The start of the 2026 school year marks a technical turning point for the French education system. With the introduction of AI in the second year of high school, the extension of the ban on mobile phones to high schools, and the creation of digital referents in institutions, reforms are piling up. We observe that these measures focus almost exclusively on digital tools and uses, while the actual capacity of institutions to absorb these changes remains the blind spot of the debate.
AI Governance in Institutions: The Missing Technical Link in Reforms
AI becomes mandatory in the second year of high school, but its full implementation is postponed to the following year. This delay reveals a structural problem: institutions lack both the infrastructure and the internal skills to manage these deployments.
The CIANUM recommends the appointment of a digital referent per institution, responsible for coordinating uses, training teams, and ensuring the compliance of deployed tools. This recommendation, supported by a total of eleven recommendations, outlines a framework for local governance that does not yet exist in the majority of middle and high schools.
The CNIL has also issued specific guidelines on collaborative tools used in primary and secondary education, indicating that the issue of protecting school data is taking on a concrete regulatory dimension. To keep track of these regulatory and pedagogical developments throughout the year, regular monitoring is necessary on resources like https://www.echosdecole.fr/ that aggregates news from the educational world.
We recommend distinguishing between two levels of management: academic framing (choice of solutions, public contracts, GDPR compliance) and local pedagogical facilitation (continuing education, feedback on usage, adjustments). Without this clear separation, the digital referent becomes a catch-all position without resources.
Ban on Phones in High Schools: Disciplinary Constraint or Pedagogical Lever
Starting from the 2026 school year, the ban on mobile phones is extended to high schools. Exceptions remain possible, as outlined in the internal regulations of each institution. This measure extends a system that has already been in place in middle schools for several years.
The technical issue is more subtle than it seems. Banning smartphones means cutting off access to the tool that most students use to access digital workspaces, digital textbooks, and educational applications recommended by their teachers. Institutions that do not have sufficient tablet or laptop inventories find themselves in a logistical deadlock.
The exception outlined in the internal regulations becomes the real issue. Each head of institution must arbitrate between a strict ban (disciplinary coherence, reduction of distractions) and a regulated use (access to digital resources in class). This arbitration takes place without a unified national reference.
What Institutions Must Decide Before September
- Define the time slots and spaces where phones remain allowed, in line with the institution’s project and the pedagogical uses planned by the teams
- Provide a secure storage solution (lockers, pouches) and bear the cost, which is rarely budgeted in current allocations
- Train school life staff in conflict management related to confiscation, a recurring friction point in middle schools since the first ban came into effect
- Draft exceptions in a sufficiently precise manner to avoid legal disputes from parents
Teacher Training in AI: A Generational Gap in Practices
The deployment of AI in schools is based on an assumption that is rarely verified: that teachers master the tools they are asked to use. Several recent analyses highlight a marked generational gap in the appropriation of generative AI by teaching teams.
Teachers who entered the profession before 2015 have, for the most part, received no initial training in advanced digital tools. Academic continuing education plans offer modules on AI, but their hourly volume remains marginal compared to the scale of the expected change.
The debate in 2026 shifts towards the notion of digital sobriety applied to education. Recent recommendations favor more controlled solutions, with institutional management of authorized tools rather than free use of commercial platforms. The question is no longer whether to use AI in class, but who manages it, with what guarantees, and at what educational cost.
Four Decisions to Make Before the Start of School for Management Teams
Even before the first class, principals and heads of schools face concrete technical arbitrations:
- Choose between AI tools validated by the ministry and those already spontaneously adopted by teachers, with a risk of GDPR compliance on the latter
- Allocate specific consultation time for AI in the pre-school calendar, knowing that this time is taken from other priorities (national assessments, needs groups)
- Clarify the institution’s policy on academic integrity regarding AI-assisted productions, a subject on which the National Education has begun to establish rules
- Identify resource teachers capable of training their peers, in the absence of an officially created AI referent position
Teacher Shortage: A Global Problem Impacting School Quality in France
UNESCO warns of a worsening global teacher shortage. In Afghanistan, restrictions imposed on women may exacerbate the lack of qualified female teachers. This international observation resonates with the situation in France, where recruitment competitions struggle to attract enough candidates in several disciplines.
The budget for National Education for 2026 remains stable compared to 2025, despite unavoidable expenses and reforms to be funded. Job cuts are looming. Education is no longer treated as the budgetary priority stated in the political speeches of previous years.
This budgetary tension makes all announced reforms even more fragile. Deploying AI, training teachers, equipping institutions, recruiting referents: each measure has a cost that current allocations do not cover. Institutions absorb these injunctions with constant resources, which mechanically produces an increasing gap between well-equipped high schools and those that are already operating at full capacity.
