Scan
Seventy-seven percent of secondary leaders already report an assessment AI policy, and NZQA requires authenticity policy to include acceptable use of AI. Where student-use rules exist, fewer than half of teachers and students find them useful. This lane turns paper into practice.
Map staff, student, and tool use already happening, not a blank-slate policy invent.
Tighten expectations by stage of work so GenAI rules guide behaviour, not just sit on a website.
Checkpoints, version history, and verbal questioning aligned to MoE design guidance and NZQA.
Practice session plus parent and student communications that match the same language.
- Landing review. Map current use, existing policy, and where rules fail in practice.
- Clarity. Tighten if / when / how, authenticity process, and tool register.
- Practice. Staff workshop, checkpoints, parent and student communications.
- Care (optional). Annual review, tool vetting, alerts.
Pricing (ex GST)
- Policy landing review - complimentary (30 min)
- Implementation & assurance - $1,800–$2,500
- Full framework from zero only if needed - quoted after review
- Optional AI Governance Care - $1,800/yr
What schools leave with
- Clear picture of where AI is already used
- Usable authenticity practice, not another unread PDF
- Staff workshop and shared home/school language
- Tool register for what is actually in the building
nathanielbaldock@gmail.com · nathanielbaldock.com · +64 20 479 6683
Schools pack: nathanielbaldock.com/schools
AI disclosure: I used Google NotebookLM to assist my research for this topic, Claude (Anthropic) supported the editorial process, helping brainstorm, edit, and refine the content, and Cursor.ai to help with the technical coding build. The ideas, direction, and final content are mine — I reviewed everything before publishing and take responsibility for it.