Written by Matthew Esterman
Australian schools are now entering the era of artificial intelligence, whether they planned for it or not. Teachers are using generative AI tools to reduce planning time, customize activities for different learners in the classroom, and explore many other new ways of working. Students will turn to AI for explanations, drafts, summaries, and even shortcuts, leaving teachers to guess whose work is being graded. Leaders are finding opportunities to make workflows more efficient and redirect staff efforts to new and better initiatives.
With constant updates, new platforms, new features, and shifts in focus, it has been extremely difficult to find solid footing when it comes to AI in schools.
A principal recently said to me: AI already exists and is advancing faster than our systems, policies, and capabilities can keep up.
Expectations are high, but so are the risks. Who wouldn’t want to deal with the extreme workload that school staff and leaders are currently experiencing? Who wouldn’t want to meet the diverse needs of the students in their classroom? But who exactly is responsible for AI driving innovation in schools? And who is responsible if something goes wrong?
Much of my work begins in the field of teaching and learning. What role is AI currently playing in our schools and students’ lives? How can we change our practices and assessments to meet this challenge? What practical strategies can we use today to realize the potential of AI? But AI will impact every aspect of our schools as places we learn, as places we work, and as communities.
The tension between vast opportunities and real vulnerabilities is forcing schools to rethink their approaches to governance, policy, risk and innovation all at once.
Now, a growing number of school leaders are turning to DecisionLine’s practical two-step model as a way to take back control—to give innovation a safer runway rather than slowing it down.
Opportunity: An extra hand for every teacher
For exhausted staff, AI may feel like the first real relief in years. Initial trials have shown that teachers are saving time each week on planning, management and resource generation. Generative AI helps teachers:
- Turn syllabus dot points into fully differentiated lesson sequences
- Instantly generate exemplars, rubrics, and feedback
- Adjust reading materials for students with additional needs
- Streamline communications and reporting
- Summarize behavioral data and health trends
For students, the possibilities are equally appealing. Used as a tutor or “teacher after hours” (students’ direct term), AI can analyze complex ideas, give customized practice questions, and simulate real-world scenarios. When done well, this allows teachers to be incredibly responsive to the complexities of modern classrooms.
Risk: safety, integrity and reliability on the line
But alongside this incredible potential, concerns are also real and growing.
Leaders have reported challenges with academic integrity, the rapid spread of AI-generated misinformation, and students’ overreliance on “black box” advocates. There are also pressing questions about child safety, privacy, data storage, the threat of deepfakes, and the trustworthiness of AI-generated content.
Hallucinations, biased output, privacy violations, and misuse are already impacting schools more than many realize.
Students are also using AI in ways that don’t fit into the “teaching and learning” or “IT systems” boxes where AI is often used. Every school now has students who have AI boyfriends or girlfriends. They may not realize they’re using it this way, but they’re definitely building a relationship with the machine that goes far beyond the transactional demands of an essay.
Many leaders admit they still lack clear policies, trained staff, and governance structures to address emerging risks. ASBA research in early 2025 found that only 25% of governing bodies were briefed on AI. And as AI-related laws tighten, schools know they will soon be required to demonstrate much more oversight and documentation than they currently have.
What school boards and principals say is missing is not enthusiasm for the potential of AI, but a safe, structured way to implement it without damaging students, staff, the school’s culture or reputation.
From uncertainty to action: A two-step response
This is where DecisionLine’s two-step approach started to resonate. Not because schools want a different framework, but because they need a way out of uncertainty.
The model is simple.
- Stage 1 builds stability.
- Stage 2 allows for safe deployment.
Leaders describe this as less of a governance framework and more like finally having a map to guide them.
Stage 1: Build a safety net before building your future
The first step, “Setting the Foundation,” addresses the issues schools are most concerned about: unclear decision-making, inconsistent practices, and unknown risks.
Schools begin with leadership alignment, ensuring boards and executives understand both the promise and the risks. Many misconceptions will be cleared up here. Leaders will discover how widely AI is already used by teachers and students, and how much it is at risk without a clear stance.
Next, establish context. This means assessing current staff usage, student behavior, existing systems, and risk appetite. What emerges is often a confrontational but necessary baseline.
The school will then appoint an AI lead and cross-functional team. This is not about becoming “AI people” as an exclusive club, but ensuring that governance, education, benefits, ICT, compliance and data management are all represented. This is where siled decision-making begins to break down.
With the right people at the table, schools can define their AI strategy, update related policies, conduct staff training, and assess data governance and cybersecurity vulnerabilities. These steps, along with strategic planning, risk analysis, and stakeholder engagement, form what we call the school’s AI safety capsule. This is the core of protection to stabilize your organization and prepare for a secure deployment.
Leaders who have carried out Stage 1 describe it as the moment when fear disappears. They know where the risks are, who is responsible for what, and what guardrails are in place.
Only then will they begin to move.
Stage 2: Deploy AI with eyes wide open
Once the foundations are in place, the school moves from “staying strong” to “moving forward with purpose.”
Stage 2 focuses on organizational adoption. That means identifying where AI can have the most positive impact (whether in learning, health, or operations) and piloting those use cases under controlled conditions. Instead of a full-scale rollout or frenzied chaos, schools will conduct targeted testing.
- The 9th grade English team may test AI-assisted feedback.
- Welfare teams may try early warning systems.
- Management teams might experiment with AI-powered workflows.
These pilots are closely monitored for impact, safety, accuracy, and alignment with the school’s values. Only once the use case is proven to be safe, effective, and within the school’s risk tolerance can we move forward with broader deployment.
The implementation roadmap is as follows: This is something most schools have never experienced before with technology. Outline who uses what, when, in what training, and under what conditions. Evaluation and continuous improvement close the loop.
This means that AI adoption will be measured, documented, accountable, and repeatable on the backend. Exciting, ambitious, situational and empowering on the front end.
A turning point for schools
The story coming out of Australian schools is clear. AI is not the enemy. Nor is he a savior.
This is a powerful new layer in the educational environment. This requires the same level of governance and professional judgment as curriculum, assessment, finance, and safety.
The risks are great, but so are the opportunities. Schools don’t need to stop, they need to plan.
By starting with Stage 1, stabilization efforts, and progressing to Stage 2, structured implementation, schools are finding ways to implement AI without losing their footing. They protect students, empower teachers, build trust with parents, and prepare for future regulations while improving learning and reducing workloads today.
For an industry accustomed to unpredictable change, this two-stage model provides something valuable: confidence. structure. And a path forward that feels truly doable.
If the past two years were about randomly responding to AI, the next two years will be about building systems that allow schools to lead the future rather than chase it.
If you want to learn how you can leverage AI to take your next best step, contact The Next Word here.
Matthew Esterman is the founder and director of The Next Word, a consultancy focused on training, support, and strategies to help schools and other organizations take their use of AI to the next level. Esterman has been a leader in the thoughtful implementation of technology in schools and elsewhere for more than 15 years. He is a trained history teacher with two master’s degrees and has made a significant contribution to professional learning in Australia and overseas.
