Harness the power of English for a global competitive edge

Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing how students learn, write and communicate. Tools such as ChatGPT can write essays, correct grammar, translate text and generate ideas in seconds. These tools can support learning, but they also raise important questions for teachers. How can we tell if students can use English on their own? And how can we make sure they are still developing their own ideas and thinking skills?

These questions are becoming increasingly important in education. On 11 November 2026, England's Office for Students (OfS) announced that universities need to do more to make sure their assessments accurately measure what students know and can do. Research carried out with Advance HE found that some students were using AI to complete coursework without showing their own knowledge and skills.

The regulator has warned that universities could face penalties if their assessments do not meet the required standards. It is encouraging institutions to use more secure assessments, including in-person exams, presentations and oral tests, where students can demonstrate their abilities without relying on AI. You can read more about the findings in The Guardian, BBC News and MLQ's coverage of the potential consequences for universities.

However, AI is not only creating challenges. A recent University of Reading podcast about AI and creativity explored how AI could give more people access to creative activities, such as filmmaking. It also discussed the importance of teaching young people about responsible AI use and helping them understand the difference between human and AI-generated content.

For English language teachers, these developments raise an important question: if AI can write in English and generate ideas, what should students be learning and how should we assess their progress?

"The only constant is change”, a phrase that the philosopher Heraclitus of Ephesus is widely credited with.

Though it may look like a paradox, actually it is not. Without becoming too philosophical, one could argue that this statement communicates the real-life truth that perpetual shifting is the single permanent rule in life. How does this apply to teaching and to the teacher’s role in particular? Let’s start our magical mystery tour.

The first stop: the beginnings of the Communicative Approach

Before this revolution in the world of ELT, teachers were used to being the center of the classroom – a dominant, all-controlling figure orchestrating every move. Many students were quite happy with this situation, since nothing was unexpected: their creativity and spontaneity were neither welcome nor expected. Errors were not tolerated at all and teachers were supposed to correct them and, even better, prevent them from happening.

But soon it all changed. Teachers had two primary functions: facilitators of the communication process and independent participants within students’ groups (Breen and Candlin, 1980). No more centrality, which came as a shock to many, not because they were not ready to relinquish power, but because they were not sure how to go about this new role. What is expected from a facilitator, from a person who joins any group as another member?

Often the answer was this one: “When you are a facilitator, if a person enters your classroom, they won’t know who the teacher is.” This led to misinterpretations of this new role. It was not about making things easier for learners, nor was it about relinquishing power and having learners decide what to do.

This was natural. Think about a pendulum. When it’s at one end and it is moved, it does not stay in the middle but goes to the other end. Over time the pendulum reached a medium. This meant that teachers left their physical centrality, i.e. they did not stand at the front of the classroom at all times, but understood the centrality of their role in learning.

The next stops do not follow chronological order because they overlap.

Stop two: Task-based learning

Our next stop: Task-based learning (Willis, 1996 and Nunan, 1989). As it could be argued that it is a framework within communicative approaches, it did not create the same uneasiness in some teachers as the Communicative Approach. The teacher’s role is more structured, especially in Willis’s framework. Teachers select and sequence tasks, monitor students as they work without correcting mistakes, yet provide scaffolding as needed and help students notice language features and become aware of how language works.

Unlike early Communicative Language Teaching, form gets explicit attention, yet after students have been using language, i.e., after the task.

Stop three: Project-based learning.

Teachers move further away towards the background, acting as a coach or guide. They are expected to negotiate projects with their learners, provide scaffolding and language support as needed and assess both process and product, also encouraging self and peer assessment.

Stop four: The Lexical Approach

The stop: The Lexical Approach (Lewis, 1997). Teachers provide input and work toward learners noticing and discovering language features, while learners play an active, central role.

Stop five: Teachers today

The question goes around in society, “Will teachers be replaced by AI? Will they be necessary at all?” The answer to those questions is “No, teachers won't be replaced and will always be necessary." Why? What is there in our role that makes us unique? On the one hand, we know that we should mediate between learners and teaching materials.

This mediation cannot be black and white, since all groups are different and, even within each group, learners have different styles and needs and are affected by different situations. It is the teacher who knows this and knows when to adapt on the spur of the moment, just by looking at their learners’ faces. Often a learner’s question or comment helps us know where they are in their learning process and the scaffolding we give takes that as the starting point.

AI is a fantastic resource, but it is still a resource. It can help teachers generate materials and it can help learners by offering tailored information, answers to queries they may have when the teacher is not here to help, among other ideas. But the teacher has the final say before giving students AI-generated materials. The teacher’s critical reflection and mediation ensure the materials support learning.

As explained before, the teacher is not at the front of the classroom, yet their role is central to students’ learning.

We have come to the end of the magical mystery tour, and a question seems natural: Will AI become more intelligent and be context-sensitive in the way teachers are? We do not know. However, there have been different attempts to replace teachers since Skinner’s Teaching Machine and still, it is the teacher’s humanity that can make all the difference.

With several established English language tests already in use, it is a fair question for institutions to ask: do we really need to accept another one? 

However, in today’s evolving admissions landscape, the focus is shifting from maintaining the status quo to maximizing access and competitiveness. 

Global student mobility continues to grow, but access to testing remains a significant barrier. Limited test center availability, travel constraints and long result waiting times can all restrict students’ ability to apply, particularly in emerging or underserved markets. 

PTE Express directly addresses these challenges by offering fully online, flexible testing experience that allows candidates to take the test from anywhere at any time. This removes barriers from a geographic standpoint and opens the door to a wider, more diverse pool of applicants.