The competition is now closed.
Please check back for updates in January and follow us on LinkedIn.
Education in 2028:
AIEd Forecasting Competition
AI is already transforming education in ways both positive and negative—and the pace is accelerating. This forecasting competition invites anyone with a thoughtful perspective—educators, researchers, technologists, students, and beyond—to make specific, defendable forecasts about AI's impact on education by the end of 2028 (roughly the same span between ChatGPT's release and today).
Schools, universities, teachers, and students are doing their best to navigate this shifting landscape, but we need better collective intelligence about what's actually coming. By aggregating predictions from hundreds of informed participants, we create a richer picture of possible futures.
Forecasts will be reviewed by a panel of expert judges, and the best forecasts will be shared publicly and win cash prizes. Deadline: Tuesday 16 December at 23:59 PST
Competition Overview
Ten Prizes Per Track
50 awards total
Four Runner-Up Prizes: $500 each
Grand Prize Winner: $2,500
Five Honourable Mentions: $100
Who Should Apply
Anyone with a thoughtful perspective on education's future. You don't need to be an AI expert, just someone who thinks carefully about education's future. We especially encourage submissions from:
• Technologists, edtech entrepreneurs and developers
• Classroom teachers and school leaders
• University lecturers and academics
• Students and recent graduates
• Researchers across disciplines
• Policymakers and administrators
• Industry professionals thinking about workforce needs
Judges
Applications will be judged by a fantastic group of experts from leading organisations.
Track 1: Teaching Profession
• Donika Dimovska, Chief Knowledge Officer | Jacobs Foundation
• Marcela Morales Hidalgo, Director | Pousaz Philanthropies
• Dan Meyer, Vice President | Amplify
• Joanna Cannon, Senior Program Officer | Walton Family Foundation
• John Roberts, CEO | Oak National Academy
Track 2: Cognitive Development & Mathematics Education
• Laurence Holt, Senior Advisor | XQ Institute
• Stephen Jull, Global Head of AI & EdTech | Teach for All
• David Monis-Weston, Head of EdTech | Purposeful Ventures
• Irina Jurenka, Research Director | Google DeepMind
• Alex Siegel, Senior Program Officer | Gates Foundation
Track 3: Student Motivation, Personalization & Socialization
• Susan Acland-Hood, Permanent Secretary | Department for Education
• Isabelle Hau, Executive Director | Stanford Accelerator for Learning
• Sandy Smith, Vice President of Efficacy & Learning | Pearson
• Kristen Eignor DiCerbo, Chief Learning Officer | Khan Academy
• Kim Shillinglaw, Non-Exec Director | Creative Industries, Science & Technology
Track 4: Higher Education Assessment & Academic Integrity
• Amber Oliver, Managing Director | Robin Hood Learning + Technology Fund
• Joshua Lotstein, Senior Director | Overdeck Family Foundation
• Tyler Sussman, Senior Program Officer | Chan Zuckerberg Initiative
• Mary Curnock Cook CBE, UK Chair | Pearson
Track 5: AI Tutoring
• Baroness Diana Barran, Former Minister | School System & Student Finance 2021-24
• Lila Ibrahim, COO | Google DeepMind
• Kumar Garg, President | Renaissance Philanthropy
• Bryan Richardson, Senior Program Officer | Gates Foundation
Forecasting Tracks
1. Teaching Profession
Scenario: By the end of 2028, what percentage of non-interpersonal teacher activities (lesson planning, grading, and parent communication) will teachers routinely delegate to AI systems?
Note: We are excluding activities that require social, emotional, or live human-to-human interaction support—such as classroom management, building relationships, or providing pastoral care.
Your prediction: Please start with a quantitative answer to the above question.
Rationale: What would have to be true technologically, institutionally, and politically for your prediction to be correct?
Implications: What are some of the follow-on consequences of your prediction? For instance:
-
Would this lead to teacher substitution (job losses) or augmentation (more time for relational aspects of teaching, improved efficacy across the teacher workforce)?
-
Would teacher prestige and compensation increase or decrease?
-
How would the parent and student agency, relative to school authority, change?
2. Cognitive Development & Mathematics Education
Scenario: AI systems can already solve mathematics problems at expert human levels. By the end of 2028, will this capability contribute towards an increase or decrease in enrolment in advanced mathematics courses in high school / secondary school & sixth form, and by how much? (Current baseline: approximately 15-20% of students take calculus in the US).
Your prediction: Predict whether enrollment will increase, decrease, or stay roughly the same by the end of 2028, and by approximately what percentage. Explain your reasoning.
Rationale: What would have to be true technologically, institutionally, and politically for your prediction to be correct?
Implications: What are some of the follow-on consequences of your prediction? For instance:
-
Would widespread AI assistance in mathematics improve mathematical literacy by making it more accessible or create cognitive dependencies?
-
What happens to students' problem-solving abilities and tolerance for intellectual challenge when AI can instantly solve problems many find difficult?
-
What would be the implications for STEM career preparation and the development of quantitative reasoning skills?
3. Student Motivation, Personalization & Socialization
Scenario: By the end of 2028, what percentage of high school students will spend more than 2 hours per day in school learning through AI-powered, personalized and/ or gamified educational content that adapts to their individual interests and learning pace?
Your prediction: Please start with a quantitative answer to the above question.
Rationale: What would have to be true technologically, institutionally, and politically for your prediction to be correct?
Implications: What are some of the follow-on implications of your prediction? For instance:
-
Is sustained engagement with highly personalized learning inherently beneficial, or does education require developing tolerance for boredom, difficulty, and learning things that don't immediately interest you?
-
How would this affect students' capacity for self-directed learning, intrinsic motivation, and ability to collaborate with peers who have learned different things?
-
What would be the implications for cognitive diversity, shared cultural knowledge, and democratic participation when students increasingly follow individualized learning paths?
4. Higher Education Assessment & Academic Integrity
Scenario: By the end of 2028, what is the likelihood (expressed as a percentage) that AI systems' ability to complete written assessments will force a significant shift back to in-person, proctored assessment methods (such as handwritten exams, oral presentations, or live demonstrations) in higher education?
Your prediction: Please start with a quantitative answer to the above question.
Rationale: What would have to be true technologically, institutionally, and politically for your prediction to be correct?
Implications: What are some of the follow-on implications of your prediction? For instance:
-
If universities DO shift to in-person assessments:
-
Would this increase or decrease the quality and validity of what we're measuring?
-
How would this affect the types of skills prioritized when complex written work becomes impossible to assess authentically?
-
-
If universities DO NOT shift to in-person assessments:
-
What are the implications for the value and credibility of college degrees when AI can complete most coursework?
-
What unique value would universities provide beyond social networking and credentialing functions?
-
5. AI Tutoring
Scenario: By the end of 2028, what is the percentage likelihood that AI tutoring platforms will be able to provide learning growth equivalent to today's high-quality professional human tutors?
Note: We are intentionally excluding other valuable aspects of human tutoring such as college counselling, mentorship, emotional support, or social connection.
Your prediction: Please start with a quantitative answer to the above question.
Rationale: What would have to be true technologically, institutionally, and politically for your prediction to be correct?
Implications: What are some of the follow-on implications of your prediction? For instance:
-
Would this democratize access to high-quality instruction, or would wealthy families find new ways to maintain educational advantages?
-
What would be the implications for educational equity and social mobility?
-
How would this affect the professional tutoring industry and education labour markets?
Guidance For Applicants
Making Strong Predictions: Avoid extreme predictions (0%, 100%) unless you have compelling structural arguments, and avoid hedging around 50%. Make clear, reasoned predictions that reflect your genuine assessment of likelihood.
All Perspectives Welcome: We have no preference for optimistic versus pessimistic forecasts. We also ask you to separate probability from desirability, so you can argue that a scenario can be likely yet harmful, or beneficial yet unlikely. Submissions are evaluated on clarity of reasoning and quality of argumentation.
Geographic Focus: Unless a question specifies otherwise, make predictions at the national level. You can choose any country—just declare it clearly. National-level predictions make it easier to compare submissions and ground forecasts in available data.
Each Submission Must Include:
An analytical essay
-
Must be 500 to 1,000 words.
-
Figures and data are not required, but may be included and do not count against the word limit.
A short audio note or video summarizing your core argument
-
Must be 2 to 5 minutes in length.
-
This recording will be reviewed only by the program team for quality assurance—not by judges. It will not be shared publicly without your express written consent.
Frequently Asked Questions
Terms and Conditions
The competition is organised by EdTechnical, which is incubated by Purposeful Ventures and operates under its charitable status. Purposeful Ventures is registered with the Charity Commission for England and Wales under no. 1204622, and is based at 1 EdCity, EdCity Walk, London, W12 7TF.
If you have any questions, please contact hello@edtechnical.com
Entry requirements
-
Entry requirements include the Submission Requirements section, which forms part of these Terms and Conditions.
-
The competition is free to enter.
-
The organizer accepts no responsibility for entries that are lost, damaged or delayed, regardless of cause, including any technical or network malfunction.
-
The organiser reserves the right to disqualify entrants whose conduct is contrary to the spirit or intention of the competition.
Eligibility
-
The competition is open globally to individuals aged 18 and over.
-
Employees of Purposeful Ventures, their families, agents or any third party directly involved in administrating the competition are not eligible to enter.
Prize
-
The judges’ decision is final and binding. No correspondence will be entered into.
-
The prize is non-exchangeable, non-transferable and no cash alternative is offered. The organisers reserve the right to alter the details of the prize if required by circumstances beyond their control.
-
Winners will be notified by email within 60 days of the closing date. If a winner cannot be contacted or does not claim the prize within 14 days of notification, the organiser reserves the right to withdraw the prize and select another winner.
-
For team entries, the prize will be issued to the team lead designated in the submission form, who is wholly responsible for distributing it to team members.
-
Insofar as is permitted by law, the organiser, its agents or distributors will not in any circumstances be responsible or liable to compensate the winner or accept any liability for any loss, damage, personal injury or death occurring as a result of taking up the prize except where it is caused by the negligence of the organiser, its agents or distributors or that of their employees. Your statutory rights are not affected.
Data use and protection
-
By entering, you agree that any data provided by you with your entry may be held and used by the organiser or its agents and suppliers to administer the competition.
-
Your data will be processed in line with applicable data protection legislation.
-
The lawful basis for processing your data is consent, given when you enter the competition, and, where relevant, the organizer’s legitimate interest in managing the competition fairly and effectively, maintaining records, and using anonymized data for reporting and evaluation.
-
Your personal data will be deleted within 12 months of the competition’s close unless you consent to further contact.
-
You have the right to access, correct, or delete your data, withdraw consent, and complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
General
-
The organiser reserves the right to cancel, amend, or suspend the competition where necessary due to circumstances beyond its reasonable control.
-
The organiser reserves the right to update these Terms and Conditions from time to time and any updated version will be effective as soon as it is published.
Entry into the competition constitutes full and unconditional acceptance of these terms and conditions.