North Carolina legislators are pushing an AI chatbot into public school classrooms — and they want it there by August. As New York Times reporter Natasha Singer noted yesterday on The Daily podcast, teachers and students at the center of this national debate have been largely left out of the discussion. In North Carolina, lawmakers are moving to make that decision for them, brushing aside both state education guidelines and a growing body of research warning against exactly this kind of rushed rollout.

Instead of soliciting feedback from local communities, our state’s legislators are negotiating North Carolina’s educational direction as regards AI in private. As I detailed earlier this week in my post, “NC legislators want to put an unproven AI bot in your child’s classroom in August,” lawmakers are fast-tracking a mandate to deploy an under-construction version of Khan Academy’s paid “Khanmigo” platform. This top-down vendor push is moving quickly through the General Assembly, tucked into a sweeping education reform package called the K-12 Innovation and Transformation Act, known as Senate Bill 1006.

Why did meetings between lawmakers and Khan Academy’s CEO carry more weight than the experiences of North Carolina teachers, students, and families? If legislators are prepared to earmark more than $10 million in recurring taxpayer dollars for a specific AI vendor, the public deserves a transparent explanation of how that decision was made. Even if you are enthusiastic about the potential of AI in the classroom, selecting a specific vendor through legislation and deploying it at scale without robust stakeholder input is a completely irresponsible way to govern.

Bypassing normal procurement and evaluation procedures to favor a single vendor means lawmakers are ignoring the actual operational reality of these tools which North Carolina’s students and educators will have to deal with next school year. In fact, Khan Academy founder Sal Khan has acknowledged that early classroom adoption fell short of expectations. When a tool’s own creator admits that integration is difficult and student engagement is uneven, it is a clear sign that a state should pause. A human-centered education system must vet software through standard transparent processes rather than bypassing checks and balances through legislative mandates.

This lack of clarity about what students and teachers will actually be using is precisely why child development experts are urging caution. Researchers continue to debate the long-term impact of AI dialogue systems on young learners, and there is no settled scientific consensus. A recent Brookings Institution report examining AI in education across 50 countries found that at this point, the risks of using generative AI in children’s education overshadow its benefits. Khanmigo is built around the Socratic method, asking guiding questions rather than giving direct answers. But a struggling child often doesn’t know what to ask next. A human teacher reads the room and adapts to what they already know about that child. A chatbot does not.

This exact need for developmental certainty and classroom readiness is why the state’s own education agency originally urged a cautious, phased approach. When the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (DPI) released its institutional Generative AI Guidebook, it explicitly established that teachers must be given adequate time to master and understand these tools before they are ever introduced to students.

Instead of collaborating with public education experts, the General Assembly is bypassing them through SB 1006. This bill pushes forward a unilateral agenda that ignores the careful guardrails established by our own education agency. Worst of all, it leaves out any real, structural requirement for student, parent, or teacher input before these tools are forced into schools.

We must demand a seat at the table. Our children are not beta testers, and our classrooms are not tech testing grounds.

Act Now: Where the Bill Stands and What’s Next

Senate Bill 1006 is moving fast, and right now is our best window of opportunity to make our voices heard.

Where it is right now: The bill is currently sitting in the Senate Appropriations Committee. This is where things get critical. The primary sponsor of this bill—Senator Michael Lee—actually chairs this specific committee. He is essentially sending his own bill to his own committee to approve more than $10 million in recurring taxpayer dollars for a hand-picked vendor rollout.

What happens next: Once Senator Lee and his committee approve the funding, the bill will head straight to the full Senate floor for a final vote. If it passes there, it officially crosses over to the House.

Why we need to act today: The easiest place to stop a bad deal is in its very first chamber before it builds major momentum. We need to reach every State Senator’s inbox before the committee chairs vote to fund this bill.

How to find your Senator’s email: You can find a complete, all-in-one spreadsheet listing every single State Senator, their district number, and their direct email address on the official NCGA Senate Master Directory. Write your own email or use the template below, and please share this information with anyone who would find it helpful.

***

Subject: Vote NO on SB 1006 AI Mandates: Include Educators and Parents in the Process

Dear Senator [Last Name],

I am writing as a constituent to urge you to oppose the provision in Senate Bill 1006 that mandates deploying a specific AI chatbot in North Carolina classrooms without competitive bidding or public input.

A recent Brookings Institution report found that at this point, the risks of using generative AI in children's education overshadow its benefits. North Carolina's own Department of Public Instruction has called for cautious, phased implementation with adequate teacher training. SB 1006 ignores both.

Directing more than $10 million in recurring taxpayer dollars toward a specific, hand-picked vendor contract buried in a broader education bill, without public solicitation or competitive bidding, undermines transparency and cuts out the educators, parents, and students who will live with the consequences.

I urge you to oppose this provision and advocate for an open process that puts North Carolina families at the center of the conversation.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]
[Your City/County]
[Your Voting District Number - Optional]