IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crm/wpaper/26195.html

AI Diffusion Gaps: Unequal Integration of AI Across K-12 Schools

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher Campos
  • John Singleton

Abstract

Although use of generative AI tools has quickly become widespread in education settings, emerging evidence suggests that effects on learning will depend on how that use is supported and guided. This paper reports findings from an original national survey of K-12 school principals designed to measure institutional integration of AI in schools through policies, teacher training, guidance for student use, leadership engagement, and the availability of AI-enabled tools. We find that AI use has spread rapidly across schools, largely as a productivity aid. Students mainly use AI for homework help and writing, while educators primarily use it for lesson planning and administrative tasks. The development of teacher training, guidance, and school policies has lagged adoption. We next document two diffusion gaps across schools: First, lower AI integration is associated with a higher share of disadvantaged students (a one standard deviation increase in disadvantage is associated with a 0.07-0.11σ lower score on an index of AI integration); Second, private and charter schools score 0.23-0.44σ lower on the AI integration index than traditional public schools. Although several surveyed school-level factors strongly predict AI integration, they do little to explain these gaps. Differences in district size account for roughly one-third of the disadvantage gap between public schools. These findings suggest that the factors associated with greater AI integration differ from those needed to narrow disparities in how schools support and guide AI use.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher Campos & John Singleton, 2026. "AI Diffusion Gaps: Unequal Integration of AI Across K-12 Schools," RFBerlin Discussion Paper Series 26195, ROCKWOOL Foundation Berlin (RFBerlin).
  • Handle: RePEc:crm:wpaper:26195
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rfberlin.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/26195.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shi, Ying & Villarroel, Francisco, 2026. "The Consequences of Cellphone Restrictions in Classrooms," IZA Discussion Papers 18426, IZA Network @ LISER.
    2. Jacob L. Vigdor & Helen F. Ladd & Erika Martinez, 2014. "Scaling The Digital Divide: Home Computer Technology And Student Achievement," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(3), pages 1103-1119, July.
    3. Petra E. Todd & Kenneth I. Wolpin, 2003. "On The Specification and Estimation of The Production Function for Cognitive Achievement," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(485), pages 3-33, February.
    4. James Heckman, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    5. Jeffrey R Kling & Jeffrey B Liebman & Lawrence F Katz, 2007. "Experimental Analysis of Neighborhood Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 83-119, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Steven N. Durlauf & Yannis M. Ioannides, 2010. "Social Interactions," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 451-478, September.
    2. Emily Beam & Priya Mukherjee & Laia Navarro-Sola, 2022. "Lowering Barriers to Remote Education: Experimental Impacts on Parental Responses and Learning," Working Papers 2022-030, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    3. Patrick Bayer & Stephen L. Ross, 2006. "Identifying Individual and Group Effects in the Presence of Sorting: A Neighborhood Effects Application," Working papers 2006-13, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2009.
    4. Fairlie, Robert W. & Kalil, Ariel, 2017. "The effects of computers on children's social development and school participation: Evidence from a randomized control experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 10-19.
    5. Mesnard, Alice & Vera-Hernández, Marcos & Fitzsimons, Emla & Malde, Bansi, 2012. "Household Responses to Information on Child Nutrition: Experimental Evidence from Malawi," CEPR Discussion Papers 8915, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    6. Afridi, Farzana & Barooah, Bidisha & Somanathan, Rohini, 2020. "Improving learning outcomes through information provision: Experimental evidence from Indian villages," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    7. Aughinbaugh, Alison & Rothstein, Donna S., 2015. "Do cognitive skills moderate the influence of neighborhood disadvantage on subsequent educational attainment?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 83-99.
    8. Peter Hull & Michal Kolesár & Christopher Walters, 2022. "Labor by design: contributions of David Card, Joshua Angrist, and Guido Imbens," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(3), pages 603-645, July.
    9. Hanushek, Eric A. & Kain, John F. & Rivkin, Steven G. & Branch, Gregory F., 2007. "Charter school quality and parental decision making with school choice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(5-6), pages 823-848, June.
    10. Roland G. Fryer, Jr, 2016. "The Production of Human Capital in Developed Countries: Evidence from 196 Randomized Field Experiments," NBER Working Papers 22130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Maggie Jones & Michael Barber, 2019. "Inequalities in Test Scores between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Youth in Canada," Department Discussion Papers 1904, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    12. Ian K. McDonough & Constant I. Tra, 2017. "The impact of computer-based tutorials on high school math proficiency," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 1041-1063, May.
    13. Simon Calmar Andersen & Louise Beuchert & Phillip Heiler & Helena Skyt Nielsen, 2023. "A Guide to Impact Evaluation under Sample Selection and Missing Data: Teacher's Aides and Adolescent Mental Health," Papers 2308.04963, arXiv.org.
    14. Bold, Tessa & Barton, Nicholas & Sandefur, Justin, 2017. "Measuring Rents from Public Employment: Regression discontinuity evidence from Kenya," CEPR Discussion Papers 12105, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    15. Alexander Klein & Guy Tchuente, 2020. "Spatial Differencing for Sample Selection Models with Unobserved Heterogeneity," Papers 2009.06570, arXiv.org.
    16. Dino Alves & Ana Balcao Reis & Carmo Seabra & Luis Catela-Nunes, 2015. "Determinants of Academic Success in Economics and Management," Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación volume 10, in: Marta Rahona López & Jennifer Graves (ed.), Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación 10, edition 1, volume 10, chapter 17, pages 335-356, Asociación de Economía de la Educación.
    17. Meghir, Costas & Rivkin, Steven, 2011. "Econometric Methods for Research in Education," Handbook of the Economics of Education, in: Erik Hanushek & Stephen Machin & Ludger Woessmann (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 1, pages 1-87, Elsevier.
    18. Vandenberghe, V. & Robin, S., 2004. "Evaluating the effectiveness of private education across countries: a comparison of methods," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 487-506, August.
    19. Hull, Marie C. & Duch, Katherine, 2017. "One-To-One Technology and Student Outcomes," IZA Discussion Papers 10886, IZA Network @ LISER.
    20. Henderson, Daniel & Simar, Leopold & Wang, Le, 2013. "Schooling inputs, property tax caps and effciency scores in public schools," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2013013, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:crm:wpaper:26195. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Moritz Lubczyk or Matthew Nibloe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cmucluk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.