Nearly half of young people in England say they would trust artificial intelligence more than a human when checking whether a fact is accurate, according to a new Public First survey.

The research, conducted among more than 4,000 people aged 11 to 24, found that 47% would trust AI to check a fact, compared with 21% who would trust a person. Among young men, the div favoring AI rose to 52%.

The findings are part of a report titled “Britain’s Greatest Education Opportunity Ever,” co-authored by educationist Sir Anthony Seldon and technology entrepreneur Tim Bunting. The report argues that young people’s use of AI is moving considerably faster than the education system’s response to it.

The numbers point to a broader shift in how students find information, solve problems and decide which sources to trust.

How widely are young people using AI?

AI has already become a mainstream tool for the young people surveyed.

Public First found that 87% of respondents aged 11 to 24 in England had used an AI tool. Usage was even higher among 13- and 14-year-olds, reaching 90%.

The study also identified a gap linked to socioeconomic background. Ninety-two percent of young people from the highest social grade had used AI, compared with 79% from the lowest.

The report also found that one in five young people who are not in education, employment or training had never used an AI tool.

That suggests access to AI is widespread but not evenly distributed, raising questions about whether differences in access could create another layer of educational inequality.

The survey was conducted by Public First and formed part of the Seldon-Bunting report published in September 2026.

Why do young people trust AI for fact-checking?

The finding that 47% would trust AI over a human to check a fact is particularly notable because AI systems can themselves produce inaccurate or fabricated information.

Yet for many young users, AI offers something traditional sources do not: an immediate answer presented in simple language and tailored to the question being asked.

Instead of searching several websites, comparing explanations and deciding which source is credible, a student can ask an AI system to summarize an issue within seconds.

That convenience may be changing not only how information is found, but also how authority is perceived.

The research found a 47% to 21% split in favor of AI when respondents were asked whom they would trust to check whether a fact was correct.

Are students already using AI for schoolwork?

Yes, and the use goes well beyond occasional experimentation.

The report found that 63% of secondary school pupils surveyed were using AI for homework.

Seventy-seven percent said they had used AI to help them understand subjects when they became stuck.

That means AI is increasingly functioning as an always-available study companion. Students can ask for explanations, alternative examples, summaries or step-by-step help without waiting for the next lesson or seeking assistance from a teacher.

The shift raises a difficult question for schools: if students can obtain instant explanations from an AI system at home, what should classroom teaching provide that an AI tool cannot?

The report argues that the answer cannot simply be to prohibit the technology.

Has AI made school seem less important?

The survey suggests that attitudes toward traditional education are already changing.

Forty-two percent of respondents said AI had made school education less important, while 35% said it had made education more important.

That does not mean 42% of young people want to abandon school.

Instead, the result suggests that a substantial share of young people are questioning the relative value of traditional education now that AI can perform tasks that once required substantial effort or human assistance.

The authors argue that this perception could become more serious if education systems fail to explain how schools and universities remain valuable in an AI-enabled world.

How well do young people think schools are preparing them?

The answer from the survey is strikingly low.

Only 9% of young people said schools and universities are preparing them very well for a future involving AI.

At the same time, roughly two-thirds said they believe schools have a responsibility to teach young people how to use AI tools responsibly.

That creates a clear mismatch.

Young people are using the technology, but many do not believe educational institutions are giving them enough guidance on how to use it effectively, safely or critically.

The Public First findings also show that 38% of respondents believe they are better at using AI than their teachers.

That number does not necessarily measure actual skill. It reflects how young people perceive their own familiarity with rapidly changing digital tools compared with the adults teaching them.

What are young people using AI for beyond homework?

The report found that AI use extends into areas that go beyond conventional study.

Two in five young people said they had used AI to talk through problems or how they were feeling.

Forty percent said they had used AI for health advice.

Those findings add another dimension to the debate.

An AI system answering a homework question and an AI system being asked for health guidance are very different situations. The potential consequences of inaccurate information become considerably more serious when users rely on AI for personal or sensitive decisions.

The divs therefore raise questions not only about digital literacy, but also about whether young people understand when an AI system is an appropriate source of information and when a qualified human professional should be involved.

What does the report mean by an ‘AI-less world’?

Seldon and Bunting argue that education systems are still structured around assumptions that predate the widespread availability of generative AI.

They warn that classrooms risk preparing students for an “AI-less world that no longer exists.”

The argument is not that conventional teaching has become obsolete.

Instead, the report says schools need to adapt the role they play. Students may no longer need educators to function simply as the main source of information, but they still need teachers who can help them question information, develop judgment, communicate effectively and understand the difference between a plausible answer and a reliable one.

That distinction may become increasingly important as AI systems grow more persuasive.

Could AI make traditional fact-checking less important?

It could change how fact-checking is performed, but it does not remove the need for verification.

AI systems can quickly summarize large amounts of information, compare claims and identify possible contradictions.

But AI models can also generate confident answers that contain factual errors. An AI-generated answer therefore remains something that may need to be checked against primary documents, credible journalism, official records or expert sources.

The survey’s trust divs reveal a perception among young users rather than proof that AI is objectively more reliable than humans.

That distinction is particularly important in education, where learning how to evaluate evidence is itself a core skill.

What is the report proposing?

The report calls for a 10-point action plan aimed at accelerating the education system’s response to AI.

Among its proposals are a dedicated AI rapid-response unit within the Department for Education and a national network of 100 “AI champion” schools and colleges.

The authors also call for stronger teacher training, clearer guidance on responsible AI use and changes to the way student assessment is designed.

One proposal is a two-track approach to assessment that combines traditional examinations with more continuous evaluation of what students understand and can do.

The broader idea is to distinguish between tasks where AI assistance may be appropriate and situations where students should demonstrate their own unaided understanding.

Why are schools struggling to keep up?

The technology is evolving faster than traditional education policy.

Teachers are being asked to work out questions that did not exist at the same scale a few years ago: when should students be allowed to use AI, how should AI-assisted work be assessed, how can teachers identify genuine understanding and how should pupils verify AI-generated information?

There is also a practical issue.

Teachers themselves need training and reliable guidance before schools can develop consistent approaches.

Without a common framework, one school may encourage responsible AI use while another may largely prohibit it, leaving students with very different experiences.

What is the UK government doing about AI in education?

The UK government says it is already working on AI-related education reforms.

The Department for Education has said it is developing safe AI tutoring tools and has committed £23 million to expand testing of education technology and determine which technologies have the greatest impact.

The government has also established an AI Safety and Pedagogy Taskforce to develop benchmarks for assessing the safety and educational value of AI tools used in schools.

Officials have said the refreshed curriculum will strengthen foundational skills while giving young people greater digital literacy and helping them identify disinformation.

These initiatives are part of a broader attempt to integrate AI into education without allowing the technology to replace high-quality teaching.

Is AI replacing teachers?

The evidence from this survey does not establish that.

Students may increasingly use AI for explanations, homework and information searches while still depending on teachers for instruction, feedback, classroom management and personal support.

The more immediate shift may be in the teacher’s role.

If AI can explain a mathematical formula, summarize a historical event or generate practice questions instantly, teachers may increasingly spend more time on discussion, critical thinking, coaching, motivation and helping students evaluate information.

In that model, the value of the teacher is not reduced to the amount of information they can deliver.

Why does fact-checking matter more in an AI era?

The rise of AI-generated information creates a paradox.

Young people now have unprecedented access to information and explanations, but the abundance of answers makes it harder to determine which ones deserve trust.

A human expert can be wrong. An AI system can be wrong. A search result can be misleading. A social media post can be fabricated.

That means education may need to place greater emphasis on the process of verification itself.

Students need to know how to trace a claim to its original source, distinguish evidence from assertion, compare competing accounts and recognize when an answer requires specialist expertise.

The ability to use AI effectively may therefore depend on knowing when not to trust it.

Could AI deepen inequality among young people?

The survey suggests that unequal access and usage may already exist.

The gap between 92% usage among young people from the highest social grade and 79% among the lowest indicates that AI adoption is not uniform.

A similar concern applies to young people outside education and employment, among whom one in five had never used an AI tool.

If AI becomes an essential part of education and employment, differences in access, training and digital confidence could potentially translate into wider inequalities.

That makes AI literacy a question of opportunity as well as technology.

What does the research say about the future of education?

The report’s central argument is that education cannot treat AI as a temporary disruption.

It has already become part of how many young people study, search for information, and solve everyday problems.

The challenge is deciding what schools should teach when information itself has become easier to obtain.

The answer proposed by the report is a stronger focus on human capabilities that AI does not simply replace: judgement, critical thinking, communication, collaboration, creativity and the ability to work with others.

Those skills could become more important precisely because AI makes basic information retrieval easier.

What happens next?

The debate over AI in education is unlikely to be settled by simply allowing or banning the technology.

The Public First research suggests that young people are already moving ahead of the policy debate. Large numbers are using AI, many are turning to it for schoolwork and a larger proportion trust it over humans when checking facts.

The question for schools is therefore no longer whether students will encounter AI.

It is how educational institutions can teach students to use it without outsourcing their judgment to it.

That may ultimately be the more important finding in the survey. The technology has already entered the classroom, whether or not every classroom has formally invited it in.