Sunshine and a few clouds. Very hot. High 107F. Winds WSW at 10 to 15 mph..
Clear to partly cloudy. Low around 85F. W winds shifting to NNE at 10 to 15 mph.
Updated: June 14, 2026 @ 8:37 am
The majority of K-12 educators across the country receive little or no formal guidance about using artificial intelligence (AI) tools, according to a recent study from the Walton Family Foundation and Gallup.
While a 2025 study by the same organizations showed nearly a third (32%) of surveyed K-12 educators using AI weekly, their most recent study — “Teaching for Tomorrow: Closing the Expectations Gap” — found nearly half (48%) of educators reported receiving only informal guidance on AI use, while 34% said they had received no guidance at all.
The findings are based on a national web survey conducted from Feb. 9 to March 2 of 2,069 public K-12 teachers recruited through the RAND American Teacher Panel, a nationally representative group of educators.
The survey found that only 18% of teachers reported receiving any type of formal guidance — including written policies or official guidance — from school administrators on how AI tools should be used.
Educators were surveyed on 10 tasks that they might use AI for, including:
While 37% of teachers surveyed in 2025 reported using AI at least monthly to prepare to teach, 45% of teachers surveyed in 2026 reported receiving no guidance on using AI for the task. Only 9% reported receiving some formal guidance.
Creating worksheets, assignments, projects and classroom activities was another common use case for AI tools, with 33% of educators in the 2025 survey reporting they used AI for the task at least monthly.
But in the 2026 survey, just 8% said they had received formal guidance from administrators on how AI should be used for that purpose. And while 45% reported receiving informal guidance, 47% said they had received none.
Only 9% of educators surveyed in the recent study reported receiving formal guidance on using AI to make assessments, quizzes, or exit tickets, despite one-fourth (25%) of educators surveyed in 2025 reporting they use AI for the task at least monthly.
When it comes to modifying materials to meet student needs, 28% of teachers surveyed in 2025 reported using AI for the task. However, in 2026, 49% of educators reported receiving no guidance on doing so, while 43% reported receiving some informal guidance.
Educators received even less guidance on more sensitive or individualized uses of AI tools, according to the study.
For example 58% reported receiving no guidance on using AI for grading and providing feedback on assignments or assessments, while 69% said they had received no guidance on using AI in one-on-one instruction.
Among teachers who reported receiving some guidance, researchers found most of it was informal rather than through official district policies or written expectations.
“For many teachers, decisions about if, when and how to use AI are being made individually, in the absence of clear institutional expectations,” the study report said.
Rob, a teacher in the Tempe Union High School District who requested anonymity, said his experience mirrors that finding.
The AI-related professional development he’s received has been tool-focused — here’s a platform, here’s how to use it — rather than built around clear expectations for teachers or students, he said.
“When it comes to AI, it’s not so much that it’s unique or special; it’s really just that it’s fallen in the same pile as everything else,” Rob said.
That absence of clear expectations has a double edge, according to Rob, because not only can he do what he wants with AI in his classroom — which he sees as a positive — but so can other teachers, leading to big differences in how AI is used and monitored.
“Whenever I fall in the gray areas on how I want to handle a situation, it also falls on me,” he said. “Because when we don’t have an explicit, like ‘this is acceptable, and this is inappropriate,’ what ends up happening is, I’m becoming the judge.
“And if I make the wrong move, I don’t necessarily know what’s going to happen, because I’ve never made the wrong move.”
While the study found many educators receive little formal guidance on AI use, some Arizona educators are taking it upon themselves to provide training and support around the technology.
Amber Gould, an English and student council teacher in the Glendale Union School District who has led AI-related training and discussions in her district and through the Arizona Education Association, said interest in the topic has grown as AI tools become more common among both teachers and students.
“It’s more of a necessity, given the onslaught of AI that is now at the fingertips of not only our educators but our students,” Gould said.
Gould said many conversations focus on AI literacy, ethical use and helping educators understand how to incorporate the technology without replacing critical thinking or teacher judgment.
“Educators still need to remain at the center of education, even with AI support in different places,” she said.
Gould said her discussions often go beyond how to use specific AI platforms and instead focus on helping teachers establish classroom expectations, evaluate the reliability of AI-generated information and determine when AI use supports learning versus when it may interfere with students developing their own skills.
While some educators have access to AI-related training and discussions, like those led by Gould, the study found that not all schools and teachers are equally likely to receive guidance.
Teachers in higher-needs schools are less likely to receive guidance than those in wealthier schools, according to the report, especially when it comes to how they should apply AI tools to the creation of student materials.
In the wealthier districts, 59% of teachers received some type of guidance on how to use AI tools in making worksheets and assignments — 10 percentage points more than the highest-need schools.
Even when educators reported receiving guidance on AI use in the classroom, many said it stopped short of giving clear direction. According to the report, most teachers who received some form of guidance said it neither encouraged nor discouraged AI use.
However, among the less ambiguous guidance teachers reported, the study found that schools were most likely to encourage AI use for instructional preparation tasks, including modifying student materials, creating worksheets and assignments, and preparing lessons.
Schools were less likely to encourage AI use for tasks involving direct student interaction, such as one-on-one instruction or tutoring.
Discouragement was relatively uncommon overall, though one in 10 teachers who received guidance on AI-assisted grading said they had been discouraged from using the technology for that purpose.
Arizona lawmakers introduced multiple bills this session related to AI in schools, including bills focused on AI instruction, school policies and statewide education programs.
None made it to the governor’s desk this session.
One proposal, House Bill 4005, would require Arizona public school districts to provide instruction on the ethical, moral and educational uses of AI beginning in the 2027-28 school year. However, none of the proposals appear to focus specifically on providing formal AI guidance or training for K-12 educators.
As AI tools become more common in classrooms, the findings from the Walton Family Foundation and Gallup study suggest many educators are continuing to navigate the technology largely on their own, often without formal policies or consistent guidance from schools and administrators.
This story is made possible through grant funding from the Arizona Local News Foundation’s Arizona Community Collaborative Fund.
Never miss an issue. Sign up for free today.
Your browser is out of date and potentially vulnerable to security risks.
We recommend switching to one of the following browsers:
Leave a Reply