What do schools restrict—and what do students learn about the technology shaping their lives? Explore both sides, from national policy to your state and classroom.
Statewide limits and required instruction, viewed together.
All K–12 · Reviewed findings; coverage remains open
Limits and learning · All K–12
Adopted, including future starts
Limits + required learning documented17Limits documented; learning not established28Neither established in this view6
1 Number of selected districts with matching evidence. State fill describes statewide evidence. District markers describe local findings separately.
Select a state for grades, dates and sources. Legend totals include D.C. “Not established” means a research gap, not no policy. Learning means required CS, AI or digital-literacy instruction; standards and course offerings are separate. Coverage & method
How to read the map
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. The combined view adds personal-device rules to required student instruction. The separate school technology limits view covers 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.
50-state denominator; D.C. has its own profile. Reviewed findings in this collection, not a certification of exhaustive coverage. Categories overlap.
Required learning
17 states with findings
CS, AI or digital-literacy instruction for a covered grade or cohort; includes future starts.
Which states count?
Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Nevada, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia.
50-state denominator; D.C. has its own profile. Reviewed findings in this collection, not a certification of exhaustive coverage. Categories overlap.
National, all-grade totals. Different questions, different counts. Phone restrictions do not automatically limit school-issued technology. Learning requirements can cover specific grades or cohorts. Definitions & counting method
02 / Over time
School technology policy is moving in more than one direction.
Follow dated decisions: tighter limits, wider access and new conditions on use. These examples do not measure national growth.
How we arrived here: access expanded before today’s policy debate.
2019–20 to spring 2020 · Same measure
Devices assigned to every student to take home
Before the pandemic (2019–20)
23%
Spring 2020
45%
Public-school principals’ reports. These figures concern take-home assignment, not all in-school device access.
U.S. public schools reporting a program that provides every pupil a school-issued device. This does not measure time on screens or require take-home use.
The later measure is not joined to the earlier figures as a continuous trend. Measures, access notes & data. These national school surveys cannot establish when individual states adopted 1:1 policies or whether device access caused later restrictions.
Sep 21, 2026
Restriction / duty adopted
Seattle Public Schools
Moves K–2 from assigned one-to-one iPads to shared classroom devices, with a general daily screen-time range of zero to 30 minutes.
The district letter and FAQ give January 4, 2027 for shared classroom devices. A Key Takeaways bullet instead says January 1; confirm the precise start with the district. The change remains upcoming.
Ends 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.
Would fund state policies restricting student possession or use of personal electronic devices during school hours. Eligible policies would cover public elementary and secondary schools, include health and disability exceptions, and be developed with district and community input. School-authorized instructional laptops and tablets meeting specified safeguards are excluded.
Next step: Confirm the numbered Congressional record and committee action. No hearing or vote date is verified.
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.
Instructional technology policy · State Board draft
Draft 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.
Limits are one part of the picture. Learning is another.
Where are students expected to understand computing, AI and the digital world—and what exactly are schools required to provide?
What does the policy require?
Grade view: All K–12. A grade-band finding may apply to only some grades; each source gives the precise scope.
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.
Required instruction · Verified findings, not complete national totals
Learning area
States
Selected districts
Computer scienceAny covered grade; broader than graduation alone
Explore graduation requirements with CS content · 13 verified states
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.
See the 13 states and their start dates
Alabama
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
Arkansas
Applies to students entering grade 9 in 2022–23 and later; the first standard graduating cohort is 2026. Requirement and source
Idaho
Rule effective July 1, 2025; one-credit requirement applies to students graduating after January 1, 2028. Requirement and source
Indiana
First graduating cohort: class of 2029. This does not apply to all current graduating students. 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
North Carolina
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
North Dakota
Graduation rule: 2025–26, after July 31, 2025. Board-approved integration-plan alternative remains distinct. 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
Tennessee
Incoming freshmen from fall 2024; first graduating cohort is the class of 2028. Requirement and source
West Virginia
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
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.
How we count learning requirements
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.
National examples: what learning looks like in district documents
Kansas · Learning opportunities required
Wichita Public Schools
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.
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.
CS4All supports schools in expanding computer-science experiences and computational thinking. The program page does not establish that every student currently receives a specified course or number of hours.
A 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.
Of teens expect AI to affect their own lives positively over the next 20 years
15%
Of teens expect AI to affect their own lives negatively over the next 20 years
Pew Research Center 1,458 U.S. teens ages 13–17 and their parents Fieldwork: September 25–October 9, 2025
Predictions about personal impact, not a vote on school AI access. Other answers include equally positive and negative, or unsure. Surveyed in 2025, published in 2026.
Bring a clearer picture to your next school conversation.
Start with your state, check the affected grades and dates, then follow the evidence to the original policy.
What this tracker can tell you
Documented rules, learning requirements, selected local approaches and proposed changes. Every policy brief links to its source and explains the type of requirement.
All-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.
Policy 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.