What did the provider actually claim?
A product may describe an approach as Socratic, adaptive or evidence-based. That does not, by itself, establish how it works or whether it improves learning.
RESEARCH · 13 OCT 2026
Digital teaching tools: what do they already decide?
We reviewed public information from 100 providers: the teaching approaches they describe, what they say their systems do and the evidence they cite.
The 100 providers are an editorial selection, not a ranking by market share or number of users. This review is not a certification of the listed tools.
READING THE REVIEW
Three questions for every AI teaching tool
What is supported by the sources?
We separate product descriptions, public documentation and independently tested outcomes. A whitepaper is not automatically an effectiveness study.
What remains unknown?
We do not guess which language model runs a product. Missing information is recorded as missing, not as proof that a feature is absent.
Inside the review
Products from primary, secondary, vocational and higher education, including learning platforms, teaching assistants, adaptive practice and AI tutors. Where possible, profiles identify the published teaching approach, technical claims and evidence limits.
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION
A product description is not evidence of learning gains.
Version: 13 October 2026. Full report available in the EAI working library; public online summary of selected findings.