During an intensive weekend session in late July 2026, approximately 98 teenagers representing all 50 U.S. states gathered to address the challenge of artificial intelligence (AI) in education. The students convened at a replica of the U.S. Senate chamber at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate in Boston. Their goal was ambitious: to draft and pass “legislation” that would guide K-12 schools through the chaos created by AI technology, filling a void where no national policy currently exists.
Student Leadership Drives Federal Policy
Adult leaders have reportedly struggled to establish comprehensive rules for AI use in educational settings. The students—most of whom were high school juniors and seniors—attempted to fill this gap, debating fundamental questions such as whether AI should be permitted on assignments or during exams, and who holds the responsibility for teaching AI literacy to young people.
“This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us to actually help and try to change the country for the better,” said student Gabriel Sutphin of South Carolina while speaking from the chamber floor. The students were hosted by various organizations, including the Edward M. Kennedy Institute, AASA (The School Superintendents Association), and Day of AI, a non-profit initiative launched from MIT‘s RAISE AI literacy program.
After intensive negotiations involving compromises and spirited speeches, their proposal, titled the “Students First Act,” was passed by a significant margin: 82-16. Although this act is not legally binding, the AASA plans to distribute the text to its members, which include 10,000 school leaders nationwide.
Core Provisions of the Students First Act
The student-drafted bill includes several key requirements aimed at protecting students and ensuring proper AI integration. Key stipulations include:
- States must ensure that AI literacy training is provided to students immediately upon their access to classroom devices.
- AI use is prohibited during all graded examinations.
- Teachers are authorized to require students suspected of inappropriate AI usage to undergo an oral defense of their project work.
Among the student-focused provisions, one significant concern was preventing students from using AI as a substitute for actual critical thought. Campbell McHenry, a high school junior from Mississippi, expressed this worry: “Without guidance and guardrails, [AI use] is just gonna go unhinged.”
The proposed guidelines detailed in the bill include:
- Approved Uses: Students are allowed to utilize AI for tasks like brainstorming, studying, and editing, though these permissions are suggested after the eighth grade.
- Demonstrating Mastery: Any student who uses AI must cite exactly how it was used and must prove their understanding of a subject through oral defenses, handwritten exams, or class discussions.
- Plagiarism Review: If suspicion arises that a student misused AI, the work must be reviewed by two school officials, rather than relying solely on potentially unreliable AI detection software.
Addressing Implementation Challenges
During debate, participants grappled with how and when to introduce AI into classrooms. Lucia Herrera, a high school student from Missouri, argued against an early draft that did not specify the need for proficiency before use. Her subcommittee proposed mandating that schools teach comprehensive AI literacy as soon as devices are introduced. This training would cover topics such as misinformation, plagiarism, bias in AI design, student privacy, appropriate academic usage, and AI’s environmental impact.
Further discussion highlighted potential logistical hurdles, including funding disparities. Om Lala of California argued that mandating AI literacy could be a “heavy lift” because teachers are already under-resourced. Tristan Tjetjep from Tennessee voiced concerns over how underprivileged schools would afford this new training requirement. To address this, the students included language requiring federal government funding assistance.
Rules for Educators and Parents
The Act also established guidelines concerning educators and parents. For teachers, approved AI uses include lesson planning, creating practice materials, providing feedback, and improving instructional methods. Furthermore, every semester, teachers would be required to publish a clear written policy detailing when and how AI is permissible. Crucially, if an AI detection tool flags potential misuse in a student paper, the bill mandates that the teacher must personally investigate the issue before reporting it to school administration.
The provisions relating to parents were more difficult to legislate. Isabella Stringer of New Hampshire noted, “We cannot legislate parenthood. Schools cannot tell parents what or how to teach your children.” Consequently, many suggestions in this area are advisory rather than mandatory, encouraging parents instead to foster balanced technology habits and emphasize ethical academic behavior at home.
Regarding student safety, the debate touched on sensitive issues like emotional support. While some teens worried about privacy when using school-based chatbots for personal concerns—such as mental health crises or sexuality—Dylan Dornack of Iowa argued that in cases involving suicidal thoughts or severe distress, the technology must alert human adults immediately, stating, “This could be lifesaving.” Ultimately, the students agreed that if a chatbot detects a student needing emotional support, it should not respond to the request but instead notify school officials.
Despite some initial opposition from lawmakers like Jadelynn Petitjean of Alabama and Ethan Liu of West Virginia—who initially pointed out contradictions within the bill’s amendments—the students ultimately amended the document. By the conclusion of the weekend, most participants endorsed the Act, viewing it as a necessary foundation for future educational policy.
