Does AI Coaching Hold Up to Union Scrutiny? One Rep's View

One of the most common questions we receive from school leaders considering Starlight is a simple one: what do the unions think?

It is a fair and important question. Any technology that involves teachers recording their own lessons deserves careful scrutiny, and union representatives are right to ask hard questions about how that data is used, who has access to it, and whether teachers' professional integrity is protected. We have always believed that if Starlight is genuinely designed for teachers, it should be able to withstand that scrutiny.

What follows is a perspective we are genuinely proud to share. A workplace union representative at one of our partner schools has agreed to write about their experience of Starlight over the past year, in their own words. We have not edited their account or shaped their conclusions. What they describe, from the use of custom templates to support appraisal evidence, to the role of longitudinal data in protecting a member under pressure, reflects what we hoped Starlight could become when it is implemented well: a tool that serves teachers, not systems.

We share this not as a marketing exercise, but because trust in edtech is hard-won and easily lost. If a union rep can say, in good conscience, that this platform supported their members and maintained professional integrity, that matters more to us than any product feature we could point to.

What follows is one rep's view:

As a union workplace rep, my priority is always that staff are supported, treated fairly, and able to maintain their professional integrity. Over the past year, we’ve been using Starlight in school, and from a union point of view, it has been a useful tool when it’s used in a supportive and professional way.

Staff have mainly used Starlight for lesson feedback, but it’s gone beyond that. Colleagues have been using it as part of their wider professional development, particularly around appraisal. For example, teachers have been able to save lessons where specific development targets are being worked on. This means they’re not just saying they’re improving something — they can actually show it over time, with clear examples and impact.

The customisable templates have been a big part of this. While there are templates available, we’ve also created our own to focus on very specific areas, such as SEND adaptations or questioning. That allows for much more detailed and focused feedback, rather than something too general, and it links directly to individual targets.

We’ve also used Starlight in a more formal context. One member used the “My Teaching Journey” feature over a six-month period, uploading over 30 lessons. Because of that volume, the summary it produced gave a detailed and balanced picture of their teaching over time. This was then used as evidence of their competence, rather than relying on a single observation.

There’s also a “sentiment and tone” section, which from a union perspective is important. It would flag if anything in terms of expectations or interactions was not appropriate. In this case, it actually supported the teacher by showing that their practice was consistently professional.

Where development needs have been identified, staff have been able to respond in a practical way. For example, creating a custom Starlight template focused on a very specific development need, and then using that regularly and independently. Alongside that, the member met with a coach once a month to review their work and the feedback from Starlight. That helped keep things realistic, appropriate, and focused on genuine improvement rather than pressure.

Overall, our experience has been that Starlight can support professional development, provide clear evidence for appraisal, and help maintain professional integrity — as long as it’s used in a way that trusts staff and keeps the focus on development.

Worplace Union Rep