Most advice on AI marking and planning tools starts with a list of apps. That ages quickly, and a list says little about whether a tool is safe for your pupils' work. A more durable starting point is what the supplier should be able to show you.

The Department for Education's Generative AI: product safety standards (page updated 19 January 2026) set out the capabilities and features that generative AI products should meet to be considered safe in educational settings. They are mainly for developers and suppliers. DfE adds that schools and colleges may find them helpful in assessing which AI products are safe for use in education. They apply in England; if you teach elsewhere, check your own authority's guidance.

Which use case is the tool?

The standards ask suppliers to say which educational use cases a product is for. Two matter to a teacher's own work:

  • Assessment and analytics: tools that automate the marking of student work, provide performance analytics and offer personalised feedback.
  • Content creation and delivery: tools that generate instructional materials such as lesson plans, presentations and educational videos.

The standards say the intended use case should be clear to all users, educators and purchasers, and that suppliers should provide sufficient evidence that the product satisfies its stated purpose.

Ask: Which use cases is this product intended for, which age of learner is it for, and where is that written down?

Does the evidence match the claim?

The standards say suppliers should not exaggerate the impact or capabilities of their tools, and that claims should be supported by robust and transparent evidence.

Ask: What evidence supports "saves hours" or "accurate marking"? Who ran it, on which pupils and which subjects, and can I read it?

What happens to pupil data?

For learner and teacher-facing products, the standards set these expectations. The product should:

  • give a clear privacy notice covering what data is collected, why, and how it is processed, stored and shared;
  • say where data will be processed, and whether safeguards are in place if that is outside the UK or EU;
  • carry out a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) during development and across the tool's life;
  • comply with the ICO's Children's code if it processes personal data;
  • not collect, store, share or use personal data for any commercial purposes, including further model training and fine-tuning, without confirmation of an appropriate lawful basis.

The standards also say that, unless the copyright owner gives permission, inputs should not be collected, stored or shared for commercial purposes, including model training, product improvement and product development. For under-18s the permission must come from a parent or guardian. For teachers, DfE says the copyright owner is likely to be their employer, if the work was created in the course of employment.

Ask: Can I see the privacy notice and the DPIA? Is pupil or teacher work used to train or improve your models or product, and whose permission is that based on? Where is it processed?

Your school will have its own data protection lead and policy. Check with them before pupil work goes into any tool, and use the pupil-data checklist in our teachers' guide.

Has it been tested, and who is accountable?

The standards expect sufficient testing with a diverse and realistic range of users and use cases, testing of new versions or models before release, and a product that consistently performs as intended. On governance, they expect a risk assessment for every product, a formal complaints mechanism through which safety issues can be escalated and resolved quickly, and available policies governing AI safety decisions.

Ask: How is each new model version tested before release? What is the process if I find a wrong or unsafe output, and who answers?

What the standards do not tell you

They do not tell you whether a tool marks well. That is a separate question, and the evidence is thin; our teachers' guide covers what we found and why the mark should stay with you. They also do not name approved products. Treat a supplier's statement that it follows the standards as a claim to check, not a certificate.

FAQ

Do these standards apply to my school? They are DfE guidance for England, aimed at suppliers. Schools may use them to help assess products. The page does not present them as a legal requirement on a teacher.

Is a tool that meets them safe to use with any pupil work? No. Your school's data policy still applies. Ask your data protection lead first.

Which tools meet the standards? We have not assessed any product against them, and we do not rank tools here.

Sources

  1. UK Department for Education, "Generative AI: product safety standards", updated 19 January 2026: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/generative-ai-product-safety-standards/generative-ai-product-safety-standards