U.S. K–12 technology & literacy policy
For educators making intentional choices about classroom screens, school devices and AI. Explore the rules, the learning requirements and the decisions ahead.
10 states with findings · 25 selected district systems
Incomplete inventory · not national totals1 Number of selected districts with matching evidence. State fill describes statewide evidence; blue fill identifies district-only findings.
Select a state for grades, dates and sources. Gray means no reviewed finding for this view; it does not mean no policy. Coverage & method
A statewide action may cover a specific grade, school type or cohort. The overview includes all affected K–12 grades; details show the actual scope. A current action takes priority over an upcoming action. District evidence is a selected sample and is never treated as a statewide rule.
The restriction overview and restriction map use the same audited register. Counts include adopted future duties and Florida’s adopted rule with its legal start unverified. The learning summary uses reviewed instruction records. “Upcoming only” means there is no current matching state requirement in this collection; a state with both current and upcoming requirements counts once under current. School technology limits cover instructional screens, school-issued devices and student AI access conditions, including requirements for local policies. Required technology learning covers student instruction, including graduation requirements; it excludes course-offering requirements, standards alone and optional resources. It is not a count of AI-literacy mandates. District examples are not a national census.
Learning categories distinguish instruction, course availability, standards alignment and resources. Personal-device categories combine three grade findings; “varies by grade” means the actual rules differ. Other topics use reviewed policy-action records. Proposals and unfinished research are available in the policy explorer. Policy details distinguish documented funding from related support programs.
Map geometry: US Atlas / US Census. Attribution
Adopted policies, including future starts. Counts combine direct restrictions and duties to set local policy; they are not counts of outright bans. The district search covers 106 named systems and is incomplete. Categories overlap. This is not a national census.
School-facilitated instructional technology only; ordinary personal-phone bans are separate. Policies may cover only certain grades. A state law can require local policy without setting a statewide cap. Connecticut and Minnesota cover narrow early-years instructional conditions. Hawaii DOE is counted once as a school system within the district panel. Counts describe verified records, not all policies nationwide or evidence that rules are implemented.
Search the 106-system coverage ledger · Coverage and remaining work · Matched 2024–2026 audit
02 / Over time
Follow dated decisions in the same school systems: tighter limits, wider access and new conditions on use.
Sep 21, 2026
Restriction / duty adoptedMoves K–2 from assigned one-to-one iPads to shared classroom devices, with a general daily screen-time range of zero to 30 minutes.
Shared classroom devices begin January 4, 2027.
Read the district sourceSep 10, 2026
Restriction / duty adoptedMoratorium on student-facing GenAI in 2K–8; no routine 1:1 screen time in 2K–2; older-grade daily limits are recommendations.
2026–27 school year; September 10 school start is the implementation reference, not a verified board adoption date.
Read the district sourceJul 16, 2026
Restriction / duty adoptedEnds FCPS-issued tablets and laptops in pre-K and kindergarten, makes student generative AI unavailable in elementary school and requires principal authorization for secondary use pending policy.
Board action applies beginning in fall 2026.
Read the district sourceThese are selected decisions, not a measured national growth rate. Historical gaps prevent a reliable 2024–2026 total.
Explore the full timeline & earlier evidence03 / On the horizon
Proposed restrictions and learning duties belong in the conversation—but they are not current requirements.
Would prohibit most K–5 classroom device use, limit daily device time in grades 6–12 and restrict individually assigned or take-home school devices by grade band.
Next step: No hearing or vote date verified. Further committee action would be needed.
Status checked Oct 5, 2026
Status, scope & official sourceWould require recommendations on incorporating AI literacy and a Regents decision; it does not itself guarantee compulsory instruction.
Next step: No hearing or vote date verified.
Status checked Oct 5, 2026
Status, scope & official sourceDraft would address student technology access, take-home use, digital citizenship, AI and local technology policies. This is broader governance work, not an adopted statewide ban.
Next step: KSDE anticipated action in October or November. The next regular board meeting is October 13–14; an adoption vote on this item is not verified.
Status checked Oct 5, 2026
Status, scope & official sourceAlready adopted measures with future start dates are listed separately in the policy watch.
See what is already scheduled04 / Teaching about technology
Where are students expected to understand computing, AI and the digital world—and what exactly are schools required to provide?
Learning coverage is incomplete. These counts describe reviewed records in this collection. A state missing from a count may still have a requirement. Check the state coverage ledger.
Compare each kind of duty. Timing: adopted, including future starts. District counts reflect reviewed local requirements, not every district covered by state law. Course access duties include offering alternatives: Kansas permits an implementation plan, which does not prove that a course is available now.
Includes adopted future cohorts where selected. Requirements may allow proficiency routes or approved embedded instruction. Idaho is included because its digital-literacy credit explicitly requires algorithms and programming. This is broader than a count of courses titled computer science.
Law effective October 1, 2026; graduation provision begins with class of 2032. Detailed approved coursework and embedded-standards guidance is to follow. Requirement and source
Applies to students entering grade 9 in 2022–23 and later; the first standard graduating cohort is 2026. Requirement and source
Rule effective July 1, 2025; one-credit requirement applies to students graduating after January 1, 2028. Requirement and source
First graduating cohort: class of 2029. This does not apply to all current graduating students. Requirement and source
Ninth-grade entrants in 2027–28 and later. Requirement and source
Graduation requirement begins in academic year 2027–28. Requirement and source
Current half-credit graduation requirement. The 2023–24 guidance supersedes earlier versions; a qualifying high-school-level course may be completed in middle school. Requirement and source
Graduation requirement begins with grade9 entrants in 2024–25. SL2026-41 §7.53 extends implementation-delay notifications forWake/Johnston only through2026–27; affected units must submit a course-offering plan byJanuary 1, 2027. Older DPI pages stating no2026–27 waiver do not reflect this later local exception. Requirement and source
Graduation rule: 2025–26, after July 31, 2025. Board-approved integration-plan alternative remains distinct. Requirement and source
Applies beginning with the graduating class of 2028. Requirement and source
Current graduation framework; see the approved course list for the student’s cohort. Adoption date is not independently established in this review. Requirement and source
Incoming freshmen from fall 2024; first graduating cohort is the class of 2028. Requirement and source
Beginning with grade9 entrants in 2027–28, one full CS credit is required. May be completed in grades8–12; approved courses and Policy2510 implementation are governed by WVDE/WVBE guidance. Requirement and source
Show graduation requirements on the map
Cross-check: Code.org’s 2025 report reports 12 states using data finalized December 1, 2025. Our broader definition includes Idaho’s digital-literacy requirement. This difference is a classification correction, not an additional law passed in 2026. Nationwide amendment review remains open.
Each state counts once per subject and requirement type. D.C. is displayed in its own profile, not counted as a state. Subjects overlap. Required instruction can apply to specific grades or graduation cohorts; it does not mean every child takes a separate course. A required offering does not mean every pupil takes it. Standards alone do not establish a must-take course or actual classroom delivery.
North Carolina’s AI-literacy standards and CS course alignment appear under standards, not as a separate AI course for all pupils.
Kansas · District example
Requires support for students and staff in developing AI literacy, including foundational concepts and when and how to use AI. Supports teachers in adapting instruction. It does not prescribe a separate course or graduation credit.
Read the learning duty & sourceAlabama · District example
Directs teaching about AI limitations, bias, critical evaluation and citation, with subject-area integration and staff professional learning. This is a district commitment; classroom delivery has not been independently measured.
Read the learning duty & sourceA requirement to teach, a requirement to offer a course and evidence of classroom delivery are different findings. State and district briefs identify which is documented.
Read about learning & student agency05 / People behind the policy
Selected surveys add perspective. Their samples, questions and fieldwork dates differ; these are not measures of learning outcomes.
Educators
Want less student time on learning devices
Agree the digital tools they use help students learn effectively
Gallup / Walton Family Foundation / Joan Ganz Cooney Center
2,101 U.S. K–12 public-school teachers
Fieldwork: May 6–29, 2026
Perceptions of digital tools, not measured effects on learning.
Questions, limitations & original studyParents
Support banning student chatbot use during the school day
Support schools teaching AI safety
National Parents Union / Echelon Insights
1,528 U.S. parents of K–12 public-school pupils
Fieldwork: September 7–11, 2026
Separate questions; these percentages do not tell us the exact overlap between respondents.
Questions, limitations & original studyStudents
Of teens report ever using chatbots for schoolwork help
Pew Research Center
1,458 U.S. teens ages 13–17 and their parents
Fieldwork: September 25–October 9, 2025
Reported use, not support for school AI use. Surveyed in 2025, published in 2026.
Questions, limitations & original study06 / Use the evidence
Start with your state, check the affected grades and dates, then follow the evidence to the original policy.
Documented rules, learning requirements, selected local approaches and proposed changes. Every policy brief links to its source and explains the type of requirement.
Compare states · Search & export policiesAll-state topic coverage, district histories and superseding policies remain under review. A missing finding is a research gap. Published requirements do not establish delivery in every classroom.
See the coverage ledger · Suggest a correctionPolicy baseline: Oct 4, 2026. Latest release: Oct 5, 2026. This is an AI-assisted research preview, maintained through reviewed releases. Source checks and unresolved items are recorded in the update log.
Update log · Download the data