If you see a question that you're also interested in having answered, click the heart ❤️ to like it.

• Individual: How did today’s lesson examples affirm, challenge, or extend your understanding of meaningful AI integration in the English Language classroom? What stood out for you most?

• Group Discussion: How aligned is your EL department/team on when (and when not) to use AI? What core pedagogical principles should guide the department’s/team’s approach moving forward?

  
  

• Action: How will you communicate your rationale for using or not using AI to your students, so they too developed a principled understanding of its role in learning the English language?

Primary Science: https://go.gov.sg/ctle26edtech-prisc

1. MOE AIEd Implementation Guide & Checklist: Access the latest copy, updated in Feb 2026)​

2. 2025 CTLE Webinar_ Enhancing Student Learning Through Analytics: A Subject-Specific Approach: Click and explore the subject-specific webinar​

3. AI102: Introduction to AI Literacy for Teaching and Learning: Complete the MLU in OPAL ​

4. Summary of a literature review on the use of AI in education: A systematic literature review of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) literacy in schools (Park, 2025): Review the article for empirically grounded findings into classroom application.

Questions:

1. What is a question you have after reading/viewing the pre-session material(s)?​

2. What is a question that you would like the panellists to address during the webinar?

Was also wondering if ELIS or ELLB would consider curating a set of resources (e.g. SLS Interactives, SALiS EL-specific recipes) that can be adapted by teachers.

The lesson examples affirmed my understanding that meaningful AI integration should enhance students’ thinking rather than replace traditional learning processes. I particularly liked the use of SLS and AI tools such as SALIS to generate prompts and questions that encouraged students to elaborate on their responses and deepen their understanding. What stood out to me was that AI was most valuable when it acted as a scaffold for thinking, rather than simply providing students with answers.

At the same time, I noticed that some of the lessons without AI actually generated richer group discussions and deeper thinking, as students had to negotiate ideas, explain their reasoning and learn from one another.

What stood out to me most was that AI supports differentiated learning by providing ideas for students with different learning needs. However, I also learnt that teachers still need to check and adapt AI-generated materials to make sure they are suitable for our students and lesson objectives.

What stood out most to me was the intentional and timely deliberation behind the choice of EdTech tools, including AI. The first lesson reinforced something I think we sometimes overlook in our enthusiasm for innovation: that not every lesson is necessarily better with technology. Some learning experiences are richer without it, and recognising that distinction is itself a mark of thoughtful pedagogy. This affirmed my existing belief that AI integration requires deeper consideration rather than wholesale adoption.

Additionally, the showcase on SALis was particularly illuminating. It extended my understanding by highlighting that simply providing accessibility to a tool does not automatically translate into meaningful use. Students, especially young learners, need to be ready, cognitively, linguistically, and even emotionally, to engage with EdTech tools in ways that genuinely support their learning. This challenged me to think beyond the question of whether my students can use a tool, and towards whether they are ready to use it, and in what ways it serves their learning at this stage.

Moving forward, I find myself thinking more carefully about the conditions under which AI might genuinely enhance my areas of interest in oral communication or writing tasks, versus when a more traditional approach might better serve my students' developmental needs.

I also found it meaningful that students' feedback was sought on whether the use of AI was beneficial to them.

• Affirmed that AI can be used to strengthen students’ understanding of concepts through immediate, individualized feedback

• Challenged the idea that AI should supplement every activity that aims to deepen students' thinking. Group discussions and writing on paper can be much more effective at promoting deeper thinking.

The pedagogy has to come first, and the teacher has to make that call. This session affirms that belief.

Personally, I will use AI only when necessary, e.g. finding ideas for certain sections of a lesson that I've planned. After all, AI does not fully understand the context and profile of our classes.

The examples also reinforced the important role of the teacher as the expert and facilitator of learning. The quality of what we receive from AI is highly dependent on the quality and specificity of the prompts we provide. Teachers therefore need to exercise their professional judgement when crafting prompts, evaluating AI-generated responses and adapting them to suit the needs, abilities and context of their students. AI does not replace teacher expertise but it can enhance what teachers are already doing when used thoughtfully.

One significant benefit of SALIS is its ability to provide students with immediate feedback. This allows students to identify areas for improvement, make adjustments and take greater ownership of their learning without always having to wait for teacher feedback. Used meaningfully, this can support more independent and self-directed learning.

At the same time, today’s examples extended my thinking about the limitations of AI. While AI can provide information and feedback quickly, building knowledge is also a social process. There is still immense value in teacher-student and peer-to-peer interaction. Through meaningful conversations, students learn to ask the right questions, listen to different perspectives, challenge ideas respectfully and respond critically and empathetically.

Ultimately, meaningful AI use is about achieving the right balance. AI can provide immediacy and support, but teachers and peers provide the human interaction, judgement and empathy that make learning truly meaningful.

1.     Pedagogy first, AI second. AI should be used when it adds genuine learning value—not simply because the technology is available.

2.     Teacher judgement remains essential. AI supports. It does not replace the teacher’s professional judgement.

3.     Not everything needs technology. Some learning is more effective through hands-on activities, interaction, and teacher guidance.

1 Situation Where I Should Step Back from AI:

I should step back from AI when students need to develop social skills through real human interaction. For example, during a Primary 1 group activity where students are learning to share, communicate, resolve disagreements or work together. In this situation, face-to-face interaction and teacher guidance are more valuable than AI as students need to practise empathy, listening, and collaboration in real time.

The presentations today affirmed that teachers need to first understand their students’ individual learning needs before designing customised lessons that effectively address their specific strengths, challenges, and learning gaps. A one-size-fits-all approach may not always be effective, as students have different learning abilities and evels of readiness. By identifying these differences, teachers can select appropriate resources, and activities to better engage students and support their learning. Ultimately, understanding our students allows us to create more purposeful, inclusive and effective learning experiences.

[AST, CTLE & ETD] P5 EL Lesson: Semiotic Modes]

https://vle.learning.moe.edu.sg/community-gallery/module/view/470f6ed6-52b8-4e0f-9b29-001376f5652a