Curriculum Development and AI – Where’s the Harm?

AI and the Primary Curriculum: A Cautionary Opportunity

In recent times, artificial intelligence (AI) has begun to get a foothold in UK schools, not just as a classroom curiosity, but as a serious contender in shaping curriculum design. With large language models capable of drafting lesson plans, writing curriculum overviews, and generating resource materials in seconds, the appeal is obvious, especially when teacher workload and recruitment remain front-line challenges. But with this opportunity comes risk, and nowhere is the balance more delicate than in the design and development of the primary curriculum.

The Promise: Time-Saving and Creative Spark

There’s no denying that using AI in schools can significantly reduce the time it takes to create teaching materials. A Year 4 teacher, for example, might use AI to generate differentiated questions on a topic, or a subject lead might use it to sketch out a curriculum overview aligned to the national curriculum. For teachers pressed for time, this can offer breathing space or even offer a chance for a real work/life balance.

Used well, AI can also be a creative partner. Teachers may find inspiration in AI-generated ideas or use it to experiment with different ways of sequencing content or explaining difficult concepts. The initial drafting phase of curriculum development (often considered the most difficult; a blank page is hard to fill!) can feel more manageable when a first version is ready in seconds.

The Danger: Eroding Expertise and Ownership

But the very speed and ease of AI can come at a cost. When teachers rely too heavily on AI-generated materials, they risk becoming editors of someone else’s curriculum rather than authors of their own. The professional knowledge that underpins curriculum decisions, what to include, what to leave out, and how to sequence learning for conceptual understanding, can weaken over time if not actively practised.

There’s also the question of enthusiasm and ownership. Teachers are more likely to engage deeply with material they’ve shaped themselves. When a curriculum is developed collaboratively within a school, it tends to reflect shared values, provoke professional dialogue, and strengthen a sense of collective purpose. AI can short-circuit this process, replacing rich professional discussion with a silent, solo session at a screen with little thought or consideration.

Curriculum, Community and Cohesion

From a school leadership perspective, the curriculum is more than a delivery mechanism for knowledge, it is an expression of the school’s values, vision and identity. A curriculum written in-house, even if imperfect, often reflects the nuances of the local community, the passions of staff, and the strengths of the pupils.

If curriculum content begins to be outsourced to AI, even partially, there’s a risk of diluting this cohesion. Materials may appear polished but generic; therefore, disconnected from the lived experience of the school. The more AI is used without careful review and adaptation, the harder it becomes to ensure consistency of voice, tone and educational philosophy across year groups and subjects.

What’s Happening Nationally?

In England, the Department for Education has not yet issued a formal policy on the use of AI in curriculum design, but it has shown growing interest in the technology. A 2023 DfE report highlighted AI’s potential for reducing teacher workload, and pilot projects are beginning to explore this across schools. Ofsted, meanwhile, remains focused on ensuring that curriculum is “coherently planned and sequenced,” regardless of who, or what, writes it.

There’s also broader government messaging about the need for pupils to become “AI literate,” which is pushing schools to experiment with these tools more broadly. But there’s little guidance yet on how to do this safely or meaningfully when it comes to curriculum creation.

A Final Word: Keep the Curriculum Human

In this fast-moving space, it’s tempting to see AI as a shortcut to curriculum excellence. But curriculum development is more than an administrative task, it’s a craft rooted in professional judgement, child development, subject knowledge and local context. No AI, however advanced, can replace the deep understanding a teacher has of their pupils, their school, and their community.

Used wisely, AI can be a helpful assistant, but it should never be the author of a school’s story. That story needs to be human. It needs to belong to the people who live it: the teachers who shape it, the children who experience it, and the community it serves.