We summarise the key changes in the updated KCSIE 2025 guidance that schools need to be aware of.
Although it wasn’t too long ago that we last had an update to KCSIE, that update was very minor, whereas this version effective from the 1st September has more detail.
Key changes
Generative AI is explicitly referenced
“The Department has published Generative AI: product safety expectations to support schools to use generative artificial intelligence safely, and explains how filtering and monitoring requirements apply to the use of generative AI in education.” (page 41, paragraph 143)
The statement links to the Generative AI: product safety expectations guidance that was published in January 2025, to signpost this to schools. While the guidance is focused on the expectations placed on suppliers and developers, it’s a useful guide for schools to refer to when considering AI tools to use and vendors to work with to aid them in asking pointed questions to ensure the technology will be ‘considered safe for users in educational settings.’
Clarified expectations for filtering and monitoring
There is a substantial emphasis on the need for quality filtering and monitoring provisions that are in line with government standards and regularly reviewed. It is also explicitly mentioned that these should be ‘informed in part, by the risk assessment required by the Prevent Duty.’
It is recommended that schools use the DfE’s Plan technology for your school service to ‘self-assess against the filtering and monitoring standards and receive personalised recommendations on how to meet them.’ A list of expectations that links directly to the filtering and monitoring standards in Meeting digital and technology standards in schools and colleges has been given as follows:
• identify and assign roles and responsibilities to manage filtering and monitoring systems.
• review filtering and monitoring provision at least annually.
• block harmful and inappropriate content without unreasonably impacting teaching and learning.
• have effective monitoring strategies in place that meet their safeguarding needs.
Governing bodies and properties should also ensure relevant staff have an awareness and understanding of provisions in place, manage those provisions effectively and know how to escalate identified concerns and ‘consider the number of and age range of their children, those who are potentially at greater risk of harm and how often they access the IT system along with the proportionality of costs versus safeguarding risks’.
They also provide supporting links for support in this area, including guidance from the UK Safer Internet Centre (SIC) and SWGfL as well as the DfE document Schools’ buying strategy. (pages 40-41, paragraphs 140-143)
Cyber resilience – emphasis on meeting standards
Cyber resilience is another area where the language has been strengthened. The KCSIE guidance now strongly suggests that schools comply with the cybersecurity standards to improve their resilience, encouraging schools to work closely with IT teams to build a staged improvement plan.
“Education settings are directly responsible for ensuring they have the appropriate level of security protection procedures in place in order to safeguard their systems, staff and learners and review the effectiveness of these procedures periodically to keep up with evolving cyber-crime technologies.” (page 41, paragraph 144)
There are links for schools to helpful resources to aid in cyber security awareness and considerations from the National Education Network (NEN) and the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC).
RSHE timetable
In the ‘Opportunities to teach safeguarding’ section, it’s mentioned that the revised RSHE guidance that was published in July 2025 and will come into effect from September 2026. It notes that the RSHSE curriculum is a crucial part of education and that a school’s RSHE programme should be ‘fully inclusive and developed to be age and stage of development appropriate (especially when considering the needs of children with SEND and disabilities and other vulnerabilities).’ (pages 36-37, paragraphs 130-132)
Four Cs model of online risks
The document also expands the four Cs model of online risks – content, contact, conduct and commerce.
- Content covers exposure to harmful material such as pornography, extreme violence, or hateful ideologies.
- Contact relates to harmful interactions such as grooming, coercion, or exploitation.
- Conduct refers to harmful behaviours by the child themselves, such as bullying, sharing indecent images, or oversharing personal data.
- Commerce focuses on financial harm such as scams, gambling, or exploitative in-game purchases.
(Page 38, paragraph 135)
Guidance on gender questioning children to be revised
Updated guidance on gender questioning children will be ‘published soon’ and signposted in KCSIE 2025 once made it’s available. (page 56, paragraph 207)
For thoughts on the current gender questioning guidance and about reviewing KCSIE with inclusivity in mind, we recommend this LinkedIn explanation from Dr Nicole Ponsford, Founder and CEO of the Global Equality Collective.
Other key changes
- ‘Misinformation, disinformation (including fake news) and conspiracy theories’ have been clarified as safeguarding harms. (page 38, paragraph 135)
- ‘Working together to improve school attendance’ is now statutory guidance. (page 49, paragraph 177)
- Clarification that Virtual School Heads must promote the educational achievement of children in kinship care. (page 54, paragraph 199)
- Updates to SEND terminology to align with the SEND Code of Practice. (page 56, paragraph 2025)
Useful resources
Some other useful resources that are signposted in the updated guidance include:
- Shorespace
- Centre of expertise on child sex abuse (CSA)
- The Children’s Society
- CEOP Education
- Questions from the Governing Board
- UKSIC Online Safety Audit tool
- External visitors guidance
We recommend following Al Kingsley MBE, Mark Anderson and Gemma Gwilliam for some excellent insights on KCSIE 2025 and next steps for leaders.
Read the full KCSIE 2025 guidance and let us know your thoughts and how your school or college is responding on social media.
