The phrase “pedagogy first” has long been a go-to in discussions about technology in the classroom. It reminds us that the real engine of learning lies not in the devices we use, but in the processes of teaching and learning themselves. Yet recently this notion has come under criticism.
Too often, detractors present a narrow caricature of pedagogy, as if it were simply concerned with the mechanisms involved in the transmission of knowledge, and then dismiss the whole concept as rigid, outdated, and inattentive to the needs of either teachers or students. This position lacks nuance.
Teachers have long aspired to autonomy as the hallmark of professional respect. Give us teachers autonomy, the argument goes, and we will flourish: freed from prescription, released from bureaucracy, and able to dedicate our creativity and expertise to actually teaching.
But like many noble ideals, it comes with drawbacks. I’ve seen how, left on its own, autonomy can turn into isolation. Teachers may feel free, but free in the vacuum of their own classroom, with little guidance on how to translate that freedom into professional development.
But what if autonomy is not the destination, but only the starting point?
In 2025, according to the Literacy Trust, around two in three (66.5%) young people aged 13–18 reported using generative AI. Those who did were turning to it more frequently, with 45.6% saying they used AI weekly or more often compared with just 31.1% the year before.
Among monthly users, the most common purposes were asking questions (61.2%), getting help with homework (60.9%), and entertainment (52.8%), reflecting both its role as a learning aid and as a tool for everyday curiosity.
I work as both an educational consultant and an ISI school inspector, and when I sit down with any group of GCSE or A Level students (15–18 years old) and one thing becomes clear almost instantly: AI is no longer something approaching over the horizon; it is woven into their everyday learning. While schools and teachers may be exploring a wide menu of platforms, the students themselves have already strongly converged on one: Open AI’s ChatGPT.
Supporting schools, educators, and organisations to lead with clarity, teach with impact, and grow with purpose
José Picardo
For much of its history, the internet has been a library, a static archive of documents waiting to be searched, sifted, and cited. Education adapted around this model: we taught students how to look things up, how to cross-check sources, and how to evaluate reliability. This seemed reasonable, and it mostly worked well.
But the web is changing. With the rise of generative AI, it is becoming dynamic: information no longer needs to exist in advance; it can be conjured on demand, often personalised to the individual. As I have argued before, my version of the internet may not look anything like yours, because the content itself is shaped by the questions I ask and the data it knows about me.
For schools, this is not an abstract shift. It affects how pupils complete homework, how teachers plan lessons, how administrators manage logistics, and how parents support their children at home. The implications are immense, swinging between utopian promise and dystopian concern.
Perhaps the best way to explore them is through four familiar characters, each encountering potential scenarios in which this new dynamic web either supports, distorts, or reshapes their everyday experience of school life.
Supporting schools, educators, and organisations to lead with clarity, teach with impact, and grow with purpose
José Picardo
Each August, as another exam season comes to an end, I look to celebrate the wins and study the losses. I try to resist the temptation to sit back in the comfort of the staffroom armchair and pass judgement. It is always easier to critique in the abstract, rehearsing what others ought to have done differently and with the benefit of hindsight, than it is to offer practical, workable alternatives. The harder, and more honourable, task is to ask instead: what am I prepared to change, to invest in, and to live by? Integrity in school leadership is measured not by cataloguing the failings of others but by modelling the commitment we ask of them.
With that in mind, I offer five areas where schools might focus their energy to help build lasting improvement:
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
