People can want stronger limits and better technology education at the same time. Explore the questions behind the headlines.
This first collection contains eight survey and implementation reports. It covers reported views and experiences; it does not measure whether a policy or product improves learning. National findings cannot stand in for your district’s families.
8 studies shown. Publication year and fieldwork year can differ.
Survey · Parents · Published 2026-09-28
Parents on school AI, screens and instruction
National Parents Union / Echelon Insights
71%Support banning student chatbot use during the school day
85%Support schools teaching AI safety
77%Support teaching effective AI use
78%Prefer limiting K–2 learning screen time; 11% prefer a ban
58%Prefer laptops on carts for designated use; 38% prefer desks all day
Useful for: Pair age-specific limits with the separate question of teaching safe and informed use.
Read with care: Responses to separate questions cannot identify which individual parents support both. Different May wording prevents a simple trend. These are national views, not local district opinion or evidence of learning effects.
Sample, questions and methods
Fieldwork
September 7–11, 2026
Who was surveyed
1,528 U.S. parents of K–12 public-school pupils
Question / measure
Separate policy-support items and screen/device questions. The publisher provides wording and response tables. Support combines strong and somewhat support where applicable.
Method
Online non-probability sample from Cint/Lucid; quotas and demographic weighting. Publisher reports ±2.6 points using a random-sample calculation; this does not capture all non-probability sampling error.
Sponsor / research organization
Commissioned by National Parents Union, an advocacy organization.
Gallup / Walton Family Foundation / Joan Ganz Cooney Center
61%Want less student time on learning devices
59%Agree the digital tools they use help students learn effectively
34%Strongly support a daily maximum for device time
Useful for: Ask about purpose and classroom oversight alongside screen duration.
Read with care: Teacher perceptions and self-reported use do not establish causal effects. Learning devices are distinct from personal phones.
Sample, questions and methods
Fieldwork
May 6–29, 2026
Who was surveyed
2,101 U.S. K–12 public-school teachers
Question / measure
Different items measure preferred device time, perceived effectiveness and strong support for a daily maximum. “Strongly support” is not total support.
Method
National probability-based teacher panel; see the linked study for weighting and questionnaire.
Sponsor / research organization
Walton Family Foundation–Gallup study with the Joan Ganz Cooney Center.
Survey · Students / Parents · Published 2026-02-24
Teen chatbot use and parents’ comfort with it
Pew Research Center
54%Of teens report ever using chatbots for schoolwork help
18%Of parents would accept chatbot emotional support for their teen
Useful for: Distinguish homework assistance, information seeking and companionship.
Read with care: Fieldwork was in 2025 despite the 2026 publication. Comfort differs by use case. Neither statistic measures support for a school ban.
Sample, questions and methods
Fieldwork
September 25–October 9, 2025
Who was surveyed
1,458 U.S. teens ages 13–17 and their parents
Question / measure
Separate teen use and parent acceptability questions. The schoolwork figure uses all teens, not only chatbot users. Original wording and tables are linked.
Method
Online Ipsos KnowledgePanel recruitment through parents; weighted national estimates. Overall margin of error ±3.3 percentage points for each population.
Sponsor / research organization
Published by Pew Research Center; survey collection by Ipsos.
Survey synthesis · Students / Parents / Teachers / Administrators · Published 2025-09-30
How students, parents and district leaders view AI
RAND
61% / 22%Parents / district leaders agreeing that more AI use could harm student critical thinking
35%District leaders reporting student AI training in spring 2025
Useful for: Surface differences between leadership assumptions and family/student concerns.
Read with care: These are beliefs and reports, not measured cognitive harm or verified policy coverage. Different populations and dates are not a single matched trend.
Sample, questions and methods
Fieldwork
October 2024–June 2025 across eight survey samples
Who was surveyed
Eight samples, including 984 parents of 12–17-year-olds and 232 district leaders; denominators differ by item
Question / measure
Item wording appears in figure notes; the Data Sources and Methods section lists eight samples. The parent–leader comparison uses different samples.
Method
National survey panels plus a small, nonrepresentative leader-interview sample. District sample weighting cannot eliminate unobserved selection differences.
Sponsor / research organization
See report acknowledgments for funding and partner details.
Useful for: Check whether adopted rules reach the educators expected to use them.
Read with care: A teacher reporting no guidance does not prove the district has no policy. These figures concern staff work, not student AI permission.
Sample, questions and methods
Fieldwork
February 9–March 2, 2026
Who was surveyed
2,069 U.S. K–12 public-school teachers
Question / measure
Formal means written policy or official guidance; informal includes discussions and shared norms. Ten work tasks were measured.
Method
National probability-based teacher panel.
Sponsor / research organization
Walton Family Foundation–Gallup research partnership.
Provider implementation report · Teachers / Administrators · Published 2024-06
How educators implement digital-citizenship lessons
Common Sense Media
49%Of sampled implementers report covering all six curriculum topic areas
Useful for: Check whether a curriculum listing translates into a complete learning sequence.
Read with care: Provider research and self-selected users. This statistic measures reported coverage, not causal effectiveness or national teaching prevalence.
Sample, questions and methods
Fieldwork
May 2023 implementation survey; report also combines other evidence
Who was surveyed
Implementation analysis of 1,749 experienced curriculum users within 2,097 educator respondents
Question / measure
Implementation section, pages 10–12: educator-reported lesson coverage. Do not combine with the separate quiz or annual-survey samples.
Method
Survey of registered educators, conducted with University of New Hampshire researchers. Selected curriculum users, not a representative national teacher sample.
A source earns its place by helping explain a decision: what to limit, when to use technology, what to teach, or what support people need. We identify the population, field dates, sponsor, question and limits of the finding. We do not combine unlike surveys into a sentiment score.
Future additions should include evaluations and reviews of learning outcomes, with their methods separated from opinion surveys. CS, media-literacy and online-safety coverage remains incomplete; an empty filter is a research gap.