Artificial intelligence is already in your school.
Not as a future possibility. Not as a pilot project. It is already being used quietly, pragmatically, and increasingly routinely by teachers across the country.
Recent survey data from primary educators paints a consistent picture: most teachers are now using generative AI tools to support their work. They are planning lessons, creating resources, adapting materials for different learners, and developing their own subject knowledge. In primary science, some are beginning to use AI to design investigations and generate explanations for complex concepts.
The important point is this: teachers have moved ahead. Systems have not.
The question for school leaders is no longer “Should we allow AI?” It is: “How do we support staff to use it well?”
What the Data Tells Us
AI use is already embedded in day-to-day workflow. Most teachers have used AI tools within the past year, and many are now doing so weekly or more. Tools like ChatGPT dominate, but others are appearing alongside them.
The uses are practical, not gimmicky. Teachers are using AI to plan lessons and sequences, create worksheets and questions, adapt materials for different learners, and support their own subject knowledge. In science specifically, there is early use in designing investigations and generating explanations. AI is being used to improve core teaching work, not to replace it.
Workload is improving, but modestly. Most teachers report some reduction in workload. AI is helping with efficiency. It is not transforming teaching overnight, and that is a realistic and healthy starting point.
Teachers are acting professionally. Perhaps the most reassuring finding in the data is this: most teachers always check or edit AI output, and many have already identified inaccuracies or bias. Teachers are not blindly trusting AI. They are applying judgement. That matters, and it suggests the profession is responding responsibly.
Training and guidance are lacking. A large proportion of teachers report no formal training, limited or self-taught use, and unclear or absent school policies. So we now have a situation where AI use is widespread, confidence is mixed, and support is inconsistent. This is where leadership matters most.
The Risk of Doing Nothing
It can be tempting to take a “wait and see” approach, assuming the technology will settle before schools make decisions. The problem is that staff are not waiting.
Without clear expectations, practical guidance, and professional development, teachers will continue to use AI independently, develop habits in isolation, and rely on trial and error. That creates inconsistency at best.
Doing nothing is not a neutral position. It simply leaves staff to work it out alone.
What Schools Should Do Now
Set clear, proportionate expectations. Start by answering a straightforward question: what do we want AI use to look like in our school? This does not need to be a lengthy policy document. Shorter is often better. Focus on acceptable uses (planning, drafting, resource creation), non-negotiables (checking accuracy, protecting pupil data), and professional responsibility. Avoid blanket bans or overly restrictive rules that do not reflect the reality of what is already happening. A useful working principle is this: AI can support professional judgement, but it does not replace it.
Prioritise practical CPD. The survey is clear that teachers want help, but it needs to be practical. Focus professional development on how to write effective prompts, how to refine and improve outputs, how to check for accuracy and bias, and how to use AI for real classroom tasks. Avoid long theoretical sessions about how AI works or generic discussions about the future of education. Teachers need to see how to use this for tomorrow’s lesson. We can help with that. Get in touch!
Make it subject-specific. One of the strongest signals from the data is that teachers want subject-relevant support. In primary science, this could include generating investigation ideas, identifying and addressing misconceptions, creating age-appropriate explanations, and designing retrieval questions. Without subject-specific guidance, there is a risk that AI use becomes superficial or detached from curriculum intent. Done well, it can genuinely strengthen subject knowledge and planning.
Build a culture of critical use. Teachers in the survey are already checking outputs. Schools should reinforce this by making it explicit: always verify AI-generated content, compare it with trusted sources, and be alert to bias and simplification. This is not just about staff. It is also about modelling good practice for pupils, particularly in science, where evaluating evidence is central to what we teach. AI provides a useful opportunity to strengthen critical thinking, not weaken it.
Support the hesitant, not just the confident. Not all staff are using AI with confidence. Where teachers are not engaging, the reasons are predictable: lack of confidence, concerns about accuracy, and uncertainty about what is expected. This is not resistance; it is caution. Schools should provide low-stakes opportunities to explore, share simple starting points, and avoid assuming prior knowledge. A small amount of structured support can make a significant difference.
Classroom Application: Three Steps to Take Now
1. Start the conversation with staff. Before writing a policy, find out what your staff are already doing. A simple anonymous survey or a short staff meeting discussion will give you a much clearer picture than assumptions will. You may find that AI use is already more embedded than you realised.
2. Identify one subject area to pilot subject-specific guidance. Rather than trying to produce whole-school AI guidance in one go, pick a subject where you have a confident lead and develop practical guidance there first. Primary science is a good starting point given the evidence around investigation design and misconception-checking.
3. Run a short, practical session rather than a lecture. Give staff 20 minutes to try a single AI task relevant to their planning, then discuss what they noticed. A brief, hands-on experience will do more than an hour of slides about what AI is and where it came from.
A Leadership Moment
What stands out most from this survey data is not the technology itself. It is the professionalism of teachers. They are adopting new tools, applying judgement, managing risk, and looking for ways to improve their practice.
The role of school leadership is to match that professionalism with clarity, support, and direction.
AI is not coming into schools. It is already there, being used every day by teachers trying to do their job well. The question is no longer whether to engage with it. It is whether schools will provide the support needed to ensure it is used safely, thoughtfully, and effectively.
Get that right, and AI becomes what it should be: a tool that supports good teaching, not something that sits outside it.
AI in Primary Schools: What Leaders Need to Do Next
The Whiteboard Blog – Education, Technology, AI and Science CPD and Support