Do you know what apps your child uses in school? You should…
The UK government's recent £45 million investment in school connectivity is a laudable step toward digital transformation. But while we race to install routers and upgrade broadband, we're still missing the crucial piece of the puzzle: what students actually do online once they're connected.
A delivery system is only as powerful as the content it delivers. And when it comes to education, content is king.
In 2019, the Department for Education launched the Early Years Apps Pilot, a pioneering initiative to accredit high-quality educational apps. It was quietly shelved as classrooms reopened post-Covid, but its purpose is more urgent now than ever. Today, with nearly half of UK families still digitally excluded in some way – lacking broadband, devices, or essential digital skills – we need a clear national standard to ensure educational apps are safe, effective, and aligned with the curriculum.
During the pandemic, digital learning tools were not just useful – they were essential. Yet not all tools were equal. Evidence from the Behavioural Insights Team shows that thoughtful EdTech design can dramatically improve outcomes. On the HegartyMaths platform, usage of help tools more than doubled and accuracy improved significantly. Other trials saw online course completion rates boosted by 15–32 per cent through simple behavioural prompts and study planning support.
Schools and teachers are under immense pressure. Apps can help – not by replacing teachers, but by empowering them. They personalise learning, identify children needing support earlier, and free up time for real teaching. They're also powerful tools for homework and out-of-school engagement.
But without guidance, schools are left to fend for themselves in a crowded digital marketplace. An app store is not an accreditation system. We need a rigorous national framework – one that supports both teachers and developers.
The digital divide remains stubbornly wide. A 2024 study by the University of Liverpool and Good Things Foundation found that 45% of UK families lack essential digital access. During school closures, children eligible for free school meals were twice as likely to do less than an hour of learning per day, according to UCL research. The kids who would benefit most from high-quality EdTech are the ones most at risk of being left behind.
This is where a national standard could be transformative. As CEO of Mrs Wordsmith, a UK-based EdTech company focused on literacy, I've seen how evidence-based, game-driven content can ignite a love of reading. Our tools are rigorously tested and built around curriculum outcomes. But not all companies work to these standards – nor should they be expected to without oversight.
This isn't about nostalgia for lockdown learning. It's about realising the missed opportunity: by failing to build on the success of the Apps Pilot, successive governments have left children, parents, and teachers to navigate a Wild West of digital content. And as Secretary of State Bridget Philipson focuses on digital, we risk delivering gigabit internet to schools where children are still playing games that teach them nothing.
If you're a parent, that should make you angry. But you can make your voice heard. The government must introduce a seventh digital standard: one for content. Let's move from 'connection over content' to 'connection with content' because infrastructure is meaningless without the tools to use it wisely.
It is easy, just restart the program from 2019! The Department for Education is currently consulting on this very issue and inviting educators, developers, parents, and stakeholders to contribute their perspectives on digital standards. This is a rare opportunity to push for the revival and expansion of the 2019 Early Years Apps Pilot into a full national framework for educational content. The estimated 5000 to 7000 UK schools already using these DfE-endorsed apps are especially encouraged to contribute their experiences.
A formal DfE accreditation process would go a long way in extending the benefits of these tools to schools that lack the internal capacity or funding to conduct their evaluation – ensuring that access to high-quality apps isn't just a privilege for well-resourced institutions. Together, let's ensure the future of UK education is not just wired for speed – but powered by purpose.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Campainers urge UK watchdog to limit use of AI after report of Meta's plan to automate checks
Internet safety campaigners have urged the UK's communications watchdog to limit the use of artificial intelligence in crucial risk assessments following a report that Mark Zuckerberg's Meta was planning to automate checks. Ofcom said it was 'considering the concerns' raised by the letter following a report last month that up to 90% of all risk assessments at the owner of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp would soon be carried out by AI. Social media platforms are required under the UK's Online Safety Act to gauge how harm could take place on their services and how they plan to mitigate those potential harms – with a particular focus on protecting child users and preventing illegal content from appearing. The risk assessment process is viewed as key aspect of the act. In a letter to Ofcom's chief executive, Dame Melanie Dawes, organisations including the Molly Rose Foundation, the NSPCC and the Internet Watch Foundation described the prospect of AI-driven risk assessments as a 'retrograde and highly alarming step'. 'We urge you to publicly assert that risk assessments will not normally be considered as 'suitable and sufficient', the standard required by … the Act, where these have been wholly or predominantly produced through automation.' The letter also urged the watchdog to 'challenge any assumption that platforms can choose to water down their risk assessment processes'. A spokesperson for Ofcom said: 'We've been clear that services should tell us who completed, reviewed and approved their risk assessment. We are considering the concerns raised in this letter and will respond in due course.' Sign up to TechScape A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives after newsletter promotion Meta said the letter deliberately misstated the company's approach on safety and it was committed to high standards and complying with regulations. 'We are not using AI to make decisions about risk,' said a Meta spokesperson. 'Rather, our experts built a tool that helps teams identify when legal and policy requirements apply to specific products. We use technology, overseen by humans, to improve our ability to manage harmful content and our technological advancements have significantly improved safety outcomes.' The Molly Rose Foundation organised the letter after NPR, a US broadcaster, reported last month that updates to Meta's algorithms and new safety features will mostly be approved by an AI system and no longer scrutinised by staffers. According to one former Meta executive, who spoke to NPR anonymously, the change will allow the company to launch app updates and features on Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp more quickly but would create 'higher risks' for users, because potential problems are less likely to be prevented before a new product is released to the public. NPR also reported that Meta was considering automating reviews for sensitive areas including youth risk and monitoring the spread of falsehoods.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves is the new Steve Jobs, says Cabinet minister
A Cabinet minister has been ridiculed for comparing Rachel Reeves to the creator of the iPhone. In an attempt to defend Labour's spending plans, Peter Kyle, the Technology Secretary, said the Chancellor was fixing the public finances in much the same way Steve Jobs saved Apple from the brink of bankruptcy in the late 1990s. Mr Kyle's comments prompted a swift backlash from the Tories, who argued it was ridiculous to liken Jobs's achievements to Ms Reeves's record tax rises on businesses. The Chancellor launched a £40 billion tax raid in her first Budget last year, including an increase in employers' National Insurance contributions. At the spending review on Wednesday, she will announce departmental budgets for the next three years. The process has involved a significant amount of wrangling behind the scenes as ministers attempt to dodge expected real-term cuts. Challenged on where the money was coming from for his department, Mr Kyle told the Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips show on Sky News that the Government is going 'to be investing record amounts of money into the innovations of the future '. 'Just bear in mind how Apple turned itself around … when Steve Jobs came back to Apple, they were 90 days from insolvency,' he said. 'That's the kind of situation that we had when we came into office. Now, Steve Jobs turned it around by inventing the iMac, moving to a series of products like the iPod. 'Now we are starting to invest in the vaccine processes of the future, some of the high-tech solutions that are going to be high growth. We're investing in our space sector … they will create jobs in the future.' Mr Jobs, who co-founded Apple in 1976, was credited with rescuing the company from collapse in 1997, when it teetered on the brink of bankruptcy in the face of competition from Microsoft. He died aged 56 in 2011 after a long battle with cancer. At the time, floods of tributes described him as a 'visionary' whose impact would be felt for many generations to come. Labour has long blamed 'difficult' decisions on tax and spending on the 'dire' state of the economy they inherited from the Conservatives. However, the Tories claimed that comparing Ms Reeves to Mr Jobs was inappropriate. Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, told The Telegraph: 'Labour are plumbing new depths of delusion. Steve Jobs, creator of Apple and the iPhone, improved life for billions of people. 'In contrast, Rachel Reeves has trashed the UK economy, spending billions of pounds that we don't have in the process. 'This comment just shows Labour have not the faintest understanding of business.' Greg Smith, the shadow business minister, added: 'Kyle's comments are a little far of the mark. 'Steve Jobs created a mega international business from scratch and Rachel Reeves is actively preventing anyone doing that in the UK, ripping businesses apart, increasing tax and red tape. Apart from that, yeah, they're identical.'
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
Real risk Rachel Reeves's spending review will be about the departments that have lost out
"It's a big deal for this government," says Simon Case. "It's the clearest indication yet of what they plan to do between now and the general election, a translation of their manifesto. "This is where you should expect the chancellor to say, on behalf of the government: 'This is what we're about'." As the former cabinet secretary, Mr Case was the man in charge of the civil service during the last spending review, in 2021. On Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will unveil the Labour government's priorities for the next three years. But it's unclear whether it will provide all that much of an answer about what it's really about. Unlike the Autumn budget, when the chancellor announced her plans on where to tax and borrow to fund overall levels of spending, the spending review will set out exactly how that money is divided up between the different government departments. Since the start of the process in December those departments have been bidding for their share of the cash - setting out their proposed budgets in a negotiation which looks set to continue right up to the wire. This review is being conducted in an usual level of detail, with every single line of spending assessed, according to the chancellor, on whether it represents value for money and meets the government's priorities. Budget proposals have been scrutinised by so called "challenge panels" of independent experts. It's clear that health and defence will be winners in this process given pre-existing commitments to prioritise the NHS - with a boost of up to £30bn expected - and to increase defence spending. On Sunday morning, the government press release trumpeted an impressive-sounding "£86bn boost" to research and development (R&D), with the Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle sent out on the morning media round to celebrate as record levels of investment. 14:18 We're told this increased spending on the life sciences, advanced manufacturing and defence will lead to jobs and growth across the country, with every £1 in investment set to lead to a £7 economic return. But the headline figure is misleading. It's not £86bn in new funding. That £86bn has been calculated by adding together all R&D investment across government for the next three years, which will reach an annual figure of £22.5bn by 2029-30. The figure for this year was already set to be £20.4bn; so while it's a definite uplift, much of that money was already allocated. Peter Kyle also highlighted plans for "the most we've ever spent per pupil in our school system". I understand the schools budget is to be boosted by £4.5bn. Again, this is clearly an uplift - but over a three-year period, that equates to just £1.5bn a year (compared with an existing budget of £63.7bn). It also has to cover the cost of extending free school meals, and the promised uplift in teachers' pay. In any process of prioritisation there are losers as well as winners. We already know about planned cuts to the Department of Work and Pensions - but other unprotected departments like the Home Office and the Department of Communities and Local Government are braced for a real spending squeeze. We've heard dire warnings about austerity 2.0, and the impact that would have on the government's crime and policing priorities, its promises around housing and immigration, and on the budgets for cash-strapped local councils. The chancellor wants to make it clear to the markets she's sticking to her fiscal rules on balancing the books for day-to-day spending. But the decision to loosen the rules around borrowing to fund capital investment have given her greater room to manoeuvre in funding long-term infrastructure projects. That's why we've seen her travelling around the country this week to promote the £15.6bn she's spending on regional transport projects. The Treasury team clearly wants to focus on promoting the generosity of these kind of investments, and we'll hear more in the coming days. But there's a real risk the story of this spending review will be about the departments which have lost out - and the promises which could slip as a result.
