This page summarises our findings from reviewing education providers and programmes in recent years.
It provides our view on changing learning, teaching and assessment methods by education providers, including our regulatory requirements, and what we commonly see in programme delivery.
This information should be considered by education providers when developing new and existing programmes, linked to this area.
Our threshold requirements
- The resources to support learning in all settings must be effective and appropriate to the delivery of the programme and must be accessible to all learners and educators (SET 3.12);
- The learning and teaching methods used must be appropriate to the effective delivery of the learning outcomes (SET 4.6);
- The structure, duration and range of practice-based learning must support the achievement of the learning outcomes and the standards of proficiency (SET 5.2); and
- Assessments must provide an objective, fair and reliable measure of learners’ progression and achievement (SET 6.3).
- programme resources are readily available to learners and educators and are used effectively to support the required learning and teaching activities of the programme;
- the methods education providers use to deliver the programme support learners to achieve the learning outcomes;
- the way practice-based learning is designed allows learners to achieve the learning outcomes of the programme and the SOPs; and
- assessments are effective at deciding whether a learner is fit to practise by the end of the programme.
Summary reflections
Most education providers have considered and responded to technological change, particularly in relation to artificial intelligence (AI), simulation, and blended learning delivery. They are aware of emerging risks to academic integrity, notably AI-assisted writing and increased plagiarism, and have taken proportionate steps to mitigate these risks through policy development, staff training, learner guidance, and technological controls.
Education provider policies and practices have evolved rapidly following the mainstream introduction of AI tools. Education providers transparently reflected on both opportunities and risks, particularly acknowledging the imperfect nature of AI-detection software while maintaining a commitment to academic standards.
Overall, education providers saw changes to technology as a deliberate pedagogic tool to enhance flexibility, realism, learner engagement, and access to practical learning.
Education provider approaches
Education providers have generally adopted a coherent, multi-layered approach to the use of technology, integrating policy, systems, staff capability, and learner support. A key focus has been strengthening academic integrity in response to the increased availability of artificial intelligence (AI). Education providers have often updated academic misconduct policies to explicitly address AI-generated content, supported by tools such as Turnitin and clear learner declarations of authorship. While detection software is used to flag potential misuse, education providers consistently acknowledge its limitations and retain assessor judgement as a core safeguard.
They have also often invested in staff capability, offering targeted training and ongoing continuing professional development (CPD) to support the identification of AI misuse and the effective use of new technologies. This is often complemented by regular programme-level reflection on learner needs and teaching approaches, informed by feedback and continuous review.
With regard to delivery of programme, there has been continued expansion of blended and simulation-based learning, including the use of virtual learning environments, recorded resources, and digital simulation tools to support geographically dispersed learners and improve accessibility. Alongside this, assessment design has evolved, with greater emphasis on creative and practice-focused approaches tailored to programme and regulatory requirements, and active consideration of how assessments can remain robust in the context of AI.
Current sector focus and challenges
Keeping pace with rapid technological change, particularly developments in AI, remains a significant and ongoing issue, requiring continual updates to teaching materials, assessment approaches, and staff capability rather than one-off adjustments. Alongside this, ensuring equity of access continues to be a concern, as providers seek to deliver consistent learning experiences through hybrid and remote models while managing risks of digital exclusion, especially for learners engaging remotely.
Education providers are also actively managing the tension between innovation and academic integrity. While there is recognition of the educational value of AI when used responsibly, there is increasing emphasis on designing assessments that are less vulnerable to AI generation and more focused on applied decision-making, reflection, and professional judgement. Progress in this area is often shaped by the need for partnership and regulatory alignment, as changes to assessment and technology use typically require consultation and, in some cases, agreement with external bodies. Education providers therefore remain mindful of balancing innovation with the need to maintain the delivery of the standards of proficiency and meet external expectations.
Areas commonly explored further through our assessments
Assessment activity frequently explored the effectiveness and consistency of AI detection and academic misconduct processes, including how AI thresholds were applied in practice, whether staff decision-making was consistent and well evidenced, and how learners were supported to understand appropriate versus inappropriate use of AI. Assessments also focused on the embedding of technology within learning outcomes, examining the extent to which simulation and digital tools were explicitly aligned with programme learning outcomes and standards of proficiency, and whether their use enhanced, rather than replaced, core professional learning.
Further scrutiny was commonly given to the learner experience and accessibility, particularly how providers identified and mitigated risks of digital exclusion and the impact of recorded, visual, and simulation-based resources on different learner groups. In addition, assessors routinely considered the sustainability and governance of technological approaches, including how providers ensured that policies, platforms, and staff capability remained up to date, and how oversight and feedback mechanisms were used to inform ongoing development.