WHAT THE EXPERTS SAY.... SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE MUST GUIDE THE


AI REVOLUTION IN EDUCATION Comment by LISA HAYCOX, CEO of Explore Learning


F


ew sectors have seen the rapid proliferation of AI face greater scrutiny than education. Given the high stakes involved in shaping the next generation, intense debate has surfaced over what role AI should play in learning. For us, the answer is clear. AI has an increasingly vital role to play in the education sector, provided its integration is informed by learning science and subject to meaningful oversight.


AI-enabled platforms and other digital tools are transforming the way children learn. In an increasingly strained education system, where unwaveringly dedicated educators are battling a chronic resource deficit, technology is a vital tool for support.


The impact of these strains is particularly profound for the 1.7 million children with SEND in the UK. With widespread reforms set out in February to overhaul SEND support, the power of technology to bridge the support gap for additional needs in mainstream settings is significant. For both children with SEND and others struggling to access individualised support, AI’s ability to provide personalised feedback and learning pathways at scale signals a significant shift in the education landscape. Some platforms use adaptive content generation that is designed to help keep students in what Vygotsky conceptualised in 1978, the ‘Zone of Proximal Development’, where the challenge is sufficient to engage but not so great as to discourage.


However, as our new paper ‘The Evidence Imperative’ finds, without careful design and oversight, some AI tools risk derailing learning trajectories rather than supporting them.


Where overreliance on AI takes hold, there is a tangible risk of eroding higher-order cognition, including critical thinking and problem-solving,


while inhibiting the development of self-regulation and confidence. If a system consistently removes challenge or provides answers too readily, learners are less able to engage in the productive struggle that underpins resilience and deeper understanding.


This influx of poorly designed tools may be the hidden cost of the EdTech industry’s dizzying growth, which saw it become one of Europe’s fastest-growing sectors in 2020 following the COVID pandemic. As competition grows, so does the pressure from traditional venture capital models, where the five to seven-year return expectation can lead to a preference for rapid results over long-term considerations. Humans remain one of the most effective safeguards against the unintended consequences of AI in education. No algorithm is perfect and the most effective EdTech companies will recognise these limitations and position their technology as a means of augmenting – not replacing – human relationships.


At the very heart of this issue is the educational theory behind the tools. Established learning science should serve as an anchor for the technology being introduced to the learning experience. We wholly reject the notion of technology for technology’s sake; rather, it should always come back to whether AI is actually helping children learn, and there should be clear scientific evidence proving it does so in practice.


As the government takes an increasingly active role in shaping AI’s integration into education, these considerations will be key. Embracing the full potential of transformative technology in education should indeed be a top priority for the years to come, but first and foremost, we must ensure it is grounded in evidence and genuinely supports how children learn.


SOME LESSONS CANNOT BE TAUGHT IN A CLASSROOM Comment by KATE ERSKINE, Head of DGI Study Trips


I


nternational study trips have been a cornerstone of higher education for decades. They form an essential part of the student experience, because some lessons simply cannot be taught in a traditional classroom setting.


Overseas holidays are not a universal rite of passage. For some students, a university-led programme provides their first passport stamp, immersion in another culture and exposure to life beyond their immediate environment. That lived experience can be transformative, both academically and personally. In an increasingly competitive graduate marketplace, real-world experience carries weight.


When candidates hold comparable academic qualifications, those able to demonstrate applied understanding, global awareness and resilience often stand apart.


Despite their clear value, international programmes face mounting pressure. While short-haul travel is often seen as more predictable, long-haul programmes remain critical for subjects where global context matters. For many, long-haul offers a formative experience that builds confidence and perspective.


These trips come with perceived barriers, such as cost, logistics, safeguarding and environmental considerations; however, with thoughtful planning, partnerships and clear educational intent, these challenges are manageable.


Despite this, students are frequently required to contribute financially, and for those already managing high tuition fees, rent and living expenses, even modest additional costs can present a barrier. To maintain accessibility, many institutions are rethinking planning cycles and payment structures. Travel Management Companies (TMCs) often help make trips more accessible. The risk is that international learning becomes accessible primarily to those who can afford it, undermining widening participation goals institutions have worked hard to achieve.


Academic and professional services staff are operating under significant 26 www.education-today.co.uk May 2026


workload constraints. Designing overseas programmes requires time: shaping itineraries, completing risk assessments, navigating compliance and securing approval. In this environment, trips must clearly articulate measurable learning outcomes. Programmes embedded within the curriculum and aligned to strategic objectives are most likely to gain approval.


TMCs can take on these responsibilities, helping academics translate module outcomes into meaningful itineraries while ensuring correct processes are followed at a fair price.


Sustainability is a major part of conversations, whether exploring rail or designing itineraries that support climate goals without compromising academic value. Lower-emission alternatives, such as rail instead of short- haul flights, are frequently explored, yet cost differences can make them less viable within restricted budgets.


Widening participation cannot sit comfortably alongside models that disadvantage students from lower-income backgrounds. If overseas study is to remain a meaningful component of higher education, equity and accessibility must be central to its design.


According to a 2025 report from UUKI, graduates from less advantaged backgrounds who had taken part in study abroad programmes were more likely to move into professional-level roles within five years (70.2%) than peers who remained in the UK (68.3%).


A sustainable model for international study must reconcile competing pressures: financial realism, climate responsibility and inclusive participation. It must also reaffirm a fundamental principle: global exposure is not a luxury add-on, but an educational tool that deepens understanding beyond the classroom.


Students remain eager to engage with the world beyond the classroom. If higher education is to prepare them for a rapidly evolving world, international study opportunities must remain accessible.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48