Education Leaders Face a 90-Day Crisis

James Purdy
Sep 5, 2025
3 min read

Key Takeaways

Trump’s July 23 AI Action Plan gives federal agencies 90 days to set education priorities that will shape future grants
UNESCO’s September survey shows international momentum, exposing North America’s lag
Private capital is scaling AI education faster than public systems can adapt
Canada faces a widening disadvantage after the collapse of AIDA

The New Clock is Ticking

Education leaders are used to multi-year timelines. AI has ended that comfort. On July 23, the White House released its AI Action Plan, establishing 90 days for federal agencies to draft education priorities and launch the Presidential AI Challenge. Within 120 days, agencies must redesign scholarships and fellowships to reflect AI as a priority. Full implementation is expected within a year.

For schools and districts, the pressure is indirect but real. The next round of federal grants will increasingly reward institutions that align with these priorities. Those who act early position themselves for competitive advantage. Those who delay risk falling behind when the funding environment shifts.

This is less about penalties than positioning. The clock is already running, and institutions that fail to prepare will miss opportunities that competitors seize.

Global Momentum Leaves North America Exposed

While the United States reframes priorities, UNESCO’s September Digital Learning Week in Paris revealed the speed of global change. Nearly two-thirds of universities worldwide now report having AI policies in place or in progress. Institutions are embedding AI literacy into core curricula, reshaping assessment, and signaling to employers and students that they are ready for an AI-driven future.

Canada, meanwhile, is stuck in limbo. The collapse of the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA) has left no federal anchor. Provinces are improvising with piecemeal guidance, creating inequity and confusion for leaders. Without a national strategy, Canadian schools face a growing disadvantage relative to US institutions benefiting from federal direction and global counterparts moving in lockstep.

Private Capital is Scaling Faster Than Public Systems

On September 2, Singapore’s iEduGPT announced a ten million dollar funding round for AI-powered exam preparation. It is one of many examples of venture-backed firms releasing polished solutions that students adopt immediately.

This creates a painful tension for public education leaders. While governments debate and ministries consult, students are already learning through commercial platforms. Employers are hiring based on AI fluency. The risk is that schools and universities appear increasingly irrelevant if they cannot provide comparable preparation.

For ministers and trustees, the message is clear. Regulation alone cannot solve this. Institutions need working frameworks now—policies that are defensible, usable by staff, and flexible enough to evolve.

What Leaders Must Do Now

The pressure is not abstract. It shows up as parents demanding clarity, staff unsure what is allowed, and students using tools teachers have no guidance to manage. Leaders who delay face three compounding risks:

Loss of competitive access to federal and international funding
Reputational harm as institutions appear unprepared
Long-term disadvantage for students entering an AI-driven workforce

The practical path forward is not waiting for perfect legislation or polished national frameworks. It is adopting provisional, stop-gap systems that can be implemented within weeks. These frameworks should set clear principles, establish immediate guidance for staff, and leave room for review and adaptation as regulations evolve.

The institutions that act quickly will gain credibility with parents, confidence from staff, and leverage in funding competitions. Those that hesitate risk being locked out of the next phase of education’s AI transformation.

Ryan James Purdy is an AI Policy and Compliance advisor and author of the Stop-Gap AI Policy Guide series. He helps senior education leaders build immediate, defensible AI frameworks that satisfy regulatory requirements while preserving institutional independence. Connect with him on LinkedIn [link].