Topeka — State education staff opened a learning series on artificial intelligence, telling the Kansas State Board of Education that schools should teach AI literacy rather than simply handing students access to tools. The presenter warned that chatbot "companions" can produce emotionally manipulative output and cited a Common Sense Media survey showing 73% of U.S. youth ages 13-18 use chatbot companions.

The presenter read from the report: "Therefore, our earliest recommendation stands, given the current state of AI platforms, no one younger than 18 should use AI companions," adding platforms must implement age assurance and redesign features that foster relationship manipulation. The presenter said, "An AI companion is only a mathematical algorithm. It does not like you. It does not care about you. It does not really know you exist."

Why it matters: Board members said the prevalence of AI on home devices and students' mobile phones makes this a practical classroom issue. Members asked whether the state should provide curricula or limit access at school and emphasized parents' concerns about addiction and social-emotional impact.

Board reaction and next steps: Some members urged an approach like driver's education: teach when and how to use AI safely rather than ban it outright. One member said parents and districts need clear guidance and training: "If we can teach that in schools, then these things that are very scary and impacting their lives outside of schools could be mitigated," the presenter said. The board asked staff to return with examples from other states, policy recommendations and training that addresses data privacy and implementation for teachers.

What the board heard: Presenters compared two frameworks (a Digital Promise model and an OECD-based AI literacy framework) and recommended emphasizing technical know-how, ethics, algorithmic thinking and misinformation detection rather than mere tool use. Members raised questions about how local districts and families should balance access and safeguards, and requested concrete state-level examples of curriculum and age-appropriate implementation for future meetings.

The board did not adopt policy at the session; presenters said further briefings will follow.