I'VE BEEN THINKING

Whenever a new tool lands, generative AI most recently, the first conversation tends to be about the tool. What can it do? Which features should we switch on? Who's trying it?

I find it more useful to start from somewhere else: what is this teacher trying to help their students do, and what's getting in the way? Sometimes technology is the answer. Often it's a clearer assessment brief, a better-structured course page, or a conversation.

The best technology work I've seen is quiet. Nobody talks about the tool afterwards. They talk about what their students could suddenly do.

Supporting staff across a large college taught me that digital skills aren't spread evenly, and that confidence matters as much as skill. People will avoid a tool they suspect they'll look foolish using in front of a class.

The most effective support I've seen makes it safe to be a beginner: short sessions, real examples from people's own subjects, and peers who share what went wrong as well as what went well.

Tools come and go. The habits underneath them last: being curious, being willing to try something and adapt it, and designing learning so that more people can take part.

A digital practitioner isn't someone who knows every app. It's someone who knows how to learn the next one, and who can tell when it isn't worth learning at all.