Parental Consent and Safeguards for AI in Schools

H5253 arrives at a moment when artificial intelligence is entering South Carolina classrooms faster than any framework exists to govern it. The American Council supports this bill because it places the parent, not the algorithm, at the center of every consequential decision affecting a child's education. Under the bill, a school entity may not require or permit a student to use AI or generative AI in instruction or school-sponsored activities without first obtaining written, opt-in parental consent, and a parent may revoke that consent at any time. A student who opts out faces no academic penalty and is not denied access to core instructional content. That is the correct order of authority, and it deserves to become law.

Faith-formed communities have always understood that children are not data points. H5253 reflects that conviction in enforceable terms. School entities and vendors are prohibited from selling, sharing, licensing, or using AI-collected student data for commercial advertising or profiling. Student data collected through AI remains the property of the student and parent. Biometric data, including facial recognition, voiceprints, and emotional analysis, may not be collected, stored, or analyzed without case-specific written parental consent. AI systems are limited to collecting only the minimum student data necessary for an approved educational purpose. These are not bureaucratic niceties; they are protections against the commodification of childhood.

The bill also defends the irreplaceable role of the licensed teacher. AI may not replace a licensed teacher in providing core academic instruction or assigning final grades. Any AI-generated instructional content must be reviewed and approved by a licensed teacher before reaching students. Students may not use generative AI to complete graded assignments unless a teacher expressly authorizes it for a defined instructional purpose. We regard these provisions as essential: technology should serve the teacher-student relationship, never substitute for it.

H5253 further bars school entities from deploying AI systems that profile or categorize students based on political beliefs, religious beliefs, or personal values, or that conduct psychological, emotional, or behavioral assessments without explicit parental consent, or that make automated disciplinary or student placement decisions without meaningful human review. These prohibitions guard against the quiet normalization of surveillance and ideological sorting inside public schools. The American Council finds them not merely acceptable but necessary.

Accountability runs through every section of the bill. Compliance is a condition of participation in state-funded education programs. Violations expose school entities or vendors to contractual remedies, administrative penalties, or other remedies provided by law. A parent whose rights are violated may seek injunctive relief or damages in court. Each school entity must maintain publicly accessible information identifying approved AI tools and their intended uses, and parents must be notified promptly of any unauthorized disclosure or breach of student data involving AI systems. Critically, the bill expressly carves out that it may not be construed to require the use of AI in K-12 education, to limit parental authority over a child's education, or to expand state control over curriculum or local school governance beyond existing law. It adds a new section to the code; it strikes nothing. The American Council urges every South Carolina legislator to vote yes on H5253.