Qualitative feedback also suggests our approach is beginning to have an impact in important ways. One secondary teacher reduced report writing time from 2.5 days to 0.5 day after Champion training. Others are clearly motivated by the Champions lead in department-wide sessions, with peer-to-peer contact proving to be particularly energising,
External validation supports our approach. Our systematic, evidence-based approach directly addresses gaps identified in Ofsted’s comprehensive study, which concluded that “the biggest risk is doing nothing” regarding AI in education.
Honest assessment of challenges
Survey feedback, however, also reveals that implementation is challenging One Champion noted the role is “very demanding time-wise and takes a significant toll on my day-to-day job requirements.” Champions are requesting more time to do their work and for paid AI tool access.
The evidence base remains limited. Our 27 survey responses across 70+ schools represent a small sample. We lack student outcome data and face early-stage challenges as the academic year begins. Innovation Hub projects remain in feasibility stages rather than proven implementations.
Sustainability questions persist around Champion workload balance, scaling support structures across multiple platforms, and managing expectations. As one Champion noted, “Sometimes instructions given from the top [have felt] like pie in the sky mandates,” though some have voiced appreciation for leadership that translates these into “feasible step-by-step approaches.”
Strategic choices
Schools now face pathway decisions based on readiness and capacity. The Foundation Track, for example, focuses entirely on teacher-facing AI applications with direct training support, building expertise systematically whilst avoiding the complexity of simultaneous teacher and student implementations.
The Expansion Track, on the other hand, pursues both teacher-facing and student-facing approaches, with Champions leading student applications locally. This recognises that some schools have developed sufficient capacity for more complex implementation.
Future development requires addressing Champion requests for advanced training, tackling school challenges through automation and AI-assisted coding. They want practical tools immediately usable for class mixing, report writing, and performance tracking.
Evidence-Based Validation
We have been careful to align our strategy with external frameworks validating educational technology implementation, firstly taking note of EY-Parthenon’s analysis that warns of failed technology adoptions due to poor planning. Professor Rose Luckin’s UCL research emphasises evidence-based implementation, human intelligence primacy, and systematic ethical considerations – principles embedded throughout our strategy.
Significantly, 70% of Champions rated support as “very responsive” to specific needs, suggesting we’ve created genuine value rather than additional burden.