OpenAI is expanding ChatGPT for Teachers to 55 additional U.S. school systems across 20 states, bringing managed access to more than 100,000 additional educators and staff. The company says it is now working with more than 100 K–12 organisations across 30 states, covering more than 300,000 educators and staff. It has also introduced a 16-state data privacy agreement intended to give districts a more consistent framework for evaluating ChatGPT for Teachers against local student-data requirements. Why it matters for international schools The important shift is from individual teacher use towards institutionally managed adoption. Privacy, administrative controls, staff training and clear expectations increasingly sit alongside the tool itself. For international schools, that makes AI procurement a leadership and governance question as much as a technology choice. ChatGPT for Teachers remains free for verified U.S. K–12 educators through June 2028. Source: OpenAI announcement

The U.S. Department of Education has issued new guidance on responsible classroom technology use, arguing that digital tools should be judged by instructional value and evidence rather than novelty. The guidance asks schools to consider five practical questions before adopting or continuing a tool: what learning problem it solves, when it should be used, who benefits, how long it should be used and what evidence shows that it improves student learning. It also emphasises educator judgement, transparency, implementation support and avoiding unnecessary screen time. Why it matters for international schools The framework is useful well beyond the United States. International schools reviewing software subscriptions, AI platforms or classroom devices can use the same questions to move procurement discussions away from features and towards learning impact. It also creates a clearer basis for retiring tools that are not producing enough educational value. Source: U.S. Department of Education guidance

Google is offering eligible college students in many markets one year of a Google AI plan at no cost, alongside new and upgraded study tools in Gemini. The student experience includes a dedicated hub, study notebooks, flashcards, practice quizzes, interactive visualisations and deeper research tools. The exact plan varies by market, with Google AI Pro offered in the United States and Google AI Plus available to eligible students in many other countries. Why it matters for schools Although the offer is aimed at higher education, it reinforces a challenge already facing secondary schools: students are gaining increasingly capable consumer AI tools outside institutionally selected platforms. Schools will need clear expectations for assessment, independent work and AI literacy rather than assuming access can be controlled through school accounts alone. Source: Google announcement

The start of a new school year is a useful time to check whether safeguarding systems still match the realities students and staff are facing. The Council of International Schools has outlined several priorities for 2026–27, beginning with leadership and governance. CIS Head of Safeguarding & Well-being Dan Furness argues that safeguarding should be understood as a whole-school responsibility, with clear reporting routes and roles across leadership, counselling, nursing, boarding, pastoral care and student support. CIS identifies three areas for particular attention this year: harm between students, rapidly changing online harms and safer recruitment. It also recommends reviewing background checks and references, using probation as part of the safeguarding process and keeping up with changes in local legal and data-protection requirements. Student voice and local context matter One of the strongest points for international schools is the emphasis on context. Safeguarding principles may travel across borders, but school communities operate within different legal, cultural and social environments. CIS also encourages schools to involve students in shaping safeguarding education. Students can often identify emerging online behaviours and risks before adults fully understand them, making meaningful student voice an important part of prevention rather than an add-on. For leadership teams, the CIS guidance works as a useful beginning-of-year check: are roles clear, are new staff properly inducted, are reporting pathways understood, and have policies kept pace with how students’ lives are changing? Read the full CIS safeguarding guidance Featured image: Daniel McCullough / Unsplash.

After more than 15 years of laptops becoming a normal part of classroom life, an Australian debate is reopening a basic question: should a device be the default tool for learning, or simply one option among many? Federal Education Minister Jason Clare has backed what he described as a “digital detox” in classrooms. Victoria is also moving to set screen-time limits from next year, including around 90 minutes a day for Years 3–6 and two hours for secondary students. Australian Education Minister Jason Clare has backed limits on classroom screen time. Photo: AySh282 / Wikimedia Commons, CC0 1.0. The discussion is not simply about removing technology. Schools still rely on devices for research, creation, accessibility, collaboration and digital skills. The more interesting question is whether routines built during years of one-to-one device adoption have sometimes made screen use automatic rather than purposeful. Purpose before device Some Australian schools are already experimenting with more structured use, including reducing reliance on bring-your-own-device models and being more deliberate about when laptops are open. There is also reason for caution. Researchers have warned against treating all screen use as equivalent or assuming that blanket limits will automatically improve learning. Different subjects, age groups and students have different needs. For international schools, the useful takeaway may be simpler: technology policy should start with the learning activity. If discussion, handwriting, practical work or direct instruction is the better tool for a particular lesson, the presence of a laptop does not need to dictate the pedagogy. Read The Guardian’s report on the Australian debate Read Jason Clare’s ABC Breakfast interview Featured image: Ashutosh Gupta / Unsplash.

Microsoft 365 Copilot is part of the wider AI rollout and training being expanded for educators. Image: Microsoft. Microsoft and the Philippines Department of Education are expanding their AI partnership, with Microsoft 365 Copilot access planned for one million public-school teachers. The programme goes beyond tool access. Microsoft says AI-skilling initiatives have already attracted more than 175,000 educator registrations, while nearly 75,000 educators joined its flagship live training. A Reading Progress and Reading Coach pilot has also reached 3,431 students across eight regions, generating 8,381 reading submissions and training more than 2,100 teachers. Why it matters for international schools The scale is notable, but the more useful lesson for school leaders is the implementation model: access is being paired with training, governance and evidence of classroom use. International schools considering staff-wide AI tools will need the same supporting structures if adoption is to move beyond individual experimentation. Source: Microsoft announcement

Educators appear to be holding two ideas at once: artificial intelligence is likely to become a bigger part of education, while more screen time is not necessarily better for students. McGraw Hill’s 2026 Global Education Insights Report surveyed more than 1,300 K–12 and higher-education educators across 19 countries. Excessive screen time emerged as the leading obstacle to student success, while 42% of respondents said students’ ability to focus had declined compared with five years ago. At the same time, nearly nine in 10 educators expect AI use in education to increase. Almost three-quarters said social-emotional support and teacher–student relationships cannot be replaced by AI, and 72% do not expect in-person instructional time to decline over the next decade. The issue is not simply more or less technology For schools, the findings point towards a more useful technology conversation than “digital versus traditional”. The question is whether a tool improves the learning activity enough to justify the additional screen time and attention it requires. That matters as schools adopt more AI-enabled platforms. A useful implementation measure may not be how widely a tool is used, but whether it saves teachers time, improves learning and leaves room for discussion, collaboration, handwriting, practical work and other forms of learning that do not need a device. Read the 2026 McGraw Hill Global Education Insights findings Featured image: Fajar Herlambang STUDIO / Unsplash.

Some schools are moving beyond the question of whether students should be allowed to use AI and towards a more useful one: do students understand when they should not use it? An Associated Press report from the United States highlights districts that are replacing blanket bans with AI-literacy programmes. In Charleston County, teachers and students are being taught about hallucinations, bias, data privacy and the need to verify information rather than simply learning how to write better prompts. The shift reflects a broader definition of AI literacy. Students need to understand what these systems can do, where they can fail, what information should not be shared with them and when using AI would undermine the thinking or practice a task is designed to develop. A useful distinction for schools For international schools developing AI guidance, this is a practical distinction. A policy can explain where AI is permitted, but students also need enough judgement to decide whether it is appropriate. That might mean checking an AI-generated explanation against reliable sources, choosing to solve a problem independently before asking for assistance, or recognising that a reflective task loses much of its value if the thinking is outsourced. The strongest AI-literacy programmes may therefore be the ones that teach students both how to use the technology and how to work effectively without it. Read the Associated Press report Featured image: Gaurav Tiwari / Unsplash.

Hong Kong’s Education Bureau is putting artificial intelligence into the language of whole-school planning, not just classroom experimentation. Under its new digital education blueprint, publicly funded schools are being asked to incorporate digital education into School Development Plans and Annual School Plans for 2026–27. The Education Bureau is supporting that work with “AI Leadership” training for school heads, deputy heads and relevant middle leaders. The strategic sessions cover how AI and digital education can sit within the school planning–implementation–evaluation cycle, alongside curriculum planning and the territory’s AI Literacy Learning Framework. That framework asks schools to help students “learn AI well”, “use AI effectively” and “use AI responsibly”. Why this matters The immediate policy applies to Hong Kong’s publicly funded sector, but the planning model is relevant well beyond it. For international-school leaders, it is another reminder that AI decisions increasingly touch curriculum, professional learning, assessment, governance and communication with families. The useful question is becoming less about which individual AI tool a school should adopt and more about what a coherent, school-wide approach should look like — and how leaders will know whether it is working. The first strategic sessions are being held on 24 and 25 August, with reruns in September and practical planning workshops following later that month and in early October. Read the Hong Kong Education Bureau circular Featured image: Kaden Taylor / Unsplash.

Rubrics are already built into Google Classroom; Gemini can now draft one directly from the assignment context. Image: Google. Google Classroom can now use Gemini to draft a rubric directly from the assignment a teacher is creating. The new option sits in the Rubrics section of the assignment workflow. Gemini uses the assignment context to propose criteria for a Classroom-ready rubric, which the teacher can review and edit before adding it. Existing options for converting rubric files and drafting rubrics through the Gemini tab remain available. Why this matters Rubrics often take time to structure well, particularly when teachers are trying to align criteria closely with the task. Generating a first draft inside the assignment workflow could reduce setup time without handing the final judgement to AI. The important part is the review step. A generated rubric still needs the teacher to check whether the criteria actually reflect the intended learning, level of challenge and evidence expected from students. The feature is available to Google Workspace for Education Fundamentals, Standard and Plus users over 18 where Gemini in Classroom is enabled. Read Google’s original announcement →

Apple Classroom already lets teachers guide student devices during lessons; new controls will broaden this to approved sets of apps and websites. Image: Apple. Apple is preparing new Classroom controls that will let teachers run lessons across a selected set of apps and websites without giving students unrestricted access to the rest of their device. Coming later this year with new Classroom features for iPadOS 27 and macOS 27, teachers will be able to create sessions that allow several approved apps or web pages at once. The list can be changed during a lesson without ending the session. Apple is also adding guided browsing, which can keep student devices on one or more teacher-selected websites while still allowing the teacher to move the class to a new URL when needed. Why this matters Current classroom-management tools can sometimes force a choice between locking students into one app and leaving the whole device open. A controlled multi-app session is closer to how many lessons actually work: students may need an LMS, a browser, notes and a subject-specific app in the same activity. For schools with managed Apple devices, the change could give teachers more flexibility to reduce distractions without making digital lessons unnecessarily restrictive. The features are still pre-release, so details may change before final release. Read Apple’s WWDC26 education update →

Microsoft Teams already allows teachers to organise students into assignment groups; Learning Groups will add differentiated resources within the same assignment. Interface image: ClassPoint. Microsoft is adding a Learning Groups option to Teams Assignments, giving teachers a simpler way to provide different resources to different groups of students within the same task. Microsoft says teachers will be able to attach different documents, URLs or other resources to groups inside one assignment. Teams already lets educators reuse groups from previous assignments and move students between groups after an assignment has been published without recreating the task or losing existing work. Microsoft said the new differentiated-content option would be available in August. Why this matters Differentiation often creates extra administration: duplicate assignments, separate resource sets and repeated changes when student needs shift. Keeping those variations within one assignment could make group-based support easier to manage. The feature may be particularly useful for reading groups, language support or scaffolded resources, where students are working towards the same broad task but need different starting points or materials. Read Microsoft’s education update →