AI that actually helps schools

Australia ranks fourth among developed nations for AI use in teaching, according to the OECD's latest survey. Yet many school leaders are still working out where AI adds genuine value and where caution is needed. Chris Smith, Civica's executive vice president and managing director for the APAC region, argues that the schools benefiting most are those focused on people, purpose and student outcomes rather than the technology itself. This feature examines how purpose-driven, data-governed approaches are helping Australian schools get more from AI.

How are Australian schools currently using AI in classrooms and administration?

Australian schools are applying AI across lesson planning, assessment support, student wellbeing tracking and personalised learning. Australia ranks fourth among developed nations for AI use in teaching, according to the OECD's latest survey, a position that reflects broad but still uneven adoption. A separate industry survey found 78.2% of secondary schools are now using AI-powered education tools. Chris Smith, Civica's executive vice president and managing director for the APAC region, says the priority must be practical impact rather than chasing the newest technology. 'Our approach to AI is deliberately focused on practical impact over "AI theatre",' Smith says. 'We're embedding AI to reduce administrative burden, surface insights faster and support better decision-making – not replace educators.' Smith says the most valuable applications include cutting administrative workload and turning complex data into clear, actionable insights for school leaders.

What are the main risks and challenges principals face when adopting AI in schools?

Principals must manage privacy, trust, accuracy, staff confidence and student learning impact all at once when introducing AI. Smith says the tension between innovation and day-to-day operational pressure is real and should not be underestimated. 'It's entirely understandable that schools prioritise business as usual, particularly in constrained environments,' he says. 'The key is positioning AI not as an additional initiative but to strengthen and streamline what already matters.' Addressing trust early, through open conversations about data privacy, security and ethical use, is equally important to long-term adoption. Smith says empowering early adopters to demonstrate value is one of the most reliable ways to build confidence across the broader school community. Schools that take this approach tend to see smoother, more lasting change than those pursuing large-scale rollouts all at once.

How can school principals build teacher confidence and buy-in for AI projects?

Building buy-in starts with recognising that many educators are already willing to engage with AI. 'Many educators are already experimenting with AI,' Smith says. 'The opportunity is to provide safe, structured and supported ways to use it effectively.' Smith argues the question should shift from whether teachers know enough about AI to whether they feel supported to use it confidently in their daily work. He recommends spotlighting early adopters who can demonstrate clear wins for their colleagues, rather than relying on top-down mandates. 'AI adoption isn't about driving change for its own sake; it's about enabling staff to do their jobs better, with greater confidence,' he says. Sustainable change, Smith adds, comes from incremental progress, early wins and continuous feedback rather than large, disruptive shifts that can erode confidence across a school.

What does best-practice AI adoption in schools look like in 2026?

Best-practice AI use in 2026 is grounded in purpose and governance rather than novelty. Smith says the starting point is always solving real problems that educators and students actually face. 'In 2026, AI best practice in schools is defined by a few consistent principles,' he says. 'It starts with being purpose-driven, using AI to solve real challenges rather than adopting technology for its own sake.' Keeping educators at the centre of decision-making is equally important, underpinned by secure, well-governed and high-quality data. Schools also need transparency about how AI-generated insights are produced, so staff can trust the outputs they are being asked to act on. Taking an incremental approach and building confidence through focused, high-impact use cases is the most reliable path to lasting adoption across the whole school.

How can AI help school leaders improve student attendance and wellbeing tracking?

Student attendance in Australian schools has declined sharply over recent years. Only 59.8% of students in Years 1–10 attended at least 90% of school days in 2024, down from 73.1% in 2019. Smith says AI tools can surface attendance and wellbeing trends before they become serious concerns for individual students or year groups. 'Schools don't lack data; they often lack clarity,' he says. 'Our focus is on closing that gap by translating data into simple, contextual insights that leaders can act on immediately.' Smith says the goal is to help schools spot patterns that might otherwise go unnoticed in large, busy environments, while prioritising the insights that matter most rather than overwhelming staff with dashboards full of numbers they cannot easily interpret or act upon.

How should schools handle data privacy and governance when implementing AI?

Data governance is the foundation of any responsible AI implementation, and Smith says trust is non-negotiable. 'Critically, this is underpinned by secure, governed data environments,' he says. 'AI is only valuable if it's trusted.' This means strong controls around privacy, transparency and responsible data use at every level of the organisation. Smith says the real goal is giving educators more time and better information to focus on student outcomes, but only where data quality and security are properly managed from the outset. Civica's Education Suite brings together student, wellbeing, finance and operational data in one place, helping school leaders connect information that previously sat in separate systems. Smith says this kind of integrated approach reduces manual workload while giving leaders a clearer, more accurate picture of what is happening across their school.

How should principals guide teachers and students as AI develops faster than curriculum guidance?

School leaders must guide staff and students through change that outpaces formal curriculum guidance and government policy. 'For principals, one of the biggest challenges is guiding teachers and students through an area that's evolving faster than curriculum, teaching standards and government guidance can realistically keep pace with,' Smith says. He sees this as a clear opportunity for technology partners to work alongside education systems rather than ahead of them. The most effective schools are not trying to become AI experts overnight. Instead, they are building a growth mindset, offering safe tools and clear frameworks, and encouraging thoughtful experimentation within boundaries staff feel comfortable with. 'When educators feel supported rather than overwhelmed, adoption follows naturally,' Smith says. This steady, people-first approach is, in his view, what separates schools that succeed with AI from those that stall.

Featured expert

Chris Smith: executive vice president and managing director, APAC, Civica; leads Civica's education and technology work across the APAC region; Civica was founded in 2001 and supports more than 6,000 customers globally; the company's software and solutions are used by over 100 million citizens across government, education, and health and care in seven countries.