Personalised Adaptive Learning at Scale: Lessons from India

High usage, aligned content and teacher buy‑in decide impact.

Challenge

As‑is processes were heavy or misaligned to classroom change.

Result

Lightweight cycles tied to live priorities created visible movement in rooms within weeks.

Outcome

Trust grew, decisions sped up and impact became easier to see and evidence.

Innovation

Two‑page operating system, coached rehearsal, artefact reviews, humane short‑form measurement.

Brief overview

Adaptive tools help when they are reliably used and close to curriculum, with integrity carried by assessment design and teacher judgement.

Mechanisms that move practice

Leaders visited short slices; departments codified models; artefacts stayed next to numbers so discussion stayed concrete.

Human moments that matter

Colleagues practised aloud, mentors stood beside them and families received plain English communications that explained what would happen next.

Keeping workload net zero

Templates replaced reinvention; calendars aligned deadlines; any process that did not improve teaching time was retired.

Evidence and alignment

Signals were simple and believable - time to settled work, clarity of models, retrieval movement and short viva checks.

Impact

Calmer rooms, clearer modelling and steadier workload produced better retention and more minutes spent thinking about quality ideas.

Lessons for leaders and investors

• Publish decision rights so accountability feels fair and fast.
• Review artefacts with measures; prefer evidence close to the work.
• Protect rehearsal time, especially in EYFS and key stage 1 where foundations compound.
• Retire low‑value tasks to keep workload net‑zero.

Full Article

What this means for school leaders and investors

Personalised Adaptive Learning at Scale: Lessons from India is a reminder that implementation is the difference between a strategy and a routine. The surface story is familiar: leaders are asked to improve outcomes, protect wellbeing and keep the organisation financially credible, all at once. The deeper issue is whether a school can turn big ideas into small, repeatable acts that pupils experience every day.

For leaders, this means choosing fewer priorities, defining the classroom behaviours that show those priorities are real, and then protecting staff time so the work is sustainable. A plan that reads well but cannot be enacted in a normal week creates cynicism, and cynicism spreads quickly.

For boards and investors, the best question is not 'Do we have a strategy?' but 'Do we have a routine?'. Evidence should include artefacts such as model lessons, common resources, coaching logs and clear decision points, not only narrative updates.

Full narrative expansion

In practice, successful schools describe the problem with precision before they reach for a programme. They agree what will improve, for whom, and how they will know. This avoids the common trap of launching a new initiative that feels busy but does not change teaching.

The strongest narratives are not heroic. They are operational. Leaders build routines for modelling, rehearsal and follow up, and they create simple artefacts that make quality easier to repeat. They also define non-negotiables so staff are not left guessing what matters most.

This is where a practical lens is helpful. It asks: what does the teacher do at 8.55 on a wet Tuesday? What do pupils do? What do leaders look at in the first five minutes of a visit? If those answers are clear, the rest of the story is likely to hold.

What changed in practice

Whatever the theme, the shared lesson is that improvement is built from clarity, rehearsal and evidence. Adaptive tools sound attractive but succeed only when reliably used, closely aligned to curriculum, and supported by teacher buy-in. The insight from large-scale implementations in India was simple: usage rates, content match and staff confidence mattered more than the sophistication of algorithms.

The practical act was publishing clear norms for when and how pupils used adaptive tools. Leaders tracked usage fortnightly, reviewed content alignment to live curriculum sequences, and provided brief training for staff on interpreting data. Integrity was protected through assessment design that mixed formats rather than relying solely on platform scores. Teachers remained responsible for planning and next steps, with the tool serving as rehearsal support rather than replacement.

Human moments that built culture

A teacher who was sceptical of technology saw her pupils engage for longer periods because the adaptive tool met them at their actual level. She reported feeling supported rather than replaced. A pupil who had been silent in class volunteered an answer after building confidence through private adaptive practice. A parent understood progress through clear communication about what the tool measured and what it did not.

Results

Within a half term, usage rates stabilised above 80%, content alignment improved as curriculum teams reviewed sequences together, and staff confidence grew. Pupils spent more time practising at appropriate difficulty levels, leading to measurable gains in retrieval and fluency. Assessment integrity was protected through mixed formats and teacher judgement remained central.

Workload

The shift saved time because adaptive rehearsal reduced the need for separate intervention materials. Brief fortnightly reviews of usage and alignment kept implementation on track without lengthy meetings. Teachers reported feeling the tool served them rather than created additional burdens.

Evidence and scale

Tracked signals included usage rates, content alignment scores, staff confidence surveys, retrieval gains and assessment integrity flags. These were simple, credible and close to practice. Patterns held across diverse contexts, suggesting the approach scaled reliably when implementation respected local curriculum and protected teacher agency.

Sources and further reading

Selected links to expand on the themes in this article.

• Teaching at the Right Level policy insight (J-PAL)
• Teaching at the Right Level programme (Pratham)
• Learning Poverty overview (World Bank)
• Education at a Glance 2024 (OECD)
• A School's Guide to Implementation (EEF and IEE UCL)