2027 enrolments are open! Black Friday, Christmas & Boxing Day early bird · Save 20%.View offers
AICAMP Find a program
Project spotlight

What UNESCO Digital Learning Week 2026 Means for Schools & Families

A student uses AI to improve a science explanation. The finished work is clear and convincing. Could the student explain the same idea in their own words the next day?

That question captures one of the challenges explored at UNESCO’s Digital Learning Week, held in Paris from 8 to 11 September 2026. The event also examined who gets to decide which AI tools enter classrooms, how learner data is handled, and what evidence schools can use to judge whether a tool helps children learn. UNESCO’s Digital Learning Week 2026 overview

Three themes from Digital Learning Week

  • Facts. What evidence supports an AI-generated claim? A confident answer can sound credible even when its sources are missing or unreliable.
  • Frictions. Whose priorities shape how AI is used? Teachers, families, students and technology providers can have different expectations about what a tool should do and what information it should collect.
  • Frontiers. What is worth trying, and what is worth keeping? The programme explored emerging AI tools and community-led approaches alongside familiar ways of learning such as handwriting, reading print and talking things through face to face.

What it means to treat education as a common good

When a school introduces an AI tool, the decision affects what children practise, how teachers exercise their judgement and who can access support. UNESCO’s discussion paper calls for deliberative governance, an approach in which the people affected by a decision take part in weighing the evidence and shaping what happens. Read UNESCO’s discussion paper

Take a school considering an AI writing assistant. It could start by choosing the writing skill students are meant to practise, asking teachers and students what support would help, and explaining to families how student work would be handled. A small trial could then check whether students can apply that skill independently in a new writing task.

Eight priorities from the Ministerial Statement

More than 25 ministers and designated education representatives adopted a statement on how education systems should approach AI. Its eight priorities can be put in practical terms.

  • Make AI tools used in education open to public scrutiny, including tools offered free of charge.
  • Build AI literacy and give students time to reason, question and work through problems.
  • Invest in teacher professional learning and involve teachers in decisions about classroom tools.
  • Match AI activities to children’s ages, development and learning needs.
  • Give learners and teachers a voice in decisions about how their data is collected and used.
  • Consider accessibility, inclusion and language needs when choosing and evaluating tools.
  • Account for the full cost of adoption, including staff time, ongoing support and switching providers.
  • Share expertise across education systems so they can evaluate and govern AI effectively.

Read the UNESCO Ministerial Statement

Six questions schools can ask about AI adoption

UNESCO’s discussion paper identifies six ways that AI use can change education when oversight is limited. For schools, these risks translate into practical questions.

  • Use across classrooms. Which tools are already in use, and who has reviewed them?
  • Evidence of learning. Can students explain how they reached an answer and apply the same idea in a different task?
  • Teacher judgement. Can teachers review and override an AI suggestion that affects assessment or student support?
  • Student data. What might the school miss about a learner if a decision relies on a platform’s data or predictions?
  • Fair access. Who can use the paid features, accessible formats or language support that an activity requires?
  • Reliance on a provider. Could the school keep teaching and move its data if a provider changed its prices, features or terms?

What UNESCO’s higher education survey found

Among academics who responded to UNESCO’s survey of its Chairs network, 93% believed students were using generative AI to produce assignments and 63% perceived a decline in students’ cognitive abilities. These figures describe the views of respondents in higher education. Measuring changes in school-aged children’s learning, or establishing what caused any changes, would require separate evidence. Read UNESCO’s survey announcement

What schools and families can do

  • School leaders. Pick one proposed use and agree on what students should gain from it. Hear from teachers, students and families, give them a way to raise concerns, and set a date to review the evidence.
  • Teachers. Explain when AI assistance is permitted. Ask students to check a generated answer against a trusted source, explain a choice they made, or apply the same idea independently.
  • Parents and carers. Ask your child what they asked the tool, how they checked the answer and how they would explain it themselves. With younger children, try sorting pictures together and discussing what examples a computer would need to tell one group from another.

At AICAMP, we want children to understand how AI works, test where it makes mistakes and decide when it’s useful. Hands-on activities give them time to try ideas, talk through mistakes and explain what they’ve learnt.

Six UNESCO background papers for further reading

UNESCO resources for schools

UNESCO plans to use feedback from the 2026 consultation to inform policy briefs for Digital Learning Week 2027. The discussion paper and all six background papers are available through the UNESCO consultation page. Follow Digital Learning Week updates