Benefits
- Benefit
-
56.2 minutes a week on Year 7 and 8 science lesson preparation against 81.5 minutes
Awaiting review
- Outcome identifiers
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Category
-
Reduced Task Time
Awaiting review
- Status
-
Reported benefit
Awaiting review
- Beneficiary groups
-
People. Organizations.
Awaiting review
- Beneficiaries
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Reach
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Distribution and access
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Duration
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Expected?
-
Yes
Awaiting review
- Costs and harms
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
AI system
- System
-
ChatGPT, with an online guide to using it for lesson and resource preparation
Awaiting review
- Model
-
This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Release
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Provider
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Role
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Configuration
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Inputs and outputs
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Autonomy
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Workflow
-
Teachers received ChatGPT access and an online guide to using it for planning. The trial covered Year 7 and 8 science lessons for ten weeks.
Awaiting review
- Human oversight
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Relation to AI
-
Schools were randomly assigned to the ChatGPT group or to a group asked not to use generative AI, so the difference in preparation time isolates the effect of ChatGPT with the guide.
Awaiting review
- AI contribution
-
Schools were randomly assigned to the ChatGPT group or to a group asked not to use generative AI, so the difference in preparation time isolates the effect of ChatGPT with the guide.
Awaiting review
Measurement
- Studies
-
Randomized. [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Studies
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
- Study design
-
Randomized. [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Study design
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
- Measurement
-
Teacher-reported weekly preparation time; blind expert panel review of sampled resources. [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Measurement
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
- Setting and sample
-
259 Year 7 and 8 science teachers in 68 schools. [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Setting and sample
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
- Measures
-
Minutes per week on lesson and resource preparation. [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Measures
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
- Comparison
-
Teachers asked not to use generative AI. [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Comparison
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
- Results
-
56.2 against 81.5 minutes per week (69%). [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Results
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
- Additional value from AI
-
25.3 minutes saved per week. [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Additional value from AI
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
- Limitations
-
Self-reported diary times; quality reviewed for 30 teachers; one subject and two year groups; free ChatGPT version changed during the trial. [2]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Limitations
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [2]
Money
- Kind of value
-
The kind of monetary value is unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Amount
-
The monetary value is not established.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Currency and prices
-
The currency and price basis are unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Period and unit
-
The period and unit of the monetary estimate are unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Realization
-
Whether the monetary value was realized is unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Recipients and payers
-
The recipients and payers are unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Gross or net
-
Whether the monetary figure includes costs is unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Included costs
-
The costs included in the estimate are unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Comparison
-
The financial comparison is not established.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Method
-
The method used to calculate monetary value is unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Return and payback
-
The return on investment or payback period is not established.
Not reviewedUnresolved
People and places
- Participants
-
Developer:
OpenAI. Operator: Science teachers in 68 secondary schools in a trial run by NFER for the Education Endowment Foundation and the Hg Foundation.Awaiting review
- Jurisdictions
-
Benefit: 68 state-funded secondary schools in England. Developer:
United States. Operator: 
United Kingdom.Awaiting review
- Ownership and control
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Dependencies
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Cross-border connections
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Geopolitical implications
-
The geopolitical implications are unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
Follow-up
- Conditions for replication
-
Teachers must learn to use the tool for specific activities such as quizzes. Schools must permit its use for planning.
Awaiting review
- Replication attempts
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Later findings
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Availability
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Institutional decision
-
A relevant institutional decision has not been established.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Grounds
-
The grounds for an institutional decision are unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Action and result
-
The result of an institutional decision is not established.
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Success criterion
-
The criterion for a successful institutional decision is unclear.
Not reviewedUnresolved
Evidence
- Source numbers
-
AIBD-0669-source-0001–0003
Awaiting review
- Citations
-
Numbered references below.
Awaiting review
- Language
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Source relationships
-
Evaluator, Independent
Awaiting review
- Original evidence
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Access and versions
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Supported findings
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Evidence links
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Evidence strength
-
Independently reported. Sources: one independent news report and two reports from the evaluators. The cited evidence includes no independent study or report and no finding by a regulator or court. [1] [2] [3]
- Missing evidence
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
Grades
- Assessed benefits
-
People. Organizations.
Awaiting review
- Depth
-
People: 1. Organizations: 1.
Awaiting review
- Reasons
-
People: Teachers saved about 25.3 minutes a week on Year 7 and 8 science lesson preparation. Organizations: Schools gained teacher time with no difference found in the quality of resources.
Awaiting review
- Observed or intended
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Rubric
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Assessor and date
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Alternative assessments
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Fill
-
Independently reported
Awaiting review
Entry details
- Kind
-
The case describes an evaluation or a study. A school-randomized controlled trial by an independent evaluator. [1]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Kind
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [1]
- Related entries
-
No incident in the AI Incident Database snapshot of 26 October 2026 concerns the same kind of system harming the same kind of stakeholder.
Partly reviewedUnresolved: supporting details for Related entries
Compared with the incidents in the AI Incident Database snapshot of 26 October 2026.
- Field
-
Education (teacher workload).
Awaiting review
- Purpose
-
OpenAI built ChatGPT as a general-purpose chatbot. The trial tested whether it could cut the time that teachers spend preparing lessons.
Awaiting review
- Dates
-
Source information as of: July 2024. Updated: 29 October 2026.
Awaiting review
- Stage
-
The system was used in a pilot. Teachers used the tool for ten weeks within a trial. [1]
Fully reviewed: supporting details for Stage
Review date: 29 October 2026.
Sources: [1]
- Version
-
SHA-256: ad1a6c2e3a94…
Awaiting review: supporting details for Version
SHA-256 of the public case, its assessments, and its displayed answers and notes, excluding its own identifier and the derived coverage summary.
References
- Other identifiers
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Category mappings
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Citable summary
-
Unresolved
Not reviewedUnresolved
- Revisions
-
1 revision. Latest: 29 October 2026.
Awaiting review
Sources
-
Report Evaluator
Roy P, Poet H, Staunton R, Aston K, Thomas D. ChatGPT in lesson preparation - A Teacher Choices Trial. National Foundation for Educational Research, for the Education Endowment Foundation, 12 December 2024.
While a typical teacher in the non-GenAI group spent 81.5 minutes per week preparing lessons and resources for Year 7 and Year 8 science lessons, teachers in the ChatGPT group spent around 56.2 minutes per week, saving 25.3 minutes per week on average.
-
Report Evaluator
Roy P, Poet H, Staunton R, Aston K, Thomas D. ChatGPT in Lesson Preparation: A Teacher Choices Trial. Evaluation Report. Education Endowment Foundation, December 2024.
teachers in the ChatGPT group spent around 56.2 minutes per week, saving 25.3 minutes per week on average. This finding has a high security rating.
-
News report Independent author
Whittaker F. Using ChatGPT can cut lesson planning by 31% - EEF study. Schools Week, 12 December 2024 (archived copy).
Teachers who use ChatGPT alongside a guide on using it effectively can reduce lesson planning time by 31 per cent, a new study suggests.