A teacher reviewing a suggested lesson has to imagine what happens when students meet it. An explanation may depend on knowledge the class has yet to develop. An exercise can be accurate and still ask learners to take a step they are unprepared for.
UNESCO’s 2024 AI competency framework for teachers places professional judgment within a wider account of AI competence. It connects technical understanding with ethical responsibilities and teaching practice, while giving teacher agency an explicit place. Read the teacher framework.
That expertise needs room in the timetable. Reviewing generated material requires professional work, and schools should allocate time for teachers to do it.
What reviewing a lesson requires
Consider an imaginary science lesson about evaporation. A generated activity asks students to compare two containers after changing several conditions at once. The teacher needs to decide whether that activity supports the explanation students are expected to develop. The wording can be clear while the comparison remains difficult to interpret.
We would want professional learning to give teachers room to examine examples like this together. Colleagues could identify the question the activity is meant to answer, then change the task so learners can reason about the evidence. Their discussion would make the teaching decision visible.
The same exercise should allow disagreement. One teacher may see a useful discussion prompt where another sees a confusing first introduction. The class’s previous learning could justify either judgment. A shared review should help teachers explain the conditions under which they would use the material.
School leaders can support that work by asking for the reason behind a choice. Requiring staff to demonstrate frequent AI use would create a different incentive. We would assess a proposed activity through its fit with the lesson and the teacher’s account of the students’ needs.
Make room for professional learning
A useful programme should start with a problem teachers already need to solve. A department could choose one difficult explanation and examine several proposed ways of teaching it. Staff would then decide which approach deserves a classroom trial and what they need to observe during it.
That trial should have a manageable scope. The teacher needs a practical way to record where students become confused and which changes the activity requires. A short discussion afterwards could help colleagues decide whether the material is worth using again.
Professional learning also requires permission to pause. If a teacher cannot establish that a resource suits the task, the school should provide time to revise it or use an established alternative. Staff should know who can help resolve a concern about the material.
The experience gained through these reviews should remain available to colleagues. A brief note explaining a rejected example can help the next teacher understand the issue without repeating the entire review.