Children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) must be supported through the education system to fulfil their potential as fully as possible. This is the bottom line for the families of the 1.6 million children with a recognised additional learning need in England, and all those who support them. It needs to be the government’s priority too.

There is no question that the rising number of children receiving extra help has placed pressure on schools and councils. There is wide agreement that the current trajectory is not sustainable. But if plans for reform are shaped around the aim of saving money by removing entitlements, rather than meeting the needs of children by improving schools, they should be expected to fail.

If ministers did not already know this, the Save Our Children’s Rights campaign launched this week ought to help. As it stands, there is no policy of restricting access to the education, health and care plans (EHCPs) that impose a legal duty on councils to provide specified support. But ministers’ criticisms of the adversarial aspects of the current system have led families to conclude that they should prepare for an attempt to remove their enforceable rights. Christine Lenehan, who advises the government, has indicated that the scope of EHCPs could be narrowed, while stressing a commitment to consultation. Tom Rees, who chairs the department for education’s specialist group, bluntly terms it “a bad system”.

Mr Rees’s panel has had its term extended until April. The education select committee will present the conclusions of its inquiry into the Send crisis in the autumn. Both should be listened to carefully. But the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, and her team also need to show that they are capable of engaging beyond the circle of appointed experts and parliamentarians. Parents can make their views known through constituency MPs. Their voices and perspectives need to be heard in Whitehall too.

This is a hugely sensitive policy area. There is nothing parents care more about than the opportunities provided to their children, and this concern is intensified when those children have additional needs. Some positive steps have been taken during Labour’s first year. Increased capital spending on school buildings should make a difference to in-house provision, which relies on the availability of suitable spaces. Ministers are right, too, to focus on teacher training, while inclusion has been given greater prominence in the inspection framework. As with the NHS, there is a welcome emphasis on spreading best practice.

But big questions remain. Families are fearful that accountability mechanisms are going to be removed, and want to know how the new “inclusive mainstream” will be defined and judged. Councils are concerned about what happens to their £5bn in special needs budget deficits, when the so-called statutory override expires in 2028. The concerning role of private equity in special education – which mirrors changes in the children’s social care market – also needs addressing.

Schools need to adapt so that a greater range of pupils can be accommodated. The issue is how the government manages that process. The hope must be that the lesson ministers take from their failure on welfare is that consultation on highly sensitive changes, affecting millions of lives, must be thorough. In order to make change, they must build consensus.

• Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping industries across the globe, and education in Africa is no exception. From personalized learning platforms to AI-driven teacher training, the continent is witnessing a surge in innovative solutions tackling longstanding challenges. In this Q&A Insights piece, we dive into how AI is revolutionizing education, addressing questions from our iAfrica community about its impact, opportunities, and hurdles.

What are the biggest challenges in African education that AI can address?

Africa’s education sector faces issues like limited access to quality resources, teacher shortages, and diverse linguistic needs. AI can bridge these gaps in practical ways. For instance, AI-powered platforms like Eneza Education provide mobile-based learning in local languages, reaching students in remote areas with affordable, interactive content. Adaptive learning systems analyze student performance to tailor lessons, ensuring kids in overcrowded classrooms get personalized attention. AI also supports teacher training through virtual simulations, helping educators refine skills without costly in-person workshops.

“AI can democratize education by making high-quality resources accessible to students in rural areas.” – Dr. Aisha Mwinyi, EdTech Researcher

How is AI being used to improve access to education?

Access is a critical issue, with millions of African children out of school due to distance, poverty, or conflict. AI is stepping in with scalable solutions. Chatbots and virtual tutors, like those developed by Ustad Mobile, deliver bite-sized lessons via SMS or WhatsApp, working on basic phones for low-income communities. In Nigeria, uLesson uses AI to stream offline-capable video lessons, bypassing unreliable internet. These tools ensure learning continues in areas with limited infrastructure, from refugee camps to rural villages.

Can AI help with language barriers in education?

Absolutely. Africa’s linguistic diversity—over 2,000 languages—creates unique challenges. AI-driven translation tools, such as those integrated into Kolibri by Learning Equality, adapt content into local languages like Swahili, Yoruba, or Amharic. Speech-to-text and text-to-speech systems also help non-literate learners engage with digital materials. These innovations make education inclusive, especially for marginalized groups who speak minority languages.

What are some standout African AI education startups?

The continent is buzzing with homegrown talent. M-Shule in Kenya uses AI to deliver personalized SMS-based learning, focusing on primary school students. Chalkboard Education, operating in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire, offers offline e-learning platforms for universities, using AI to track progress. South Africa’s Siyavula combines AI with open-source textbooks to provide math and science practice, serving millions of learners. These startups show Africa isn’t just adopting AI—it’s innovating with it.

What concerns exist about AI in education?

While the potential is huge, concerns linger. Data privacy is a big one—students’ personal information must be protected, especially in regions with weak regulations. There’s also the risk of over-reliance on tech, which could sideline human teachers. Affordability is another hurdle; AI solutions must be low-cost to scale. Experts emphasize the need for ethical AI frameworks, like those being developed by AI4D Africa, to ensure tools are culturally relevant and equitable.

“We must balance AI’s efficiency with the human touch that makes education transformative.” – Prof. Kwame Osei, Education Policy Expert

How can policymakers support AI in education?

Policymakers play a pivotal role. Investing in digital infrastructure—think affordable internet and device subsidies—is crucial. Governments should also fund local AI research, as seen in Rwanda’s Digital Skills Program, which trains youth to build EdTech solutions. Public-private partnerships can scale pilots, while clear regulations on data use build trust. Our community suggests tax incentives for EdTech startups to spur innovation.

What’s next for AI in African education?

The future is bright but demands action. AI could power virtual reality classrooms, making immersive learning accessible in underfunded schools. Predictive analytics might identify at-risk students early, reducing dropout rates. But scaling these requires collaboration—between governments, startups, and communities. As iAfrica’s Q&A Forum shows, Africans are eager to shape this future, asking sharp questions and sharing bold ideas.

Got more questions about AI in education? Drop them in our Q&A Forum and join the conversation shaping Africa’s tech-driven future.

Got more questions about AI in education? Drop them in an email to ai@africa.com and join the conversation shaping Africa’s tech-driven future.

The widespread adoption and rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has had far-reaching consequences for education, from student writing and learning outcomes to the college admissions process. While AI can be a helpful tool for students in and outside of the classroom, it can also stunt students’ learning, autonomy, and critical thinking, and secondary and higher education institutions grapple with the promises and pitfalls of generative AI as a pedagogical tool. Given the polarizing nature of AI in higher education, university policies for engaging with AI vary widely both across and within institutions; however, there are some key consistencies across schools that can be informative for students as they prepare for college academics, as well as the parents and teachers trying to equip high school students for collegiate study amidst this new technological frontier.

Here are five defining elements of Ivy League schools’ approach to AI in education—and what they mean for students developing technological literacy:

1. Emphasis on Instructor and Course Autonomy

First and foremost, it is important to note that no Ivy League school has issued blanket rules on AI use—instead, like many other colleges and secondary schools, Ivy League AI policies emphasize the autonomy of individual instructors in setting policies for their courses. Princeton University’s policy states: “In some current Princeton courses, permitted use of AI must be disclosed with a description of how and why AI was used. Students might also be required to keep any recorded engagement they had with the AI tool (such as chat logs). When in doubt, students should confirm with an instructor whether AI is permitted and how to disclose its use.” Dartmouth likewise notes: “Instructors, programs, and schools may have a variety of reasons for allowing or disallowing Artificial Intelligence tools within a course, or course assignment(s), depending on intended learning outcomes. As such, instructors have authority to determine whether AI tools may be used in their course.”

With this in mind, high school students should be keenly aware that a particular teacher’s AI policies should not be viewed as indicative of all teachers’ attitudes or policies. While students may be permitted to use AI in brainstorming or editing papers at their high school, they should be careful not to grow reliant on these tools in their writing, as their college instructors may prohibit the technology in any capacity. Further, students should note that different disciplines may be more or less inclined toward AI tolerance—for instance, a prospective STEM student might have a wider bandwidth for using the technology than a student who hopes to study English. Because of this, the former should devote more of their time to understanding the technology and researching its uses in their field, whereas the latter should likely avoid employing AI in their work in any capacity, as collegiate policies will likely prohibit its use.

2. View of AI Misuse as Plagiarism / Academic Dishonesty

Just as important as learning to use generative AI in permissible and beneficial ways is learning how generative AI functions. Many Ivy League schools, including UPenn and Columbia, clearly state that AI misuse—whatever that may be in the context of a particular class or project, constitutes academic dishonesty and will be subject to discipline as such. The more students can understand the processes conducted by large language models, the more equipped they will be to make critical decisions about where its use is appropriate, when they need to provide citations, how to spot hallucinations, and how to prompt the technology to cite its sources, as well. Even where AI use is permitted, it is never a substitute for critical thinking, and students should be careful to evaluate all information independently and be transparent about their AI use when permitted.

Parents and teachers can help students in this regard by viewing the technology as a pedagogical tool; they should not only create appropriate boundaries for AI use, but also empower students with the knowledge of how AI works so that they do not view the technology as a magic content generator or unbiased problem-solver.

Relatedly, prestigious universities also emphasize privacy and ethics concerns related to AI usage in and outside of the classroom. UPenn, for instance, notes: “​​Members of the Penn community should adhere to established principles of respect for intellectual property, particularly copyrights when considering the creation of new data sets for training AI models. Avoid uploading confidential and/or proprietary information to AI platforms prior to seeking patent or copyright protection, as doing so could jeopardize IP rights.” Just as students should take a critical approach to evaluating AI sources, they should also be aware of potential copyright infringement and ethical violations related to generative AI use.

3. Openness to Change and Development in Response to New Technologies

Finally, this is an area of technology that is rapidly developing and changing—which means that colleges’ policies are changing too. Faculty at Ivy League and other top schools are encouraged to revisit their course policies regularly, experiment with new pedagogical methods, and guide students through the process of using AI in responsible, reflective ways. As Columbia’s AI policy notes, “Based on our collective experience with Generative AI use at the University, we anticipate that this guidance will evolve and be updated regularly.”

Just as students should not expect AI policies to be the same across classes or instructors, they should not expect these policies to remain fixed from year to year. The more that students can develop as independent and autonomous thinkers who use AI tools critically, the more they will be able to adapt to these changing policies and avoid the negative repercussions that come from AI policy violations.

Ultimately, students should approach AI with a curious, critical, and research-based mentality. It is essential that high school students looking forward to their collegiate career remember that schools are looking for dynamic, independent thinkers—while the indiscriminate use of AI can hinder their ability to showcase those qualities, a critical and informed approach can distinguish them as a knowledgeable citizen of our digital world.