In part one, I outlined the permission-without-policy problem facing districts nationwide. This problem is more urgent for school districts across the US because AI use by both students and teachers accelerated sharply in the 2024–2025 school year, but guidance and policy did not.
Building the AI-ready district starts with understanding what is already happening in classrooms, then building the governance structures that make responsible use sustainable.
Students are already there—and so are teachers
The numbers are no longer projections. In a September 2025 report, the RAND Corporation found that 54% of students and 53% of English language arts, math and science teachers reported using AI for school—an increase of more than 15 percentage points in just one to two years. A February 2026 Pew Research Center survey of U.S. teens found that more than half have used AI chatbots for schoolwork, and one in ten reportdoing all or most of their schoolwork with chatbotassistance.
In the 2025 Mississippi AI Collaborative survey,nearly 80% of teachers identified academic integrity as a top concern. Not far behind was the concern of overreliance on AI by students or staff, which was cited by 74% of teachers surveyed. RAND and Pew confirm what teachers are already sensing.
The RAND report found that half of students said they worry about being falsely accused of using AI to cheat. Pew Research Center found that 59% of teens believe AI-assisted cheating is already a regular occurrence at their school. Teachers are not overreacting. Teachers are aware and concerned about what is happening in front of them every day, and their concerns extend well beyond academic dishonesty alone.
The deeper problem is that AI use is outpacingclassroominstruction. According to RAND, more than 80% of students reported that teachers did not explicitly teach them how to use AI for schoolwork. In Mississippi, 54% of teachers identified professional development and training as necessary for AI use in the classroom. Students are using AI, but genuine AI literacy is lagging. That gap belongs to districts to close.
The guidance gap is real—and measurable
The 2025 RAND report makes clear how significant the guidance deficit has become. Only 45% of principals reported having school or district policies or guidance on AI use, and only 34% of teachers reported having policies related to academic integrity and AI. Only 35% of district leaders reported providing students with any training on AI.
The 2025 Mississippi AI Collaborative survey mirrors this national picture. Only 15% of surveyed teachers reported having an AI board policy and 19% reported having AI within their acceptable use policy. Without policies or guidance, teachers and students do not know where the guardrails are. 91Ƭistrators do not have a clear instructional path for school-level goals or professional development.
The gap between parents, students and district leaders is also noticeable in the research. In the RAND report, 61% of parents and 55% of high schoolers were concerned about critical thinking, versus only 22% of district leaders. Seventy-five percent of Mississippi teachers identified reduced student critical thinking or creativity as a risk of using AI in the classroom—a concern that aligns far more closely with what parents and students are reporting than what district leaders acknowledged in the RAND data. This is a gap that school leaders cannot ignore.
Three things leaders can do right now
The research is consistent, and the teachers’ voices are clear. Districts do not need to wait for perfect conditions to act because the longer districts wait, the wider the gap becomes. Three priorities emergefrom the data that every district can begin addressing now.
Establish governance.Nearly 80%of Mississippi teachers called for clear acceptable use policies for students, and 67%identifiedstudent data protection as a necessary area of policy and guidance.
For districts unsure where to start, the offers policy and guidance examples from across the country. Governance must also include AI vetting. Most AI tools were built for commercial use and were not designed for compliance with FERPA or COPPA. This makes vendor vetting a non-Աdzپ. and provide resources for schooldistricts to vet AI applications.
Invest in professional development that goes deep, not wide.More than half of Mississippi teachersidentifiedsustained professional development as a necessary policycomponent, and only 32% cited lack of awareness as a barrier. Thismeans most teachers are ready and waiting for something more substantive than an overview.
Teachers needrole-specific, grade-level-grounded, ongoing support. Professional development must have a pedagogical focus. Pedagogy drives technologyand this includes AI.Look at yourstatestandards and integrate AI into those that make sense.
Treat student AI literacy as a curricular responsibility.Districts cannot assume students arrive with functional AI literacy regardless of grade level. AI literacy cannot be taught in a silo or as a requirement that becomes just a checkmark on a list. It is a core competency for the students sitting in classrooms right now and should be integrated into the school day.
Common Sense Media offers a freefor grades 6-12. AI for Educationmaintainsa current database of state-level guidance resources from the 34 states and Puerto Rico that have published AI guidance, and in April 2026, the AI Workforce Readiness Council published the, a K-12 and workforce progression map available to districts statewide. Each offers districts a practical, accessiblestartingpoint regardless of where they are in the process.
The work belongs to leadership
The resources exist. The research is clear. Teachers and students have told us exactly what they need. The first step does not require a perfect plan, but rather a decision to start.
Start with a conversation. Start with a policy draft. Start with a professional development session that goes deeper than an overview. Start somewhere, because every day districts wait is another day teachers and students navigate AI without the guidance andsupportthey have told us theyneed.Technology is not waiting. Neither can leadership.
