There's no official list of approved AI tools for schools — approval is your decision. Here's a practical framework for deciding what goes on pupil devices, and how to manage it.
There is no national approved list
Worth stating plainly, because schools often go looking for one. No body publishes a definitive list of AI tools approved for UK school devices. Approval is a decision your school or trust makes, based on your data protection position, your safeguarding duties and your pupils' ages. That means you need a process, not a list.
The criteria that should drive approval
- Age requirements — many AI tools set a minimum age of 13 or higher, which rules them out for primary pupil use entirely
- Data protection — what happens to anything entered? Is there a suitable agreement in place?
- Content safety — are there guardrails against harmful output?
- Teacher visibility — can staff see what pupils are doing?
- Educational purpose — does it do something you actually need?
- Manageability — can it be controlled through your MDM or admin console?
The age point catches many schools out. Most mainstream AI assistants require users to be 13+ — so putting them on primary pupil devices breaches the provider's own terms regardless of your view on the educational merits. Check the minimum age before anything else; it often ends the discussion.
Managed education versions
Where your school already uses Google Workspace or Microsoft 365, the education versions of their AI tools are usually the most straightforward route — they come with admin controls, existing data agreements and age-appropriate configuration. See Google Gemini for schools and Microsoft Copilot for education.
Staff devices versus pupil devices
These are different decisions and should be treated separately. A tool entirely inappropriate for pupil devices may be perfectly sensible for staff — with the usual rule that no pupil personal data goes into it. Don't let the pupil-device question block staff access, or vice versa.
A workable approval process
- Someone requests a tool, with a stated educational purpose
- Check the minimum age and terms of service
- DPO reviews data handling; DPIA if needed
- DSL considers safeguarding and content risk
- IT confirms it can be managed and monitored
- Decision recorded, and the approved list updated
- Reviewed annually — tools change
Write this into your AI policy so requests follow a route rather than landing on whoever is nearest.
Blocking isn't a complete answer
You can and should block unapproved AI on school devices — but pupils have phones, and blocking alone teaches nothing. Pair technical controls with teaching pupils to use AI appropriately. See pupils bypassing filters and which AI is best for school students.
Need help deciding what to approve?
We help schools build an approval process their DPO and DSL are happy with. AskColin gives schools low-cost monthly support with one-to-one help whenever you need it — so when you're stuck on a real job at 8am, there's someone to ask. Practical, jargon-free, built around your team.
Get one-to-one AI support for your schoolFrequently asked questions
Is there an official list of approved AI tools for schools?
No. No UK body publishes a definitive approved list — approval is a decision your school or trust makes based on data protection, safeguarding duties and pupil ages. What you need is a process rather than a list.
What age do pupils need to be to use AI tools?
Most mainstream AI assistants require users to be 13 or older, which rules them out for primary pupil use regardless of educational merit. Check the minimum age in the provider's terms before anything else — it often ends the discussion.
What criteria should schools use to approve AI tools?
Age requirements, data protection and whether a suitable agreement exists, content safety guardrails, teacher visibility of pupil activity, genuine educational purpose, and whether it can be managed through your MDM or admin console.
Should staff and pupil AI access be decided together?
No, they're separate decisions. A tool inappropriate for pupil devices may be perfectly sensible for staff, with the usual rule that no pupil personal data goes into it. Don't let the pupil question block staff access or vice versa.