TL;DR
Get comfort and recovery gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Google has published findings from a 10-week UK math tutoring trial and a yearlong study in Italian schools using Gemini in education. The company reports that AI-tutored students performed similarly to students with human tutors on platform tasks and quizzes, while teachers in Italy reported more collaborative lessons. The UK trial found no improvement on STAR standardized test scores during its study period.
Google published findings on October 29 from studies of Gemini in classrooms in the UK and Italy, reporting that AI-assisted math tutoring performed similarly to human tutoring on some classroom measures, while Italian teachers using Gemini to plan lessons reported more collaborative learning. The results are company-reported research, and the UK trial found no improvement on STAR standardized test scores during its 10-week period.
The UK study was a 10-week randomized controlled trial involving more than 1,100 students aged 12 to 15. Run with education platform Eedi, it compared static hints, human tutoring and interactive AI tutoring that combined Eedi’s teaching resources with Gemini. Teachers monitored progress and supported students, while human reviewers checked each AI response before it reached a student.
Google said students receiving AI tutoring performed similarly to those paired with human tutors on Eedi platform tasks and intermediate quizzes. Expert reviewers approved 95% of Gemini’s responses, compared with 76% in the previous study, a nearly 25% improvement in pedagogical quality as described by Google. The company also reported that Gemini guided students rather than giving answers in nearly 99% of sessions, and students worked through the math themselves in more than 85% of chats.
The Italian study covered 31 schools over a year, drawing on 1,600 teachers and representing more than 24,500 students aged 13 to 18. Google said teachers who co-designed lessons with Gemini more often reported feeling creative in their planning and teaching: 79%, compared with 30% when they did not use the tool. The company also reported a 38% drop in traditional lectures and nearly three times as much student-led collaborative learning in the lessons examined.
Classroom Gains, With Limits
The findings speak to two practical questions for schools: whether AI can support individualized instruction, and whether it can help teachers build lessons that involve more student participation. In the UK trial, AI tutoring offered another way to give students guided help, with human oversight built into the process. In Italy, the reported shift toward group work and peer discussion suggests Gemini may be used as a planning aid rather than as a substitute for teachers.
But the results do not establish that Gemini improves every form of learning or that the reported classroom changes were caused by the tool alone. The UK study showed gains on assignments and quizzes, but not on the standardized test used. Schools weighing AI adoption will need to distinguish between those measures and consider the supervision, time and curriculum coverage involved.
Popular right now
Ninja CREAMi 7-in-1 Ice Cream Maker, NC299AMZ
Shark PowerDetect Corded Stick Vacuum, Self-Cleaning (Eggplant, HZ4002)
Bose QuietComfort Ultra Wireless Noise-Cancelling Headphones with Spatial Audio, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How the Two Studies Worked
Google describes the findings as part of research conducted with educators and researchers in everyday school settings. The UK work builds on an earlier exploratory study with Eedi. In the new trial, students received one of three supports after answering a question incorrectly: a static hint, help from a human tutor, or AI tutoring combining Gemini with Eedi’s platform. Human experts reviewed every AI response in real time, a safeguard that matters when interpreting the results as evidence for classroom use.
The Italian research followed an initial pilot in northern Italy and involved the Salesians of Don Bosco school network and the Pontifical Salesian University in Rome. Researchers collected classroom activities and teacher self-reports about lesson planning with and without Gemini for Education. The evidence therefore includes reported teacher experiences and observed classroom activity; it is not the same kind of randomized comparison as the UK trial.
“Technology best serves education when it creates space for inspiring teaching and deeper learning.”
— Google, in its October 29 report
What the Results Cannot Show
The UK study did not find that the classroom and quiz gains carried over to STAR standardized test scores during the 10 weeks. Google said AI tutoring took longer per question: students solved about 14 problems per session on average, compared with 19 using static hints. The company believes the lower number of problems meant students covered less of the curriculum tested by STAR, but that explanation is an interpretation, not a demonstrated cause.
The report does not establish whether the same outcomes would hold over a full academic year, in other subjects or with different student populations. The Italian results are based in part on teacher self-reports and classroom observations; the material provided does not describe a randomized control group for that study. It is also unclear how persistent the changes in teaching practice or student collaboration would be after the study.
Longer Trials and More Measures
Google said it is exploring follow-up UK trials lasting a full academic year and plans to broaden the measures used to assess learning. Those studies could help determine whether slower, step-by-step tutoring affects longer-term outcomes when students have more time to cover curriculum material.
For schools, the immediate findings offer evidence to examine, not a guarantee of results. Further research will need to clarify how Gemini performs without real-time expert review, whether classroom patterns reported in Italy persist, and how any learning gains appear across different assessments and longer periods.
Key Questions
What did the UK Gemini tutoring trial find?
Google reported that students using Gemini-based tutoring performed similarly to students with human tutors on platform tasks and intermediate quizzes. The trial did not find gains on STAR standardized test scores during its 10 weeks.
Did students get answers directly from Gemini?
Google said the tutor guided students instead of providing answers in nearly 99% of sessions, and students worked through the math themselves in more than 85% of chats. Human experts reviewed AI responses before students received them.
What did teachers in Italy report?
In the yearlong study across 31 schools, Google said 79% of teachers reported feeling more creative when co-designing lessons with Gemini, compared with 30% without it. The company also reported fewer traditional lectures and more student-led collaborative learning.
Why were STAR test scores unchanged?
Google suggested that AI tutoring took more time per question, so students completed fewer problems and covered less overall curriculum during the trial. The study did not establish that this was the reason for the unchanged STAR scores.
Source: blog.google
