NYC bans ChatGPT for kids under 9th grade, keeps it for teachers
New York City has drawn a sharp line in the digital sand: students from pre-kindergarten through eighth grade are now banned from using generative AI tools like ChatGPT, while their teachers are being encouraged to use the same technology for lesson planning and administrative work.
The policy, announced by Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Schools Chancellor Kamar Samuels, marks one of the most aggressive attempts in the nation to separate the role of human educators from the reach of artificial intelligence in classrooms.
The new rules, affecting nearly 600,000 students—roughly two-thirds of the city’s public-school population—are rooted in a simple belief articulated by Mamdani: “Children need their teachers and human connection in order to learn and in order to grow.” Under the policy, generative AI tools, including ChatGPT and Claude, are blocked on all school devices and networks.
AI-powered companion chatbots are also prohibited.
The education department will remove or disable AI features in more than 38 software programmes that were previously approved for use in schools but no longer meet the city’s new safety and oversight requirements.
This bifurcated approach—banning AI for young learners while keeping it for adults—raises an intriguing question: if AI is useful enough for teachers to prepare lessons and handle operational work, why is it considered harmful for students to access?
The answer, according to the mayor, lies in the developmental stage of younger children. “The tech industry wants us to believe that AI in early education is not only inevitable, but that it is necessary,” Mamdani said. “We do not see it that way.” He also questioned whether there is sufficient independent evidence demonstrating that generative AI benefits elementary and middle-school students, pointing to concerns about research funded by companies that stand to profit from the technology.
For high school students, the restrictions are less severe.
They will be given access to a limited group of approved AI tools and will receive instruction focused on what the city calls “AI critical thinking.” However, even for older students, ChatGPT and Claude remain blocked.
Teachers, by contrast, retain the ability to use AI for tasks such as preparing lessons and handling other operational work—but they are not permitted to use it for grading or student assessments.
This suggests the city sees AI as a productivity tool for adults, but a potential crutch for developing minds.
Our analysis suggests this policy reflects a growing skepticism toward the narrative pushed by big tech companies that AI is an inevitable and necessary part of early education.
The one-year duration of the ban is telling: it is not a permanent rejection, but a deliberate pause.
A new Technology in Schools Coalition comprising educators, parents, students and other stakeholders will study the impact of the policy and advise the city on how AI should be regulated in subsequent school years.
This creates a window for independent research to catch up with the rapid deployment of AI in classrooms.
For ordinary people—parents and small business owners in education technology—this development carries several implications.
Parents should understand that their children’s schools are now actively limiting AI exposure, which means home habits may need to align.
If a child is used to using ChatGPT for homework help at home, they will now face a gap between school and home environments.
For small edtech companies, this policy signals that New York City is a tough market for AI-driven products targeting younger students.
Companies focusing on teacher-facing tools, however, may find a more welcoming environment.
The practical advice for parents is simple: talk to your child’s school about what approved tools are available, and consider reducing reliance on generative AI for homework help until the city’s review is complete.
