This guide is for teachers who want AI CPD that will hold up in appraisal conversations and formal CPD logs. You might be a classroom teacher looking for assessed learning and tangible artefacts, a middle leader wanting routines your team can adopt, or a senior leader needing policy-safe implementation. In all cases, the aim is the same: credible learning you can evidence, with classroom impact you can describe without overclaiming.
It is not a guide for chasing the newest tool, nor a promise that a badge makes you “AI-ready”. If you want inspiration and a broader reading list, you may prefer our round-up of titles in holiday reading on AI in education. If you want a behaviour-change approach to making new habits stick, you’ll also find useful framing in building AI workflows that stick.
When you’re buying CPD with your own time, “good” means “defensible”. A credible course gives you assessed tasks, clear contact hours, and artefacts you can show. It also prepares you to use AI safely: protecting pupil data, maintaining academic integrity, and aligning with your setting’s policies.
Look for a recognised provider (university, established training organisation, reputable professional body, or a long-running platform with transparent instructors). Credibility is strengthened when the course states learning outcomes, hours, and assessment criteria up front. Be cautious of courses that promise “mastery” in a weekend without any measured performance.
For appraisal, the most useful courses require you to produce something that can be checked: a short written assignment, a quiz with a pass mark, a portfolio, or a classroom implementation plan. Completion certificates are common; what matters is whether the certificate reflects assessed learning or simply attendance.
Half-term CPD works best when you can predict the workload. A course that clearly states “6 hours total” is easier to log than one that says “self-paced” with no estimate. If your setting expects CPD hours, keep a simple timesheet and save module completion screens.
Free can be excellent, but free often means lighter assessment. Paid options may offer better feedback, structured tasks, or more robust certification. Value is highest when the course produces reusable classroom assets: prompts, lesson routines, marking workflows, or policy templates.
Prioritise courses that include ready-to-run routines and model classroom scenarios. A strong indicator is whether the course asks you to trial something with pupils (or to plan a trial) and reflect on impact. If it’s all theory, you’ll struggle to evidence change.
Any course you choose should explicitly address data protection, safeguarding, bias, copyright, and academic integrity. If you lead on policy, you’ll also want guidance on procurement questions, access controls, and staff training. For ongoing context, keep an eye on AI policy watch, especially when your setting updates guidance.
Pick one pathway and complete it well. Appraisal conversations rarely reward breadth without depth; they do reward a clear goal, a completed artefact, and a measured classroom impact.
Choose this if you feel behind and want a safe, structured start. Your outcome is a personal “AI use charter” (what you will and won’t do), plus one small classroom routine you can run in week one back.
Choose this if you already use AI occasionally but want consistent, policy-safe routines. Your outcome is a mini portfolio: two ready-to-run routines, a marking/planning workflow, and a short reflection with evidence of time saved or learning improved.
Choose this if you support others, write policy, or make decisions about tools. Your outcome is a draft AI implementation pack: staff guidance, risk controls, academic integrity approach, and a training plan with evaluation measures.
Rather than pretending there is one “best” credential, this shortlist highlights what each option is typically best for, what proof you can produce, and what to watch out for. Always check the current syllabus and assessment model before enrolling, as providers update frequently.
Google for Education: Generative AI for Educators is often best for a practical introduction with classroom-facing examples and a recognisable certificate. Time to complete is usually around 2–5 hours. Proof of learning is typically module completion and a certificate, sometimes with short checks for understanding. The caveat is that assessment is usually light, so strengthen your CPD evidence by producing your own artefacts (lesson routine, prompt bank, reflection).
Microsoft Learn: AI for Educators and related pathways are best for structured, modular learning you can evidence with completed modules and logged learning activity. Time varies widely, but a focused pathway can fit into 4–8 hours. Proof of learning includes module completion records and, in some cases, knowledge checks. The caveat is that content can lean towards the Microsoft ecosystem; keep your artefacts platform-agnostic so they transfer across contexts.
ISTE (and ISTE+ASCD) short courses and micro-credentials are often best for CPD credibility and classroom transfer, particularly when a portfolio submission is required. Time to complete is commonly 10–15 hours for a micro-credential, sometimes more. Proof of learning is typically a portfolio artefact evaluated against criteria. Caveats include cost and time; if you only have half-term, choose a smaller unit or plan to finish the assessment in the following week.
Coursera or edX university-led AI literacy courses can be best for credibility and contact hours, especially when they include graded quizzes or assignments. Time to complete commonly ranges from 6–20 hours depending on the course. Proof of learning may include graded assessments and a verified certificate (paid). Caveats are that many courses are not education-specific, so you must translate learning into classroom routines yourself and document that transfer.
UNESCO and OECD-style AI in education resources (often free) are best for leadership, ethics, and policy framing. Time to complete is flexible, usually 2–6 hours for a focused read-and-notes approach. Proof of learning is not built in, so you’ll need to produce a policy briefing note, staff slide deck, or risk assessment summary as your artefact. The caveat is that these resources inform decision-making but do not, by themselves, function as a “credential”.
If you want to set a clear intention before you start, it helps to write a one-paragraph goal statement aligned to your professional targets. Our post on AI resolutions for teachers offers a simple way to do that without turning it into a grand manifesto.
Ready to Revolutionise Your Teaching Experience?
Discover the power of Automated Education by joining out community of educators who are reclaiming their time whilst enriching their classrooms. With our intuitive platform, you can automate administrative tasks, personalise student learning, and engage with your class like never before.
Don’t let administrative tasks overshadow your passion for teaching. Sign up today and transform your educational environment with Automated Education.
Keep it time-boxed: 60–90 minutes a day. The goal is not to consume everything, but to finish with evidence you can submit.
Day 1 is for selection and set-up. Choose one pathway, enrol, and create a CPD folder (digital or paper). Save the course description page, learning outcomes, and estimated hours. Your checkpoint is a one-sentence “why this course” statement and a blank portfolio document with headings for artefacts.
Day 2 is for core concepts and safety. Complete the modules on how generative AI works (at a high level), common failure modes, and safe use. Write your personal “red lines” for data: no pupil-identifiable information, no uploading protected materials unless explicitly permitted, and no unverified claims in feedback. Your artefact is a one-page “safe use charter” you can share with a line manager.
Day 3 is for classroom transfer. Design two routines you can run in any subject. Keep them short and repeatable. Your checkpoint is a ready-to-print instruction slide or handout for each routine, plus a short note on how you will check quality (success criteria, misconceptions to watch).
Day 4 is for implementation planning. Build one policy-safe workflow you will trial in week one back, such as lesson adaptation, question generation, or feedback drafting with human review. Your artefact is a workflow diagram or numbered steps, including where you will not use AI, and how you will store outputs.
Day 5 is for assessment and packaging your evidence. Complete any quizzes or submissions, download certificates, and write a 250–400 word reflection focused on impact and next steps. Your checkpoint is a one-page outcomes checklist (below) completed and signed by you, ready to upload to your CPD log.
A reliable first routine is “Explain, critique, improve”. You provide a concept and ask the AI for a deliberately imperfect explanation at your pupils’ level, then pupils annotate what is unclear, missing, or misleading. They rewrite it using your success criteria. This builds disciplinary literacy and keeps the teacher firmly in control of correctness.
A second routine is “Question ladder”. Use AI to generate a ladder of questions from recall to application, but you select and edit. In class, pupils start at a rung you assign, then move up when they show understanding. The AI saves time drafting; your expertise ensures alignment and appropriate challenge.
For a policy-safe workflow, trial “Teacher-only draft then humanise”. Use AI to draft a lesson outline, a set of hinge questions, or a parent communication template using generic information only. Then you rewrite in your voice, verify facts, and remove any content that could be inappropriate or biased. Store the final version in your usual planning space, and keep the AI output only if your policy allows it.
Appraisal-friendly evidence is clear, modest, and verifiable. Use reflection prompts that show professional judgement: What problem were you trying to solve? What did you change in your practice? What did you notice about pupil learning or your workload? What risks did you identify and how did you mitigate them? What will you do next, and what will you stop doing?
A simple portfolio template can be a single document with four sections: course details (provider, hours, syllabus link), certificates or completion screenshots, artefacts (routines, workflow, resources), and impact notes (before/after time estimates, pupil work samples with identifiers removed, or observation notes). For impact measures, keep it realistic: minutes saved planning one lesson, improved quality of questions, fewer misconceptions in exit tickets, or clearer success criteria in pupil writing.
Use this as your one-page submission. Keep it to one side of A4.
Tool-chasing is the quickest way to waste half-term. If you spend your time hopping between chatbots, you’ll end with no consistent practice and nothing to evidence. Commit to one course and one workflow, then iterate slowly.
Overclaiming is another trap. AI can support planning and feedback, but it does not replace professional judgement. In CPD logs, describe what you did and what you observed, not what you assume. “Pupils wrote more” is not the same as “pupils wrote better”; use a small rubric or sample comparison.
Unsafe data use is the most serious pitfall. Avoid entering pupil-identifiable information, sensitive pastoral details, or protected assessment materials into tools unless your policy explicitly permits it. When in doubt, keep everything generic, and document your decision-making. A cautious, well-recorded approach will always stand up better in appraisal than a flashy but risky experiment.
May your half-term study translate into calmer, safer routines when pupils return. The Automated Education Team
Classroom displays can be powerful teaching tools, but only when they are …
This ready-to-run INSET Day workshop helps staff move from general AI …
Timetabling and daily cover are high-stakes operational puzzles, but AI is …
An AI Acceptable Use Policy written once and filed away won’t keep pace …
2025–26 brings sharper, more practical expectations for how schools manage …
A back-to-school AI plan succeeds when it is small, predictable and safe …
Clearing moves fast, but students deserve decisions that are calm, …
Results season can feel like a rush of numbers, narratives and urgent …
Summer reading can slip quietly, especially for pupils who need extra …
Poolvaheaeg on haruldane võimalus kasvatada AI-kindlustunnet ilma iganädalase kiirustamiseta, kuid …
Sportlovet är ett ovanligt tillfälle att bygga AI-självförtroende utan veckans stress, men alla …
Puoliväliloma on harvinainen tilaisuus kasvattaa AI-varmuutta ilman viikoittaista kiirettä, mutta …