TL;DR
No major system is “AI-ban first” anymore. Most ministries now promote responsible use framed by ethics, data protection and academic integrity. The EU’s AI Act already bans emotion-recognition in schools; other obligations phase in through 2026.
Policy is converging on five pillars: safeguarding & privacy, integrity & assessment, teacher capacity, equity & inclusion, and procurement due diligence. UNESCO’s guidance remains the global baseline reference used by many systems.
Practical implication for schools: write a local policy, train staff, adjust assessment, and buy only tools that pass a privacy, security and bias check. (Template resources and a procurement checklist are below.)
The global policy picture (in plain terms)
1) Guardrails first: safety, privacy and ethics
Europe: The EU AI Act takes a risk-based approach. Prohibited practices apply from 2 Feb 2025 (e.g., emotion-recognition in education); high-risk obligations and most other rules are staged to Aug 2026 and beyond. Expect more literacy and transparency duties for schools and vendors.
UNESCO: The 2023 global guidance (updated page in 2025) is widely cited by ministries. It emphasises human oversight, teacher agency, equity, and data minimisation.
OECD: Recent work stresses equity impacts and cautions against over-claiming what AI can do, while calling for teacher upskilling and careful measurement.
2) Teaching & learning: from pilots to “allowed with conditions”
United Kingdom (England): The DfE’s guidance helps schools set expectations for staff and pupil use, and suggests reviewing homework and assessment policies in light of gen-AI.
United States (federal): The Office of Educational Technology’s report (2023) promotes benefit with safeguards and gives practical recommendations for leaders and developers. States and districts adapt it locally.
Australia: National ministers approved a Framework for Generative AI in Schools (Oct 2023) and endorsed a 2024 review in June 2025—systems are moving from policy to implementation.
New Zealand: The Ministry’s 2024 guidance covers staff and student use and how gen-AI fits into NCEA assessment.
Japan: MEXT issued tentative guidelines and designated pilot schools to study gen-AI use in lessons and school operations.
South Korea: National policy moved towards AI-enhanced textbooks and curriculum, though plans have seen revisions and debate during 2025.
Devolved UK systems: Scotland and Wales provide practitioner-facing guidance, AI literacy materials and assessment briefings.
3) Assessment & academic integrity
Most ministries pair permission to use with clear misconduct rules and assessment redesign (e.g., more supervised tasks, oral defences, process evidence). Singapore and the UK explicitly remind schools to enforce existing plagiarism rules while adapting policies to gen-AI realities.
4) Equity & inclusion
UNESCO and the OECD repeatedly warn that gen-AI can widen gaps without targeted support (access, language, SEND/ALN considerations). Expect ministries to push AI literacy for students and staff, plus accessibility checks in procurement.
Country snapshots
Singapore
Direction of travel: “Harness, don’t hype.” MOE statements highlight integrity in assessment and responsible classroom use; ministerial speeches frame gen-AI as a lever for “Pedagogy of One” (personalisation). Nationally, NAIS 2.0 places education among strategic sectors.
What this means for schools: Keep teaching students to cite sources and show learning processes; build staff capacity; and align school-level AI policies with national integrity rules and Smart Nation priorities.
United Kingdom (England)
DfE guidance: Use gen-AI to cut workload and support learning where appropriate, but update homework/unsupervised work policies, communicate with parents, and consider NCSC security advice.
United States (federal)
Office of Ed Tech (2023) offers a balanced roadmap: elevate teacher judgement, ensure privacy, and focus on effectiveness evidence; many states echo it.
Australia
National framework (2023) with a 2024 review endorsed in June 2025; states add specifics (e.g., Victoria’s policy). The emphasis is on safe, curriculum-aligned use and workload relief.
New Zealand
MoE guidance (Nov 2024) spans policy writing, staff/student use, and NCEA assessment rules with FAQs and case studies.
European Union (system-wide overlay)
AI Act bans certain uses outright (including emotion recognition in education), with phased compliance for high-risk systems; ministries are aligning school guidance accordingly.
Japan
MEXT issued tentative school guidance and is running formal pilots to gather evidence before stricter national prescriptions.
South Korea & UAE (fast movers in curriculum)
Korea: Ambitious plans for AI-supported textbooks and personalisation have been piloted and debated; timelines adjusted in 2025 amid public feedback.
UAE: Rolling out an AI curriculum in state schools, including for early years; policy rhetoric couples future-skills with ethics.
Bottom line: Across contexts, ministries are shifting from “policy statements” to concrete roll-outs: literacy curricula, assessment guidance, procurement rules, and model school policies.
A practical blueprint for your school
1) Write (or refresh) your AI policy in 2–3 pages
Cover:
Purpose & scope; approved and prohibited uses (align with EU AI Act if you deploy tools in EU contexts).
Expectations for student use (attribution, process evidence, misconduct).
Expectations for staff use (data handling, prompt hygiene, record-keeping).
Accessibility, inclusion and reasonable adjustments.
Incident response & continuous review.
For exemplars and framing, pair your ministry’s guidance with UNESCO’s high-level recommendations.
2) Tune assessment before the next reporting cycle
Increase in-class/supervised components, oral explanations, and drafts/plan artefacts.
Require source logs or prompt journals when gen-AI assists.
Re-teach academic honesty with gen-AI-specific scenarios (what counts as original work).
Singapore and the UK explicitly anchor this to existing plagiarism and integrity rules.
3) Build teacher capacity (fast wins)
Short, hands-on clinics: lesson planning, differentiation, feedback drafting, and scaffolded writing support—always with professional judgement on top.
Align with national CPD offers where available (e.g., NZ case studies; Scotland/Wales practitioner guidance).
4) Procure responsibly — a five-minute vendor checklist
Ask every provider (and keep answers on file):
Data: What personal data is collected? For what purpose? Is it used to train models? Is there a no-sale clause? (EU GDPR/AI Act alignment if relevant.)
Security: Where is data stored? Encryption in transit/at rest?
Bias & testing: What evaluation has been done for fairness and accuracy with our learners?
Transparency: Can we explain model outputs to students/parents?
Controls: Role-based access, admin dashboards, audit logs, export/delete on request?
UNESCO and OECD both advise making equity and evidence explicit parts of adoption decisions.
5) Communicate with families
Share your policy in parent-friendly language; explain what is encouraged, what is off-limits, and why.
Offer examples of ethical use at home (prompting for brainstorming, checking understanding, practising with feedback).
This mirrors national guidance in the UK and NZ.
What’s coming next (2025–2026)
EU timelines bite: bans already apply; governance and General-Purpose AI obligations ramp through Aug 2025, and high-risk rules through Aug 2026. If you use EU-market edtech, expect updated contracts and product changes.
Framework revisions: Australia has already reviewed its framework (2025). Expect similar updates elsewhere as evidence from pilots (Japan, state programmes) lands.
Curriculum moves: Several systems (e.g., UAE; parts of Korea) are embedding AI literacy formally; others are releasing teacher resources rather than rewriting national curricula wholesale.
Useful official references
New Zealand: MoE gen-AI guidance (incl. NCEA).
Scotland & Wales: Practitioner resources and safeguards.
Final thought
Across systems, the centre of gravity has moved from “Can we allow this?” to “How do we use it well, safely, and fairly?” If you put integrity, privacy, teacher judgement and inclusion at the heart of your school policy—and buy only what you can explain and defend to families—you’re aligned with where ministries are heading.
