Education
Advancing Artificial Intelligence Education for American Youth – The White House
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
Section 1. Background. Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming the modern world, driving innovation across industries, enhancing productivity, and reshaping the way we live and work. To ensure the United States remains a global leader in this technological revolution, we must provide our Nation’s youth with opportunities to cultivate the skills and understanding necessary to use and create the next generation of AI technology. By fostering AI competency, we will equip our students with the foundational knowledge and skills necessary to adapt to and thrive in an increasingly digital society. Early learning and exposure to AI concepts not only demystifies this powerful technology but also sparks curiosity and creativity, preparing students to become active and responsible participants in the workforce of the future and nurturing the next generation of American AI innovators to propel our Nation to new heights of scientific and economic achievement.
To achieve this vision, we must also invest in our educators and equip them with the tools and knowledge to not only train students about AI, but also to utilize AI in their classrooms to improve educational outcomes. Professional development programs focused on AI education will empower educators to confidently guide students through this complex and evolving field. Educators, industry leaders, and employers who rely on an AI-skilled workforce should partner to create educational programs that equip students with essential AI skills and competencies across all learning pathways. While AI education in kindergarten through twelfth grade (K-12) is critical, our Nation must also make resources available for lifelong learners to develop new skills for a changing workforce. By establishing a strong framework that integrates early student exposure with comprehensive teacher training and other resources for workforce development, we can ensure that every American has the opportunity to learn about AI from the earliest stages of their educational journey through postsecondary education, fostering a culture of innovation and critical thinking that will solidify our Nation’s leadership in the AI-driven future.
Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to promote AI literacy and proficiency among Americans by promoting the appropriate integration of AI into education, providing comprehensive AI training for educators, and fostering early exposure to AI concepts and technology to develop an AI-ready workforce and the next generation of American AI innovators.
Sec. 3. Definition. For the purposes of this order, “artificial intelligence” or “AI” has the meaning set forth in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3).
Sec. 4. Establishing an Artificial Intelligence Education Task Force. (a) There is hereby established the White House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence Education (Task Force).
(b) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall be the Chair of the Task Force.
(c) The Task Force membership shall consist of the following members:
(i) the Secretary of Agriculture;
(ii) the Secretary of Labor;
(iii) the Secretary of Energy;
(iv) the Secretary of Education;
(v) the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF);
(vi) the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy;
(vii) the Special Advisor for AI & Crypto;
(viii) the Assistant to the President for Policy; and
(ix) the heads of other such executive departments and agencies (agencies) and offices that the Chair may designate or invite to participate.
(d) The Task Force shall be responsible for implementing the policy stated in section 2 of this order and coordinating Federal efforts related to AI education, including the actions outlined in this order.
Sec. 5. Establishing the Presidential Artificial Intelligence Challenge. (a) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Task Force shall establish plans for a Presidential Artificial Intelligence Challenge (Challenge), and the agencies represented on the Task Force shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, implement the plans by holding the Challenge no later than 12 months from the submission of the plan. The Challenge shall encourage and highlight student and educator achievements in AI, promote wide geographic adoption of technological advancement, and foster collaboration between government, academia, philanthropy, and industry to address national challenges with AI solutions.
(b) The Challenge shall feature multiple age categories, distinct geographic regions for competition, and a variety of topical themes of competition to reflect the breadth of AI applications, encouraging interdisciplinary exploration.
(c) The Task Force and, as appropriate, agencies represented on the Task Force shall collaborate with relevant agencies and private sector entities to provide technical expertise, resources, and promotional support for implementing the Challenge, including through existing funding vehicles.
Sec. 6. Improving Education Through Artificial Intelligence. (a) To provide resources for K-12 AI education, agencies represented on the Task Force shall seek to establish public-private partnerships with leading AI industry organizations, academic institutions, nonprofit entities, and other organizations with expertise in AI and computer science education to collaboratively develop online resources focused on teaching K-12 students foundational AI literacy and critical thinking skills. The Task Force shall promptly announce such public-private partnerships on a rolling basis as they are formed.
(i) The Task Force shall seek to utilize industry commitments and identify any Federal funding mechanisms, including discretionary grants, that can be used to provide resources for K-12 AI education. To the extent practicable and as consistent with applicable law, agencies shall prioritize funding for such purposes when it would further the aims of the program for which funding is available.
(ii) The Task Force shall work to ensure the resources funded as described in subsection (i) of this section are ready for use in K-12 instruction within 180 days following the Task Force’s formal announcement of the first slate of public-private partnerships.
(b) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Task Force shall identify existing Federal AI resources on which agencies may rely, such as the NSF- and Department of Agriculture-sponsored National AI Research Institutes, to support partnerships with State and local educational agencies to improve AI education.
(c) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education shall issue guidance regarding the use of formula and discretionary grant funds to improve education outcomes using AI, including but not limited to AI-based high-quality instructional resources; high-impact tutoring; and college and career pathway exploration, advising, and navigation.
(d) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education shall identify and implement ways to utilize existing research programs to assist State and local efforts to use AI for improved student achievement, attainment, and mobility.
Sec. 7. Enhancing Training for Educators on Artificial Intelligence. (a) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education shall take steps to prioritize the use of AI in discretionary grant programs for teacher training authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-10), as amended, and Title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-329), as amended, including for:
(i) reducing time-intensive administrative tasks;
(ii) improving teacher training and evaluation;
(iii) providing professional development for all educators, so they can integrate the fundamentals of AI into all subject areas; and
(iv) providing professional development in foundational computer science and AI, preparing educators to effectively teach AI in stand-alone computer science and other relevant courses.
(b) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Director of the NSF shall take steps to prioritize research on the use of AI in education. The Director of the NSF shall also utilize existing programs to create teacher training opportunities that help educators effectively integrate AI-based tools and modalities in classrooms.
(c) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Agriculture shall take steps to prioritize research, extension, and education on the use of AI in formal and non-formal education through 4-H and the Cooperative Extension System. The Secretary of Agriculture shall also utilize existing programs to create teacher and educator training opportunities that help effectively integrate AI-based tools and modalities into classrooms and curriculum.
Sec. 8. Promoting Registered Apprenticeships. (a) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor shall seek to increase participation in AI-related Registered Apprenticeships, including by:
(i) Prioritizing the development and growth of Registered Apprenticeships in AI-related occupations. The Secretary of Labor shall establish specific goals for growing Registered Apprenticeships in AI-related occupations across industries; and
(ii) Using apprenticeship intermediary contracts and allocating existing discretionary funds, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to engage industry organizations and employers and facilitate the development of Registered Apprenticeship programs in AI-related occupations. In doing so, the Secretary of Labor shall support the creation of industry-developed program standards to be registered on a nationwide basis, enabling individual employers to adopt the standards without requiring individual registry.
(b) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor shall encourage States and grantees to use funding provided under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) (Public Law 113-128), as amended, to develop AI skills and support work-based learning opportunities within occupations utilizing AI by:
(i) issuing guidance to State and local workforce development boards encouraging the use of WIOA youth formula funds to help youth develop AI skills;
(ii) clarifying that States can use Governor set-asides to integrate AI learning opportunities into youth programs across the State; and
(iii) consistent with applicable law, establishing AI skills training and work-based learning as a grant priority in all Employment and Training Administration youth-focused discretionary grant programs.
(c) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor, through the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training, and in collaboration with the Director of the NSF, shall engage with relevant State and local workforce development boards, industry organizations, education and training providers, and employers to identify and promote high-quality AI skills education coursework and certifications across the country. Through such engagement, the Secretary of Labor shall:
(i) identify applicable funding opportunities to expand access to high-quality AI coursework and certifications;
(ii) set performance targets for youth participation through any grants awarded for this purpose; and
(iii) utilize industry and philanthropic partnerships to the extent practicable.
(d) Within 120 days of the date of this order, and in consultation with the Secretary of Education and the Director of the NSF, the Secretary of Labor shall support the creation of opportunities for high school students to take AI courses and certification programs by giving priority consideration in awarding grants as appropriate and consistent with applicable law to providers that commit to use funds to develop or expand AI courses and certification programs. The Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Education shall encourage recipients to build partnerships with States and local school districts to encourage those entities to consider offering high school students dual enrollment opportunities to take courses to earn postsecondary credentials and industry-recognized AI credentials concurrent with high school education.
(e) Within 120 days of the date of this order, all agencies that provide educational grants shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, consider AI as a priority area within existing Federal fellowship and scholarship for service programs.
Sec. 9. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
DONALD J. TRUMP
THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 23, 2025.
Register Now for Tech Tactics in Education: Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation
Tech Tactics in Education will return on Sept. 25 with the conference theme “Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation.” Registration for the fully virtual event, brought to you by the producers of Campus Technology and THE Journal, is now open.
Offering hands-on learning and interactive discussions on the most critical technology issues and practices across K–12 and higher education, the conference will cover key topics such as:
- Tapping into the potential of AI in education;
- Navigating cybersecurity and data privacy concerns;
- Leadership and change management;
- Evaluating emerging ed tech choices;
- Foundational infrastructure for technology innovation;
- And more.
A full agenda will be announced in the coming weeks.
Call for Speakers Still Open
Tech Tactics in Education seeks higher education and K-12 IT leaders and practitioners, independent consultants, association or nonprofit organization leaders, and others in the field of technology in education to share their expertise and experience at the event. Session proposals are due by Friday, July 11.
For more information, visit TechTacticsInEducation.com.
About the Author
Rhea Kelly is editor in chief for Campus Technology, THE Journal, and Spaces4Learning. She can be reached at [email protected].
A common refrain about artificial intelligence in education is that it’s a research tool, and as such, some school librarians are acquiring firsthand experience with its uses and controversies.
Leading a presentation last week at the ISTELive 25 + ASCD annual conference in San Antonio, a trio of librarians parsed appropriate and inappropriate uses of AI in a series of hypothetical scenarios. They broadly recommended that schools have, and clearly articulate, official policies governing AI use and be cautious about inputting copyrighted or private information.
Amanda Hunt, a librarian at Oak Run Middle School in Texas, said their presentation would focus on scenarios because librarians are experiencing so many.
“The reason we did it this way is because these scenarios are coming up,” she said. “Every day I’m hearing some other type of question in regards to AI and how we’re using it in the classroom or in the library.”
- Scenario 1: A class encourages students to use generative AI for brainstorming, outlining and summarizing articles.
Elissa Malespina, a teacher librarian at Science Park High School in New Jersey, said she felt this was a valid use, as she has found AI to be helpful for high schoolers who are prone to get overwhelmed by research projects.
Ashley Cooksey, an assistant professor and school library program director at Arkansas Tech University, disagreed slightly: While she appreciates AI’s ability to outline and brainstorm, she said, she would discourage her students from using it to synthesize summaries.
“Point one on that is that you’re not using your synthesis and digging deep and reading the article for yourself to pull out the information pertinent to you,” she said. “Point No. 2 — I publish, I write. If you’re in higher ed, you do that. I don’t want someone to put my work into a piece of generative AI and an [LLM] that is then going to use work I worked very, very hard on to train its language learning model.”
- Scenario 2: A school district buys an AI tool that generates student book reviews for a library website, which saves time and promotes titles but misses key themes or introduces unintended bias.
All three speakers said this use of AI could certainly be helpful to librarians, but if the reviews are labeled in a way that makes it sound like they were written by students when they weren’t, that wouldn’t be ethical.
- Scenario 3: An administrator asks a librarian to use AI to generate new curriculum materials and library signage. Do the outputs violate copyright or proper attribution rules?
Hunt said the answer depends on local and district regulations, but she recommended using Adobe Express because it doesn’t pull from the Internet.
- Scenario 4: An ed-tech vendor pitches a school library on an AI tool that analyzes circulation data and automatically recommends titles to purchase. It learns from the school’s preferences but often excludes lesser-known topics or authors of certain backgrounds.
Hunt, Malespina and Cooksey agreed that this would be problematic, especially because entering circulation data could include personally identifiable information, which should never be entered into an AI.
- Scenario 5: At a school that doesn’t have a clear AI policy, a student uses AI to summarize a research article and gets accused of plagiarism. Who is responsible, and what is the librarian’s role?
The speakers as well as polled audience members tended to agree the school district would be responsible in this scenario. Without a policy in place, the school will have a harder time establishing whether a student’s behavior constitutes plagiarism.
Cooksey emphasized the need for ongoing professional development, and Hunt said any districts that don’t have an official AI policy need steady pressure until they draft one.
“I am the squeaky wheel right now in my district, and I’m going to continue to be annoying about it, but I feel like we need to have something in place,” Hunt said.
- Scenario 6: Attempting to cause trouble, a student creates a deepfake of a teacher acting inappropriately. Administrators struggle to respond, they have no specific policy in place, and trust is shaken.
Again, the speakers said this is one more example to illustrate the importance of AI policies as well as AI literacy.
“We’re getting to this point where we need to be questioning so much of what we see, hear and read,” Hunt said.
- Scenario 7: A pilot program uses AI to provide instant feedback on student essays, but English language learners consistently get lower scores, leading teachers to worry the AI system can’t recognize code-switching or cultural context.
In response to this situation, Hunt said it’s important to know whether the parent has given their permission to enter student essays into an AI, and the teacher or librarian should still be reading the essays themselves.
Malespina and Cooksey both cautioned against relying on AI plagiarism detection tools.
“None of these tools can do a good enough job, and they are biased toward [English language learners],” Malespina said.
- Scenario 8: A school-approved AI system flags students who haven’t checked out any books recently, tracks their reading speed and completion patterns, and recommends interventions.
Malespina said she doesn’t want an AI tool tracking students in that much detail, and Cooksey pointed out that reading speed and completion patterns aren’t reliably indicative of anything that teachers need to know about students.
- Scenario 9: An AI tool translates texts, reads books aloud and simplifies complex texts for students with individualized education programs, but it doesn’t always translate nuance or tone.
Hunt said she sees benefit in this kind of application for students who need extra support, but she said the loss of tone could be an issue, and it raises questions about infringing on audiobook copyright laws.
Cooksey expounded upon that.
“Additionally, copyright goes beyond the printed work. … That copyright owner also owns the presentation rights, the audio rights and anything like that,” she said. “So if they’re putting something into a generative AI tool that reads the PDF, that is technically a violation of copyright in that moment, because there are available tools for audio versions of books for this reason, and they’re widely available. Sora is great, and it’s free for educators. … But when you’re talking about taking something that belongs to someone else and generating a brand-new copied product of that, that’s not fair use.”
-
Funding & Business1 week agoKayak and Expedia race to build AI travel agents that turn social posts into itineraries
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Mumbai-based Perplexity Alternative Has 60k+ Users Without Funding
-
Mergers & Acquisitions7 days ago
Donald Trump suggests US government review subsidies to Elon Musk’s companies
-
Funding & Business7 days ago
Rethinking Venture Capital’s Talent Pipeline
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Why Agentic AI Isn’t Pure Hype (And What Skeptics Aren’t Seeing Yet)
-
Funding & Business4 days ago
Sakana AI’s TreeQuest: Deploy multi-model teams that outperform individual LLMs by 30%
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Telangana Launches TGDeX—India’s First State‑Led AI Public Infrastructure
-
Funding & Business1 week agoFrom chatbots to collaborators: How AI agents are reshaping enterprise work
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Astrophel Aerospace Raises ₹6.84 Crore to Build Reusable Launch Vehicle
-
Funding & Business7 days ago
Europe’s Most Ambitious Startups Aren’t Becoming Global; They’re Starting That Way
