Tutors, tools & AI
Is using AI for revision or homework cheating?
Using AI to learn - explanations, quizzing, practice - is not cheating, and schools broadly encourage study use. Using AI to produce work submitted as your teen’s own is where rules bite: coursework and NEA rules are strict, and each school sets its own homework policy. The family rule of thumb: AI to understand, never to impersonate. When in doubt, check the school’s own policy - they vary.
Last updated 29 July 2026 · Written and fact-checked by the GCSEwiz team
The line, drawn plainly
The distinction that cuts through almost every case: is the AI helping your teen understand something, or is it producing work that will carry their name? Asking a chatbot to explain photosynthesis a third way, quiz them on French vocabulary, or check whether they've understood a maths method is learning - the same as asking a parent, a tutor or a study guide, just more patient. Having it write the history essay, answer the worksheet, or draft the English coursework is impersonation: the work says "I can do this" and the "I" is a machine.
The test travels well: if the teacher watched the whole session, would they call it studying or submitting? Explaining, quizzing and checking pass that test. Ghost-writing does not.
Where the formal rules are strict: coursework and NEA
Non-exam assessment - coursework, in old money - is the one place with hard formal rules rather than school discretion. NEA counts towards the final grade, students sign a declaration that the work is their own, and the exam boards' joint rules treat passing off AI-generated content as your own work as malpractice, with penalties that can reach losing the qualification. Schools take this seriously because they must: they countersign the authenticity of every submission.
So for any assessed coursework, the safe family position is simple: AI does not touch the submitted work. Not drafting it, not "improving" it, not writing the paragraph that gets lightly reworded. If your teen is unsure whether a particular use is allowed for a particular NEA, the subject teacher is the authority - boards allow schools to permit some uses if they are declared, and only the school knows what it has permitted.
Homework: the school’s policy, not a universal rule
Ordinary homework sits under each school's own policy, and policies genuinely vary - some schools embrace AI-assisted study and teach prompting; others ban it for homework outright; many are still writing the policy. Two things are worth saying to a worried parent. First, check what your school actually says - the answer to "is this allowed?" is in their policy, not in a national rule or this page. Second, whatever the policy, there is a practical reason to keep AI away from submitted homework that has nothing to do with being caught: homework is practice, and outsourced practice is skipped practice. The teen who has AI do the maths homework arrives at the exam having done less maths - the cost lands on them either way.
How to talk about it without a battle
Leading with accusation ("are you cheating with that?") invites concealment, and concealment is the actual risk - AI used openly is easy to keep on the right side of the line. It usually goes better as a norms conversation than a rules one: agree the family rule of thumb together - AI to understand, never to impersonate - and be honest that adults are navigating the same line at work.
Curiosity beats surveillance: "show me how you use it" tells you more than any monitoring app, and most teens are quietly pleased to demonstrate. If what you see is explanations, quizzing and checking, you can relax - that is the good kind, and it is worth saying so out loud. And name the real stakes, which are not about being caught: the exam hall has no AI in it, so every piece of thinking outsourced now is a mark not earned in June. Framed that way, honest AI use stops being a rule imposed on them and becomes their own self-interest.