AI What students are teaching us about the future of AI innovation
SALLY HODGSON, Head of Training at Wavenet Education, argues that we must create an environment where students do not feel they need to hide their use of AI.
When we talk about AI in education, the conversation often starts with caution. How do we manage risk? How do we protect academic integrity? Those questions matter. But students are already using AI, and fear of being accused of plagiarism is stopping some from being open about it. Young people are using AI not just to work faster, but to explore problems, test solutions and bring ideas to life. That can create a tension for universities and colleges. AI use is widespread, but formal
AI literacy training is not always keeping pace. The result is an AI literacy confidence gap.
Student-led AI assignments often begin with real-world issues young people can see and feel, from climate and sustainability to inclusion, wellbeing and access to learning. In these situations, AI becomes less of an abstract technology and more of a tool for understanding problems, organising information and developing solutions.
Of course, students do not always have polished answers. They are still learning to question outputs, check evidence and understand limitations. Yet they often bring curiosity and creativity, making connections across subjects and approaching challenges from fresh perspectives. There is a lesson here for educators and policymakers. Detection, governance and risk management are critical; the question is what we design them to achieve. Done well, they create the conditions for safe, open AI use.
Detection answers whether AI was used. It cannot answer whether it was used well. Institutions need safeguards that protect academic standards and teaching that shows students how to meet them openly. Responsible use is essential, but literacy should also include creativity, critical thinking and the confidence to explain how AI supported the work. If students are using AI to explore flood prevention, reduce waste or improve communication, they are developing skills that go far beyond prompt writing. They are learning to define challenges, test assumptions, evaluate information and communicate ideas – capabilities that will remain valuable long after today’s AI tools have evolved. For schools, colleges and universities, the opportunity is to create environments where this kind of innovation can flourish. That means embedding AI literacy into learning, encouraging open discussion and making expectations clear, so students do not feel they have to hide responsible experimentation.
None of this is entirely new territory. AI literacy builds on the digital citizenship work institutions have been doing for years, and young people need clear guidance around accuracy, bias, privacy, transparency and attribution. They need to understand that AI can support human judgement, but should never replace it.
If adults want to understand where AI innovation is heading, we should pay closer attention to how students use it today. Their creativity shows what AI can become when connected to curiosity, responsibility and purpose. With the right guidance, those habits will prepare learners for an AI-powered workplace where ethical judgement and transparent use matter as much as technical skill.
ParentPay Group warns of AI governance challenges in MATs
GDPRiS, part of the ParentPay Group, has released research showing significant governance challenges in the use of AI in Multi Academy Trusts.
Research by GDPRiS has revealed a significant gap
between the number of MATs who have an AI policy in place and those who are converting activity into meaningful leadership assurance. Coined ‘The Assurance Gap’,
the research shows that while 59% of respondents have an AI policy in place, only 50% have a named owner for AI; just 31% have completed risk assessments for all approved tools; only 25% report regularly to their board or trust leadership; and only 13% said their trust was confident that AI use by children aligns with the ICO Children’s Code. The findings reveal a clear maturity pattern across the sector: formal AI policies are increasingly common, but maturity progressively decreases as governance moves from policy to ownership, operational control, assurance and compliance confidence.
Elliott Lewis, Chief Information Security Officer at ParentPay Group, says: “AI creates so many opportunities in education, particularly in gathering data insights at speed and at scale, and making administrative processes more efficient. When academies and schools adopt AI with all the governance processes in place, it can be transformative. But AI is moving
October 2026
incredibly quickly and academies are telling us that it’s moving faster than they can govern and often beyond their levels of expertise.” In response to The Assurance Gap research findings, and to support Academies and schools adopt AI with appropriate governance measures in place, GDPRiS has launched a free AI Governance & Readiness Assessment. The assessment, which takes 10 minutes to complete, gives academies and schools a personalised AI Governance Readiness Score, identifies strengths, risks and gaps, measures governance maturity, understands AI adoption and impact, whilst also providing them with tailored recommendations and free resources to support their AI governance journey. Elliott adds: “Academies and schools need to focus on their primary purpose – achieving great learning outcomes for pupils. That’s why we’ve launched this Readiness Assessment. In just 10 minutes they can understand where they are on their governance journey and get personalised recommendations on how to move forward, supporting their use of AI in a safe and secure way.”
The study found that AI adoption is becoming an established part of operational and educational practice in trust schools. 69% of respondents described their AI usage as ‘moderate’, compared with 25% who reported limited use, 3% experimental use and 3% extensive use. Despite that, visibility of AI usage emerged as a significant governance challenge in the study, with policy guidance, self-reporting and technical controls providing oversight rather than a complete picture of AI usage. Respondents scored their confidence in understanding which tools are being used at an average of 5.8 out of 10.
www.education-today.co.uk 21
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
