Against the backdrop of AI, automation and rapid technological change, it is becoming increasingly important to ask what the classroom of 2036 might look like.

Not in a speculative, futuristic way, but in a practical one.

What will young people need to know? How will teachers teach? How will learning be assessed? And how do we make sure that technology improves education, rather than simply adding another layer of complexity?

These were some of the questions I explored while chairing a recent panel on the future of digital assessment, AI and education. The discussion brought together expertise from digital assessment, AI, education technology, curriculum leadership and the frontline teacher voice.

The central question was simple but powerful –

What could assessment look like in ten years’ time — and what do we hope it will not look like?

Digital assessment is not just about moving exams onto screens

When people talk about digital exams, the conversation can quickly become focused on devices, software and logistics. Those things matter, of course. Schools and colleges need reliable infrastructure, secure systems, staff training, appropriate access arrangements and confidence that everything will work on the day.

But digital assessment should not only be viewed as a change in format.

The bigger opportunity is to ask whether we are currently assessing the right things for the world young people are moving into.

If we simply take assessment models designed for a different age and place them on a screen, we may miss the point. Digital assessment could allow us to think more carefully about accessibility, feedback, adaptive questioning, real-time performance data and a wider range of ways for learners to demonstrate what they know and can do.

That raises important questions. Could digital assessment better support formative assessment as well as summative assessment? Could it help teachers understand student progress earlier and more precisely? Could it reduce some of the administrative burden attached to traditional assessment?

The answer may be yes, but only if implementation is thoughtful, inclusive and properly supported.

Trust has to sit at the centre

The title of the session focused on trusted digital assessment, and trust is one of the most important words in this debate.

Trust means different things to different groups.

For learners, it means knowing that the system is fair and that they will not be disadvantaged by the technology available to them.

For teachers, it means having confidence that assessment tools support professional judgement rather than undermine it.

For parents, it means believing that digital assessment is rigorous, secure and meaningful.

For employers, universities and the wider education system, it means trusting that qualifications still represent valid evidence of learning, knowledge and capability.

Without trust, digital assessment will struggle to gain public confidence, however sophisticated the technology becomes.

This is particularly important when considering exam security. Physical exam papers carry risks around printing, storage, transport and early access. Digital exams may reduce some of those risks, but they also introduce different questions around cyber security, access, resilience and contingency planning.

So the question is not whether digital assessment removes risk completely. It does not. The real question is whether we can design systems that manage risk well, are transparent about limitations, and command confidence across the education system.

AI is forcing us to rethink assessment

Artificial intelligence adds another layer to this conversation.

Schools are already exploring how AI can support learning, reduce workload, generate resources, assist with feedback and help students practise skills. Used well, AI can be a powerful tool. But it also raises significant questions for assessment.

Can existing forms of assessment be protected from generative AI? Or does AI mean we need to redesign assessment altogether?

This is one of the most important questions facing education.

If students can use AI tools to generate essays, explanations, code, images, plans and presentations, then assessment needs to look carefully at what is being assessed. Is it the final product? The process? The thinking behind the work? The ability to critique, refine and justify? The ability to use tools responsibly?

In a world where AI can produce fluent responses, human judgement becomes even more important. Students need to know how to question outputs, check sources, identify bias, refine prompts, explain reasoning and understand when not to use AI.

That means AI literacy cannot be treated as an optional extra.

Digital literacy is now a core life skill

One of the most important themes from the panel was digital literacy.

Are we preparing students today with the skills and knowledge they will need for work and life in ten years’ time? With the pace of change, that is not an easy task.

But there are some foundations that matter deeply: critical thinking, communication, problem-solving, analytical reasoning, information literacy, ethical judgement and the ability to learn new tools with confidence.

Using AI effectively requires more than technical confidence. It requires good language skills, subject knowledge, curiosity, discernment and the ability to ask better questions.

This raises a curriculum challenge. Where does digital literacy sit? Is it the responsibility of computing? English? PSHE? Careers education? Every subject?

The answer is likely to be that it belongs across the curriculum, while still needing clear ownership, progression and support.

We cannot assume that because young people use technology, they automatically understand it. Being a confident consumer of apps is not the same as being digitally literate.

We must avoid creating a new digital divide

The future of digital assessment and AI in education also raises a question of fairness.

Some schools and colleges are well placed to adopt new technologies. Others face challenges around infrastructure, funding, staffing, connectivity, devices and training.

If we are not careful, digital assessment and AI could widen existing inequalities.

A digitally rich school may be able to give students regular opportunities to practise digital assessment, use AI tools responsibly and build confidence with new technologies. A less well-resourced school may struggle to provide the same experience.

That would be unacceptable.

If digital assessment becomes part of the future of education, there needs to be a national conversation about infrastructure, access, teacher development, policy direction and public trust. Schools cannot be left to solve this alone.

Human professional judgement still matters

As assessment becomes more digital, we also need to ask where human professional judgement sits.

Technology can generate data. It can identify patterns. It can support feedback. It can help with efficiency. But education is not only a data problem.

Teachers understand context. They notice confidence, effort, misunderstanding, motivation and the human factors that sit behind performance. They understand the learner, not just the output.

The future of assessment should not be about replacing teacher judgement with technology. It should be about using technology to strengthen, support and inform professional judgement.

That distinction matters.

What would tell us technology was being used well?

If we walked into a classroom in 2036, what would show us that technology was being used well — not just used more?

It would not simply be the number of devices in the room.

It would be students asking better questions. Teachers having richer information about learning. Assessment being more accessible and meaningful. Young people understanding how to use AI responsibly. Digital tools supporting inclusion rather than creating barriers. Human interaction still sitting at the heart of learning.

The classroom of 2036 should not be judged by how futuristic it looks. It should be judged by whether young people are being prepared to thrive.

The real goal is not more technology.

The goal is better learning, fairer assessment, deeper digital literacy and greater confidence in a changing world.

That is the conversation we need to keep having.