ChatGPT is a useful starting point for a conversation about AI in education. It gives people something concrete to try: ask a question, draft an explanation, adapt a resource. The difficulty comes when that experience becomes the basis for an institutional strategy.
For a ministry, education publisher or NGO, the question is how those capabilities fit into the work of delivering education. Who approves a generated resource? What information can staff share with a provider? How will a translated explanation be checked? What happens when a funded pilot ends?
My view is that ChatGPT-class tools can make useful contributions across that work. But the programme around them needs as much attention as the technology. Without it, institutions risk expanding production faster than their capacity to check what they produce.


