report UNESCO
Guidance for generative AI in education and research
Global guidance shaping the site’s education-specific AI framing and policy caution.
Published Sep 6, 2023 · Accessed Mar 5, 2026
Methodology
How AIForEdu evaluates tools and resources.
The goal is not to produce hype-friendly rankings. It is to help educators and institutions make more defensible decisions by separating verified signals, open questions, and vendor claims.
Editorial owner
Qaisar Roonjha
Founding Editor · Education Technology & Policy
Leads AIForEdu's editorial research on AI tools, policy, and implementation for educators and institutions worldwide.
AI tool evaluationEducation technology strategyPolicy and governanceDigital equity
Review pillars
Privacy
FERPA and COPPA posture, student-data handling, contract review prompts, and claims that matter to districts.
Instructional value
Whether the tool meaningfully supports teaching, learning, or leadership workflows in a school setting.
Implementation
Setup burden, governance implications, training overhead, and likelihood of successful rollout.
Transparency
Pricing clarity, documentation quality, and how much of the vendor story can be independently checked.
Evidence standards
Vendor-stated
Claim appears in public vendor copy or documentation but has not yet been independently corroborated.
Document-reviewed
AIForEdu reviewed published documentation such as pricing pages, privacy policies, or compliance materials.
Operationally observed
AIForEdu directly tested a workflow, product behavior, or implementation path relevant to school use.
Editorial ownership
AIForEdu is published by the Impact Glocal editorial and research team. The current operation is organized as a small editorial workflow, not as a fully staffed newsroom. Pages should avoid implying more scale or individual attribution than the site can currently support.
Every major page should link back to the editor or desk responsible for the content, the evidence level used, and the public sources checked. If AIForEdu cannot verify a claim, the page should say that explicitly instead of presenting the claim as settled fact.
How the editorial desk works
Editorial research desk
Maps the AI vendor landscape, reviews product documentation, and translates product claims into language that educators and institutions can actually use.
Policy and governance desk
Focuses on privacy, academic integrity, family communication, and the governance decisions schools, universities, and education systems actually have to make.
Implementation and adoption desk
Evaluates rollout friction, training burden, workflow fit, and the practical questions teams ask before they formalize AI use.
Update policy
Tool pages should show when they were last reviewed. Significant vendor changes, pricing shifts, or policy changes should trigger page updates or clearly noted caveats.
Guides, policies, and comparisons should show their last update date and the public source trail behind the page. High-stakes decisions still require local policy, procurement, and legal review.
Sources
Public references used to shape AIForEdu methodology
policy U.S. Department of Education
Protecting Student Privacy
Federal student-privacy reference used throughout policy, compliance, and approval guidance.
Accessed Mar 5, 2026
regulation Federal Trade Commission
Children’s Privacy
Official COPPA reference used for family communication, child-data, and consent discussions.
Accessed Mar 5, 2026