AI doesn't need its own separate safeguarding policy — it needs to be woven into the one you already have. The DSL's role doesn't change; what changes is the number of places AI could quietly introduce risk if it isn't accounted for.
Three areas to think through
- Content shown to pupils — AI-generated text or images should always be reviewed by a member of staff before pupils see them. AI tools can produce confident, plausible, and occasionally inaccurate or inappropriate content.
- Pupil use of AI tools — if pupils have any access to AI (directly or through an app), the same filtering and monitoring standards that apply to internet access should apply here.
- Disclosures and sensitive information — staff should never route a safeguarding concern or disclosure through an AI tool for drafting or "help wording it," even with good intentions.
A simple staff rule of thumb
If you wouldn't post it on a public forum, don't put it into a public AI tool. That one sentence, said in an INSET session, does more to change behaviour than a lengthy policy document — and it's a rule every member of staff, from NQT to headteacher, can apply instantly without needing to think through the technical detail of how a given tool works.
Where this fits with Keeping Children Safe in Education
Your existing KCSiE-aligned safeguarding policy already sets the standard for how staff handle sensitive information, use school systems, and escalate concerns. AI use should be assessed against that same standard, not treated as a separate, novel category of risk requiring an entirely new framework. Add a short, specific AI paragraph rather than bolting on a parallel policy.
Key takeaways
- Fold AI into your existing safeguarding policy rather than writing a separate one.
- Never route a safeguarding disclosure through an AI tool.
- Involve your DSL in AI governance conversations from the start.