TL;DR
Turn the school run and nap time into listening time
- Thousands of audiobooks, podcasts and originals
- Listen on your phone, tablet or Echo — also offline
- Cancel anytime
An opinion article from The 74 argues that states need practical help turning K-12 artificial intelligence policies into school-level implementation. It points to Tennessee’s nonprofit SCORE as an example of an intermediary that convenes education leaders, shares information about products and supports pilots, while leaving purchasing decisions to districts.
The 74 has published an opinion article arguing that states need partners to help schools put artificial intelligence policies into practice, and pointing to Tennessee’s State Collaborative on Reforming Education, or SCORE, as one model. The article describes SCORE’s work convening education stakeholders, advising state planning and helping districts assess potential classroom tools, while emphasizing that districts retain purchasing decisions.
The article reports that in a November 2025 survey, 93% of 29 state education agency respondents said their state or territory had communicated, or planned to communicate, a vision for AI in K-12 education. By contrast, 43% said they had provided, or planned to provide, implementation assistance such as procurement support or information on vendor pricing. The figures describe survey respondents, not all states.
The authors also say that among 39 states and territories included in their early-adopter database, 11% had reached what they call the “integrator” stage. That stage involves moving beyond statements of vision and guidance to activities such as pilots, evaluation, procurement assistance, revised standards and implementation plans. The article argues that many state agencies lack the staff, funding or technical expertise to carry out all of this work alone.
In Tennessee, SCORE has no formal authority over district decisions, according to the article. After the state required districts to adopt AI policies addressing safety, academic integrity and risk mitigation, SCORE convened a working group of K-12 and higher education leaders, researchers, industry representatives and other partners. The group met over roughly 18 months. SCORE recommendations informed the state AI Action Plan, the article says, and the state Board of Education considered its suggestions on incorporating AI literacy into English language arts standards.
Turning State AI Plans Into School Support
The article’s central argument is that publishing rules or guidance does not necessarily give schools the tools to apply them. Districts may need help evaluating products, developing evidence about what works and building trust around how AI is used. A partner that connects state officials with educators and researchers can help share lessons across districts, rather than leaving each school system to solve the same problems separately.
This support may matter especially for smaller and higher-need districts, which could have less staff capacity to assess vendors, establish safeguards or train teachers. The authors warn that without coordinated assistance, better-resourced districts may be better placed to experiment with AI. Their argument is that intermediaries can help spread access to expertise, but should not replace local decision-making or state responsibility.
Products Worth Considering
Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS Running Smartwatch, 43 mm, Black
Withings Body Smart Wi-Fi and Bluetooth Smart Scale
Hyperice Hypervolt 3 Percussion Massage Gun with Heated Head and Premium Carry Case
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Tennessee’s Partnership and Pilot Work
SCORE’s role rests on relationships with state leaders, districts, colleges, funders and technology providers, rather than formal control over schools. The article says the organization convenes local stakeholders, relays their experiences to state leaders and shares information on products. It says SCORE does not endorse specific tools or dictate what districts buy.
The article also describes a literacy-tool pilot. After reviewing Coursemojo, an AI-enabled tool, SCORE supported a 2024–25 pilot in Sumner County Schools. For the 2025–26 school year, it partnered with a local foundation to help fund a larger effort involving seven districts, 20 schools and more than 4,000 students. The authors report that teachers said the tool’s insights informed instruction and that participating district leaders were highly satisfied. Districts renewed and expanded the work, often using their own funds, according to the article.
The authors caution that these reported responses do not amount to a final verdict on Coursemojo. They present the pilot as one source of information about possible benefits and the conditions needed to implement a tool across districts—not as proof that the product will work in every setting.
“Guidance and task forces alone are not enough.”
— The authors of the opinion article
What the Pilot Results Cannot Show
The article does not establish that Coursemojo caused improvements in student learning. Its account of the pilot relies on reported teacher and district feedback, and the authors explicitly say the findings are not a final verdict on the product. The material provided does not include a detailed research design, comparison group, effect sizes or independently assessed student outcomes.
It is also unclear how widely SCORE’s approach can be replicated, how much it costs to sustain, or whether partnerships in other states would have similar access and trust. The survey results reflect the agencies that responded and the states and territories included in the authors’ database; they should not be read as a complete measure of every state’s current work.
Further Evidence and State Implementation
The article identifies ongoing state and district implementation as the next practical test: whether partnerships can help schools evaluate tools, put safeguards into practice and share evidence across systems. In Tennessee, the larger Coursemojo cohort is scheduled for the 2025–26 school year; the article does not provide a later evaluation date or a new set of outcome data.
The authors say states can work with different kinds of intermediaries, including nonprofits, universities, technical service providers or research organizations. They argue that useful partners need trust, staying power and the ability to connect groups that do not routinely work together. The article does not announce a new state program or funding commitment.
Key Questions
What is the development described in the article?
The 74 published an opinion article arguing that intermediary organizations can help states turn AI education policies into practical support for districts. It uses Tennessee’s SCORE as an example.
What does SCORE do in Tennessee?
According to the article, SCORE convenes education and other stakeholders, shares district experiences with state leaders, and helps districts assess emerging tools. It does not have formal authority over districts or make their purchasing decisions.
What did the survey say about state AI support?
Among 29 state education agency respondents to a November 2025 survey, 93% said their state or territory had communicated or planned to communicate an AI vision for K-12 education. Forty-three percent said they had assisted or planned to assist districts with implementation, such as procurement or vendor pricing.
Do the Coursemojo findings prove the tool improves learning?
No. The authors report positive feedback from teachers and district leaders, but say the findings are not a final verdict. The source does not provide detailed outcome measures or evidence establishing that the tool caused learning gains.
Does the article recommend that every state copy Tennessee’s model?
No. The authors say the model should differ by state. They argue that a partner—such as a nonprofit, university or research organization—can be useful if it has trust, staying power and the ability to connect stakeholders.
Source: the74million.org
