AI Tool Evaluation Checklist for Schools

For administrators, tech coordinators, and department heads evaluating any AI tool before student use. Complete this for every new tool — regardless of how it's marketed.

How to Use This Checklist

Run through every section before recommending or approving a tool for student use. A tool that fails any item in the Must-Have sections should not be approved until the issue is resolved. Items in the Due Diligence sections are strongly recommended but may depend on your district's specific context.

Section 1: Data Privacy — Must-Have

• The vendor has a publicly available privacy policy written in plain language (not only dense legal text)
• The policy clearly states what data is collected from students
• The policy clearly states whether student conversations are used to train the AI model — and gives an opt-out if so
• Student data is not sold or shared with third-party advertisers
• The tool has a documented data retention and deletion policy
• A Data Processing Agreement (DPA) is available and the vendor will sign it

Notes / vendor response: ___________________________________

Section 2: Legal Compliance — Must-Have

• For students under 13: the tool addresses COPPA in writing (parental consent and data handling), not just a passing mention
• For all K-12 student data: data handling is designed to align with FERPA expectations, and the vendor will sign a School Official Agreement or DPA
• The tool complies with applicable state student data privacy laws (check your state: CA SOPIPA, NY Ed Law 2-d, TX SCOPE Act, etc.)
• The vendor has experience with K-12 compliance requirements (not just consumer or higher-ed compliance)

Notes / vendor response: ___________________________________

Section 3: Age-Appropriateness — Must-Have

• The tool's content is appropriate for the grade levels it will serve
• Content guardrails are enforced at the model level — not only as a surface-level filter that can be bypassed
• The tool's responses are calibrated for student developmental levels (language, depth, tone) — not just a generic adult voice
• The tool was designed for K-12 students from the ground up — OR I can document specifically that its adult-facing version has been meaningfully adapted, not just labeled for schools

Notes: ___________________________________

Section 4: Student Safety Oversight — Must-Have

• There is a clear, documented process for what happens when a student discloses something concerning in a chat
• That process includes notifying a teacher or administrator — not only surfacing a resource to the student
• The vendor can explain, step by step, what triggers a safety flag and what happens next
• Teachers or administrators have meaningful visibility into student interactions — not only after-the-fact alerts

Notes / vendor response: ___________________________________

Section 5: Academic Integrity — Due Diligence

• The tool is designed to guide students toward answers rather than provide direct answers they can copy
• The tool has documented anti-cheating or academic honesty features
• Teachers can configure what subjects or tasks the tool will assist with
• The tool does not encourage copy-paste behavior or produce work presented as student-authored

Notes: ___________________________________

Section 6: Independent Validation — Due Diligence

• An independent third party (not the vendor) has assessed the tool's safety or content appropriateness
• That third party is named and their methodology is described — not just referenced vaguely
• The tool has been peer-reviewed, benchmarked, or certified by a recognized ed-tech or child safety body
• I can find independent reviews of this tool from other K-12 schools or districts

Notes: ___________________________________

Section 7: Practical Classroom Fit — Due Diligence

• The tool works reliably on school-issued devices and network infrastructure
• Teacher training resources are available and adequate
• The vendor provides responsive support for school accounts (not just consumer support)
• Pricing is transparent and within budget; no hidden per-student fees
• The tool integrates with existing classroom platforms (Google Classroom, Canvas, etc.) if required

Notes: ___________________________________

Section 8: Internal Approval Steps

• Submitted to district Technology / IT for infrastructure review
• Submitted to district Legal / Compliance for privacy review
• Principal / Academic Dean informed and approved
• Parent/community communication plan in place before rollout
• Teacher training scheduled before student-facing use

Evaluation Summary

Tool name: ___________________________________

Evaluated by: ___________________________________

Date: ___________________________________

Grade levels / subjects: ___________________________________

Result:

• Approved for student use
• Approved with conditions: ___________________________________
• Not approved — reason: ___________________________________
• Pending additional information from vendor

Part of HeyOtto's Teacher's Guide to AI in the Classroom resource series. HeyOtto for Schools is purpose-built for K-12 — see how it compares.