Eleven of 33 state guidance documents mention co-design or feedback loop structures, and 27 include student, teacher, parent, and community voices¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2030: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of the 33 documents reviewed, 11 mention co-design elements or feedback loop structures, and 27 mention integrating student, teacher, parent, and community voices. → Ruiz 2025

Evidence¶

Ruiz 2025¶

Ruiz, P., Prado, Y., Roschelle, J., & Fusco, J. (2025). What States Say About Evaluating AI in Education: Reviewing Guidance From 32 States and Puerto Rico. Digital Promise. https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/280

q2 · i? · review · r2

Count from the report's document review of 33 state guidance documents. The same review reports that 27 state guidance documents "include or mention the integration of student, teacher, parent, and community voices."

"Of the 33 documents we reviewed, 11 states mention evaluation processes that involve co-design elements or feedback loop structures."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Most states' AI evaluation guidance is exploratory, and only a handful describe systematic, student outcomes-based evaluation — related
• District-community Core Team participants across four pilot districts perceived their co-designed solutions successfully met the team-defined intended outcomes — related
• Educators sustained the student voice and leadership tenet by incorporating student input and co-leadership into their ongoing roles — related
• Adult learners emphasize human-in-the-loop AI design that keeps final learning decisions with learners and instructors — related