Florida’s new classroom artificial-intelligence framework gives Central Florida families a concrete set of questions to ask about student software: what is being used, who supervises it, and what happens when a parent declines. The State Board of Education announced approval September 16, but families should distinguish that vote from implementation at their own school. Department of Education announcement
A September 18 notice of change keeps July 1, 2027, as the deadline for district and charter governing boards to adopt and implement the K-12 policy amendment. The state’s rule-history page still displayed the earlier, 2023 final rule at this package’s review. The reviewed records therefore support reporting the approved framework and its implementation deadline, but not declaring the new amendment already effective statewide. September 18 rule-change text, pages 4057–4058, Current rule-history listing
The K-12 agenda text calls for plain-language notices identifying the tool, grade levels, subjects and nature of student interaction. For direct student use, it provides parental opt-in and a non-AI alternative comparable in instructional quality and access. It also calls for a public list of approved tools. Parents can ask a principal to identify the current local policy, the tool being proposed and the actual alternative assignment, rather than relying on a general technology-consent form. K-12 agenda rule text
The September 18 changes add specific controls for autonomous, or agentic, systems. In VPK through grade 12, such tools would require direct adult supervision, activity logs and a way for school staff to disable autonomous functions without vendor assistance. The changes also require human review of AI decisions, including grading, discipline and exceptional-student-education referrals. Published changes
For a family, the practical questions are straightforward: Which adult reviews the output? How can a student challenge an error? Who can stop a tool that behaves unexpectedly? These questions are especially useful when the software affects a consequential decision, rather than merely suggesting practice exercises. A demonstration of a product cannot answer how a school handles a disputed result.
College students should read their course rules separately. The Florida College System agenda text requires notice to parents of minors who directly use an AI instructional tool. It also says students may not use AI on graded work unless the instructor expressly permits it. That language does not make an assignment acceptable simply because a tool appears on an institution’s approved list. College-system agenda rule text
No district-specific rollout calendar or individual school consent form was verified for this package. Families can request those documents now, along with an explanation of accessible alternatives. The local accountability test will be whether parents receive usable choices and teachers receive the time, training and authority to supervise the systems their schools approve.
- Kevin Seraaj
- Kevin Seraaj
- Kevin Seraaj
- Kevin Seraaj
