FCPS Faculty and Staff | Fairfax County Public Schools: https://www.fcps.edu/artificial-intelligence-guidance-fcps-faculty-and-staff · Protect Data and Privacy. Checked October 6, 2026
Oregon: Generative AI in K–12 classrooms, version 2

This record describes the issuing authority’s guidance. References to underlying laws are not independently restated as legal requirements. Local adoption and current approved tools should be checked with the district.

  1. Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in K-12 Classrooms : https://www.oregon.gov/ode/educator-resources/teachingcontent/Documents/Generative%20Artificial%20Intelligence%20(AI)%20in%20K-12%20Classrooms%20v2.pdf · PDF page 8. Checked October 6, 2026
United States: Children’s online privacy: 2025 final amendments

COPPA is not specific to AI. This file includes it as federal privacy context for covered services used in education. The general compliance date governs date searches for the retention provisions shown here. Other provisions may have different schedules.

  1. Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 76 (Tuesday, April 22, 2025): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-04-22/html/2025-05904.htm · Final regulatory text, §312.10. Checked October 6, 2026
United States: COPPA policy statement on education technology

This record is an agency interpretation of COPPA. It does not establish a new statutory enactment, a universal school consent power, or blanket coverage of every AI service. Read it alongside the separately sourced 2025 final amendments.

  1. Policy Statement of the Federal Trade Commission on Education Technology: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Policy%20Statement%20of%20the%20Federal%20Trade%20Commission%20on%20Education%20Technology.pdf · Prohibition Against Mandatory Collection. Checked October 6, 2026
United States: Generative AI risk management profile

The voluntary federal framework provides context across sectors. It does not impose a binding education rule. The source gives July 2024 as the publication month. This file does not assign an exact effective day.

  1. Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ai/NIST.AI.600-1.pdf · Introduction. Checked October 6, 2026
West Virginia: AI guidance, considerations, and intentions, version 1.2

This record describes the issuing authority’s guidance. References to underlying laws are not independently restated as legal requirements. Local adoption and current approved tools should be checked with the district.

  1. AI guidance, considerations, and intentions, version 1.2 — official document: https://wvde.us/sites/default/files/2025-03/WVDE%20AI%20Guidance%201.2%20March%202025.pdf · PDF page 14. Checked October 6, 2026
Wyoming: Guidance for AI policy development

This record describes the issuing authority’s guidance. References to underlying laws are not independently restated as legal requirements. Local adoption and current approved tools should be checked with the district.

  1. Guidance for AI Policy Development: https://edu.wyoming.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Guidance-for-AI-Policy-Development.pdf · PDF page 1. Checked October 6, 2026

Release 2026-10-06-875e416b4116. This printout includes the current result page and any selected comparison.

Sources & Notes

How to read this file

Each row describes one official law, policy, model or guidance document. Related provisions appear together. State models and guidance can require local adoption. Proposals do not establish enacted requirements. Each record includes status, dates, scope and exceptions.

The default view shows adopted policies, current published documents and guidance. Future enacted changes, proposals, and historical bills have separate views.

Source numbers link to the official publication and the relevant section. Each source includes an excerpt, a text fingerprint and a review date.

What this file covers

This release contains 24 reviewed instruments: 3 federal instruments, documents from 15 state jurisdictions, and policies or guidance from 3 district governance units. Counts show records in this file. They do not measure national adoption.

Research coverage is partial. We did not search every state or district. A missing record does not show whether AI use is allowed or prohibited. We give an exact start date only when a source establishes it.

New York City covers several local education agencies (LEAs). It has no single NCES district ID in this file. Other pilot districts use the 2025–2026 directory from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).

Coverage by state and district pilot

District pilot

Release 2026-10-06-875e416b4116. Each record shows its latest source check. A failed source check does not change a published finding or its review date. Public summaries and provision references are available below. Raw evidence copies and private review files remain private.

Public policy summaries & provision references (JSON) · This published release. Structured data preserves scope, dates, exceptions and source locations.

Related reporting

Explore Formative Spaces research →

Looking for courses or programs? Explore AI learning resources for students →