Embracing AI Within Ofsted's Framework

Summary: Ofsted's position on AI isn't "ban it" or "embrace it blindly". It's closer to: use it where it genuinely improves education, keep it safe and fair, be clear about how it's used, and make sure humans remain accountable. That's exactly the direction I've tried to take with TeachEdge.

Ofsted and AI: more pragmatic than people expect

Unless you're teaching remotely on Mars, you've noticed the educational landscape shifting fast as AI becomes part of normal working life.

Ofsted's policy paper "Ofsted's approach to AI" (published 24 April 2024) sets out two key things:

1. how Ofsted will use AI in its own work, and
2. what it expects when education providers use AI

The tone is broadly aligned with the Government's pro-innovation approach: recognise the benefits, but hold onto principles like safety, fairness, and transparency.

In other words: don't panic — but don't be careless either.

What Ofsted is really signalling to schools

When you strip away the policy language, the practical message is:

1) AI is allowed — but responsibility stays with the school

AI can support teaching, admin, and assessment. But accountability doesn't move to the tool. Leaders and teachers are still responsible for what's done with it.

2) Safety, security, and robustness matter

Schools should be able to explain how they're protecting students and staff:

• what data is being shared
• where it goes
• who can access it
• how risks are managed

3) Transparency and explainability aren't optional extras

If a tool is influencing decisions, feedback, or learning, the school needs to be able to say (in plain English) what it's doing and why.

4) Human oversight is non-negotiable

A recurring theme is contestability and redress: staff must be able to challenge, override, and correct AI outputs — and there should be a sensible process if something goes wrong.

5) Fairness and bias must be taken seriously

Schools should assume that bias is a live risk with AI and take reasonable steps to monitor and mitigate it.

Where TeachEdge fits the framework

TeachEdge is designed around a simple idea: AI should draft; teachers should decide.

That "human-in-the-loop" approach is exactly what makes AI feel legitimate in a school setting.

More practice without sacrificing standards

One of the biggest wins with TeachEdge is that teachers can assign more extended writing because the first-pass workload becomes manageable.

That matters, because students improve through:

• repetition
• timely feedback
• opportunities to redraft

Without support, we often ration essays simply because there aren't enough hours in the week.

Draft feedback, then teacher refinement

TeachEdge can suggest an initial mark and draft feedback, but the crucial step is that teachers can:

• review what's been generated
• edit it
• personalise it
• and only then release it to students

That keeps the process grounded in professional judgement, and it also strengthens student trust: they know a teacher is standing behind what they're reading.

Data, insight, and the boring-but-important efficiency bit

Ofsted also talks about efficiency and generating insights from data. In practice, this is the "less glamorous" advantage of AI:

• less time spent on repetitive drafting
• more time for high-value feedback and planning
• clearer patterns across a class (common misconceptions, weak chains of reasoning, missing evaluation)

Used properly, that's not cutting corners — it's reallocating teacher time to the bits that actually move learning forward.

What I'd want a school to be able to say in an inspection

If an inspector asked, "How are you using AI responsibly?", a strong answer looks like:

• We use AI to support staff workload and improve feedback quality.
• Staff remain accountable and review outputs where it matters.
• We protect data and understand what's being shared.
• We can explain to students and parents what AI is doing (and what it isn't doing).
• We have a simple policy and staff know how to follow it.

That's it. No grand claims. No tech theatre. Just calm, professional practice.

Practical checklist for using AI in a way that won't come back to bite you

• Have a short, written AI policy (even if it's only a page).
• Be clear about which tasks are "drafting support" vs "decision-making".
• Keep humans in the loop for anything high-stakes.
• Make sure staff can override outputs and know they're expected to.
• Don't feed sensitive student data into tools you don't understand.
• Be transparent with students about how feedback is produced and checked.
• Review tools periodically: is it helping, and is it being used responsibly?

Notes

Ofsted (the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills) is the independent government body responsible for inspecting and regulating schools, colleges, and other educational institutions in England.

The policy paper referred to in this article can be found here:

• https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ofsteds-approach-to-ai

Gary Roebuck is Head of Economics at Holy Cross School, New Malden and the creator of TeachEdge.