On September 16, the Florida State Board of Education approved an amendment to the state’s internet safety rule, adding requirements for how district and charter school boards govern AI instructional tools. The board also approved a new AI governance rule covering the 28 institutions of the Florida College System.

Florida is not the first state to regulate AI in schools. Tennessee required district AI policies by the start of the 2024-25 school year. Ohio’s deadline passed on July 1, 2026. Idaho, Maryland, Oklahoma, and Virginia have all since added requirements of their own. [K-12 Dive]

All five states told districts to write new AI policies. Only Florida sets requirements in statute, requiring a parental opt-in by default and data protections no district can waive. 

The new amendment states that districts may not deploy AI “designed, marketed, or configured to”:

  • Meet a student’s social or emotional needs, “including Social Emotional Learning”
  • Simulate friendship, companionship, or an emotional relationship with a student
  • Use “relationship-building or anthropomorphic design features for the purpose of encouraging a student to continue interacting with the system.” 

Notably, tools may not subject students to undisclosed behavior monitoring, social scoring, or psychological profiling. Interaction records must be retained for at least 30 days. Districts must prioritize vendors that store and process data inside the U.S.

Florida’s new rule also elevates parental direction. Parents must opt their child in to AI use, and every family that declines gets a “substantively comparable” non-AI alternative. The policy is grounded in parents’ “primary right” to direct their children’s education.

The rules are not yet in effect. Both were approved for adoption, but they still require filing with the Department of State, and districts will have until July 1, 2027, to comply.

What We’re Watching

  • How broadly the rule gets read. Districts have 9 months to interpret a prohibition that turns on how a product is “designed, marketed, or configured.” Whether FLDOE issues guidance, and how conservative district counsel is in the absence of it, will decide whether this touches a handful of companion apps or a whole category.
  • Whether other states follow the rule-not-delegation model. As we noted when California passed its youth safety package, statehouses copy templates. Florida has now offered a new model for AI governance.
  • California’s competing rule. A.B. 1159 covers students from Pre-K through university—a broader span than Florida’s, which stops at the Florida College System and leaves the 12 public universities out.

This article is sourced from Whiteboard Notes, our weekly newsletter of the latest education policy and industry news read by thousands of education leaders, investors, grantmakers, and entrepreneurs. Subscribe here.