Ofsted to review the use of AI in schools and colleges

DfE commissions watchdog to examine how providers use AI to 'support teaching and learning' and manage admin

DfE commissions watchdog to examine how providers use AI to 'support teaching and learning' and manage admin

The government has asked Ofsted to carry out research into the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in schools and colleges.

The review will look at how education settings are already using AI, and potential uses the technology could have for the sector.

Ministers have previously expressed hopes AI could help “transform” teacher workloads

Outlining the remit of the review on Tuesday, Ofsted said it “will investigate how schools and further education (FE) colleges are using AI to support teaching and learning and to manage administrative systems and processes.

“We will look at the role leaders are playing in embedding AI and managing risks associated with AI use.

“We will collect data from schools and FE colleges as well as from academic literature and expert interviews. This will allow us to see how AI is already used and help us consider its potential uses and benefits.”

‘Intended and unintended impacts’

It will also look at how schools and colleges are monitoring the “intended and unintended impacts” of AI and governing its use, and “managing risks associated with AI use”

An Ofcom survey last year found Snapchat’s chatbot My AI was being used by 72 per cent of 13 to 17-year-olds. 

The rise in young people using AI has sparked concerns over it being used by pupils to cheat when doing homework or coursework.

The Ofsted review aims to educate policymakers and education providers about the benefits and challenges of AI in education, and identify training Ofsted inspectors may need to help increase their understanding of AI and how it is being used.

The report will collect evidence from up to 20 schools and colleges, deemed “early adopters” of AI. Ofsted will interview leaders responsible for rolling out the use of AI at these schools and colleges.

The report will also look at existing research, and consult international inspectorates and academics with knowledge of AI use in education. 

Evidence will be collected in Spring, and Ofsted says it hopes to publish its findings next summer.

‘Imperative’ exams are marked by humans

It comes as Sir Ian Bauckham, the government’s pick for Ofqual chief regulator, warned MPs that although there were some potential “exciting uses” for AI in generating exam questions, it was “imperative that a human oversees the marking of student work”.

“AI still makes mistakes. It hallucinates,” said Bauckham, who has served as interim chief regulator since January.

Sir Ian Bauckham
Sir Ian Bauckham

“Decisions made by AI evaluating a piece of work that a student has produced for a high stakes assessment are less transparent and therefore less open to challenge than they might be if marked by a human.”

Ofqual has “carefully sampled public confidence and attitudes in this space and…the public overwhelmingly wants a human being to oversee the marking of students work”.

But AI can be used for other purposes – for example “for the quality assurance of the examining process”.

“It can sample, it can check… There are lots and lots of useful, helpful, quality-improving things AI can do, but marking work itself must be overseen by a human being.”

But ‘exciting uses’ in question generation

Generating question papers which are roughly the same level of difficulty each year is “labour intensive” and “difficult”, Bauckham said.

“It may well be that AI can support with that, and my judgment would be that there are fewer risks to public confidence there, providing a human is in the loop for final sign-off, than in the actual marking of student work.”

The former school leader, who appeared at the education committee for his pre-appointment hearing, said the “vast majority” of GCSE and A-level assessments involved “some degree of extended writing”, which would need to be marked by humans.

However, he acknowledged “there may be some very simple, selective response items, so multiple choice questions, which can be safely marked by a machine, but we would still expect a human to be in the loop, checking that that is happening, sampling quality and so on”.

He added it was “very difficult to challenge a machine’s decision”.

Latest education roles from

Executive Director of Finance – Moulton College

Executive Director of Finance – Moulton College

FEA

Director of Governance – HRUC

Director of Governance – HRUC

FEA

Principal and CEO

Principal and CEO

Hills Road Sixth Form College

Senior Quality Officer

Senior Quality Officer

University of Lancashire

Sponsored posts

Sponsored post

Funding Is Flowing, Demand Is Rising — It’s Time for FE to Deliver on Green Skills

As the UK races toward net zero, the government says it wants to back 2 million green jobs by...

Advertorial
Sponsored post

Helping every learner use AI responsibly

AI didn’t wait to be invited into the classroom. It burst in mid-lesson. Across UK colleges, learners are already...

Advertorial
Sponsored post

Supporting the UK’s Transport Decarbonisation Plan Through Skills

The UK Government’s Decarbonising Transport: A Better, Greener Britain strategy sets a legally binding path towards a net-zero transport...

Advertorial
Sponsored post

Project power: ASDAN expands its qualifications portfolio

From 2026, ASDAN’s planned Foundation and Higher Project Qualifications will sit alongside its Extended Project Qualification[CM1] , creating a complete...

Advertorial

More from this theme

Apprenticeships, Ofsted

‘One bad employer’ blamed for provider’s ‘inadequate’ Ofsted result

Inspectors found few apprentices released from work for off-the-job training

Anviksha Patel
Ofsted

ASCL and NEU to support NAHT in legal action against Ofsted

A judicial review claim was filed in May, warning the new inspection framework will 'only increase high-stakes accountability and...

Ruth Lucas
Ofsted

Nudge unit calls for ‘eye-catching’ national Ofsted inspection survey

Behavioural Insights Team also urges watchdog to 'emphasise' how to reduce the formality of conversations in inspector training

Lydia Chantler-Hicks
Ofsted

Ofsted reforms ‘the most sensible’ way forward, Oliver tells MPs

Chief inspector also praises watchdog’s ‘more human’ complaints process but admits to ‘concern’ over union tension

Billy Camden

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

2 Comments

  1. AI shows great potential, and could potentially help with workload, although the time freed up by AI will be probably be swallowed up by another aspect of the job. This review should have a focus on how coursework is delivered in an AI age, the traditional way of coursework now has so many ways student can gain an advantage with AI it is no longer a fair assessment of student understanding.

  2. Hopefully a review will explore perceptions around potential double standards.

    Encouraging teachers / tutors to use it to be more productive, but discouraging students from using it because of concerns over cheating.