Turning department AI guidance into school practice

Department AI guidance already sets the rules, so a school does not need to write its own from scratch. The work is translation. Read the guidance as a list of jobs, sort each line by how firmly it binds, give every job an owner and a place in your school’s routines, write it in your own words with the source beside it, and check it again each year. Your school’s documents then build on the guidance instead of competing with it.

The guidance already exists

In Victoria, the Department of Education publishes its generative AI rules in its Policy and Advisory Library. The Generative Artificial Intelligence policy (read 25 September 2026) sets requirements for schools that choose to use these tools, and its Guidance tab covers protecting privacy and personal data, appropriate use, and academic integrity. The policy page says the department designed it to complement the Australian Framework for Generative AI in Schools, which has six principles and 25 guiding statements.

Those requirements bind Victorian government schools. Catholic and independent schools, and schools in other states and territories, check your sector’s or state’s rules [CHECK CURRENT GUIDANCE: each state and territory, and Catholic and independent sector bodies]. The steps below work with any set of guidance.

We matched this article to the department’s published policy. The department has not reviewed this guide.

Sort each line by how firmly it binds

Policy language has levels, and staff deserve to know which is which. A useful first pass is to copy each requirement into a simple table with three columns: must, should, and encouraged.

In Victorian government schools, the policy (read 25 September 2026) uses all three levels. Schools must get opt-in consent from parents and carers before using a tool that needs personal information beyond a student’s school email address and a password. Schools should give students the chance to opt out when no personal information is needed, and should make sure AI use is disclosed when it has an impact on others. Schools are encouraged to define the expected benefits and risks of a tool before they bring it in. The department’s guidance on appropriate use (read 25 September 2026) adds that schools are strongly encouraged to set up a tool’s privacy settings so that student prompts are not disclosed to others or used to train the AI model.

Once the lines are sorted, the school can see what it has no choice about, and where it has room to decide. That makes later conversations with staff easier, because the firm rules are settled and the rest can be shaped together.

Turn each rule into a job with an owner

A line that says “schools must” does not say who in the school does the work. That gap is where good policy gets lost. For each line, write down three things: the job, the role that owns it, and where the record lives.

Take the consent rule. The job includes deciding which tools need consent, sending families a letter with a clear notice, keeping the replies, and planning a different activity with the same learning goal for students without consent. The owner might be the school’s privacy contact, and the record might sit in your usual consent app.

Or take the software rule. In Victorian government schools, the Software and Administration Systems policy (read 25 September 2026) says that before the school adopts new software that handles personal or sensitive information, someone must check the Arc Software catalogue for a Safer Technologies 4 Schools (ST4S) report and act on it. Name the role that does this, and record the result on your approved tool list. Our article on approving AI tools turns that step into a short process.

Use roles rather than names throughout, so your documents still work when staff change.

Write it in your school’s words, with the source beside it

Staff are more likely to follow a rule when they can see its reason and where it comes from. Rewrite each line in plain words for your setting, and keep a link to the source next to it. Tag rules that come from department policy “In Victorian government schools”, so staff can tell them apart from choices your school has made. If you go further than the policy, for example by asking staff to keep families’ details out of AI tools as well, mark that clearly as your school’s own addition.

Keep the original wording one click away. If a parent or staff member asks why a rule exists, the answer should be a link they can follow, not someone’s memory of a meeting.

Build it into routines you already have

Practice changes when rules appear in the documents people already use, such as task sheets that staff and students see every week.

In Victorian government schools, the department’s guidance on appropriate use (read 25 September 2026) suggests that school-wide expectations for AI use can be included in the school’s Acceptable Use Agreement, so add your student rules there. The policy (read 25 September 2026) strongly encourages Victorian government schools to manage academic integrity risks, which can include designing assessments with generative AI in mind, so add a line to every assessment task that tells students whether AI is allowed, and how. Put the staff rules into induction for new staff and relief teachers. Mention approved tools and their purpose when you write to parents.

For one example of assessment practice that keeps the teacher’s judgement in charge, read AI and maths tests.

Check it again when the guidance changes

Guidance changes, and so do the tools it covers. The Victorian policy page, which we read on 25 September 2026, shows the policy was last updated on 18 June 2024 and the page itself on 17 June 2025. The guidance on appropriate use (read 25 September 2026) shows an update on 25 November 2025. Your school’s documents should carry the same kind of information.

Put a “last checked against policy” date on each document, and set a yearly review in the school calendar. Check again whenever the department or your sector announces a change. Always check against the live policy page rather than a saved copy or a summary, including this one.

The founder, a teacher, put the reason simply: “Things are changing so fast even this opinion might change.” A dated document with its sources listed makes that change manageable, because anyone can see what was checked and when.

To see whether your school’s rules have been checked against your department or sector policy in the last 12 months, and what to do next, take the free readiness check.