AI use ‘cuts teacher workload but not hours worked’, study suggests

Half of teachers reported using artificial intelligence (AI) had cut their workload, but only a third said it had reduced the hours they work, a study suggests.

The study also found many teachers still reported they had no training from their school on how to use AI, while most secondary teachers think they have graded work that was AI-generated.

BETT, (the British Educational Training and Technology Show) commissioned YouGov to ask 1,033 teachers about how they use AI, how it affects their workload and what their concerns are.

The survey, carried out in June, was the third BETT has commissioned since 2024.

It found eight in ten teachers surveyed reported using AI for their work. Four in ten used it every week, double last year’s figure.

Only 11 per cent said they had never used it for teaching, while 10 per cent had tried it once or twice.

Younger staff were more likely to use it, with 87 per cent of under-35s using the technology for teaching-related tasks, compared with 62 per cent of over-55s.

Of those teachers who used AI, 51 per cent said it eased their workload, while 40 per cent said their workload stayed the same. However, 9 per cent said using AI had increased their workload.

Thirty-five per cent said they worked fewer hours by using AI for specific teaching tasks, but most felt the hours they saved were swallowed up by other demands.

Enthusiasm ‘cooling’

Those who used AI regularly (daily or weekly) tended to save one to two hours a week, with 20 per cent saying they saved one hour and 19 per cent saying they saved two.

A smaller number saved far more time, with 7 per cent saving more than five hours a week, while 15 per cent said they saved less than an hour.

More than half (55 per cent) said they worked the same hours as before, while 4 per cent said they worked more.

Older teachers were less likely to benefit, with just 26 per cent of over-55s saying they worked fewer hours, compared with 41 per cent of under-35s.

Last year’s survey found 68 per cent expected to use AI more in the coming year, but 47 per cent said the same this year.

Duncan Verry, a portfolio director at BETT, said: “Teachers are using AI more than ever, but their enthusiasm for it is cooling.

“They tell us it saves them time on particular jobs, but most say they are not working fewer hours … something else fills it.

“Teachers are still reaching for AI, but they have just stopped expecting quite so much of it.”

He said teachers had taken AI “about as far as they can on their own”.

“Whether it comes to do more than lighten the odd afternoon will now depend on decisions that are not theirs to make.”

Private schools more likely to get support

Of those who used AI, 76 per cent said they used it for lesson resources, such as planning and worksheets, while 39 per cent used it for letters and emails to parents.

Another 39 per cent used it for pupil reports and 13 per cent for SEND or EHCP contributions.

Only 8 per cent said they used AI to mark or grade pupils’ work.

But the study found patchy levels of support. Two in five (41 per cent) said they had no training or support from their school. Sixteen per cent said this happened once a year, while 2 per cent said it happened once a term.

Almost half (48 per cent) said their school had no written AI policy, while 19 per cent didn’t know. Where there was a policy, just 18 per cent said they understood it well.

Teachers in independent schools were more likely to get support, with 61 per cent saying they had training, compared with 41 per cent in state schools.

Most suspect pupils submit AI-generated work

Many secondary teachers raised concerns about AI cheating, with 71 per cent of them saying AI had made it easier for pupils to cheat and get away with it.

Fifty-seven per cent suspected at least one pupil of handing in AI-assisted work without permission in the previous four weeks, while 76 per cent thought they had graded AI-generated work in the past year.

The figures were far lower for primary teachers, with just 16 per cent saying they thought they had graded AI-generated work.

While 30 per cent of all teachers backed coursework – but said they would add better detection software – 29 per cent said it should be replaced with supervised in-class writing.

Nine per cent said coursework should be dropped altogether, while 4 per cent would keep it the same.

Just over half were open to making room in the curriculum for AI, compared with a third who would not.

The sample included 429 senior leaders, 604 classroom teachers, 506 primary teachers, 486 secondary teachers and 41 in all-through schools. Figures were weighted to represent UK teachers.