92% of UK undergraduates use AI, while Luminate students show 70% adoption across both FE and HE sectors.
FE students (3.31/5) show slightly higher confidence with AI than HE students (3.11/5).
Students express concerns about academic integrity, AI accuracy, and equitable access.
59% of FE and 55% of HE students support increased AI integration in education.
Luminate's Chromebook and Gemini AI rollout addresses digital equity concerns.
Student responses across FE and HE
Luminate students using AI
Students supporting AI integration
Average AI confidence rating
284 total responses across FE and HE
National Average vs Luminate Students
Six Priority Areas for Development
This report analyses student perceptions of AI in education, comparing national UK trends with findings from Luminate Education Group's 2025 survey. Recommendations focus on clear institutional policies, curriculum integration, staff development, digital equity, ethical frameworks, and ongoing dialogue. Implementation will require strategic resource allocation and regular assessment of effectiveness.
Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly generative tools such as Gemini and ChatGPT, has become increasingly relevant in education. Understanding student perceptions of AI—including confidence in its use and ethical considerations—is vital for Further Education (FE) colleges and Higher Education (HE) institutions (Freeman, 2025). This report synthesises major UK studies, compares them with findings from Luminate Education Group's recent survey (2025), and outlines recommendations to support responsible AI integration in education.
Students primarily use AI to summarise information, generate ideas, and clarify complex topics, seeing it as akin to a "private tutor" (Attewell, 2024). Overall, 80–99% believe AI will significantly shape education, particularly in saving time and enhancing learning quality (Jisc, 2024).
"Students increasingly perceive AI not only as a shortcut to answers but as a collaborative assistant that can enhance learning outcomes when used judiciously." (Attewell, 2024, p. 4)
Institutions have responded by updating guidelines emphasising responsible AI use rather than outright prohibitions (Russell Group, 2023; The Guardian, 2023).
Higher confidence levels in AI use among students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds
International students reporting language barriers when using English-based AI systems
Higher adoption rates of advanced AI features among students with prior technology experience
National undergraduate AI usage rate
Luminate FE student AI adoption
Luminate HE student AI adoption
The recent Luminate Education Group (2025) survey provides valuable insight into how students within our institution perceive and engage with AI, closely mirroring broader national findings while highlighting distinctive internal perspectives.
Average FE student confidence rating (out of 5)
Average HE student confidence rating (out of 5)
Average academic task comfort level
While national surveys indicate a wide range in student confidence—often influenced by prior digital exposure and socioeconomic factors (Freeman, 2025)—the Luminate data reflects this variability clearly. FE students at Luminate show slightly higher confidence levels (average rating of 3.31 out of 5) compared to their HE counterparts (average 3.11), possibly linked to differing course structures and digital experiences. Interestingly, comfort with academic tasks involving AI is virtually identical across FE and HE students at Luminate (around 3.24–3.25 out of 5), aligning with national observations that students are confident in informal use but still desire structured guidance and training to fully utilise AI's educational potential.
Both national studies (e.g., Freeman, 2024; Arowosegbe et al., 2024) and Luminate respondents share common concerns around academic integrity, ethics, and accuracy of AI-generated outputs. A notable proportion at Luminate explicitly express apprehensions about plagiarism and reliance on potentially inaccurate AI outputs, paralleling national apprehensions about AI-generated inaccuracies or "hallucinations". Reflecting national trends, Luminate students strongly favour clear, consistent institutional policies, ethical frameworks, and guidelines. Students across the Luminate campuses advocate for AI's supplementary rather than central role, aligning with Russell Group (2023) recommendations that institutions should clearly define acceptable usage scenarios rather than adopting overly restrictive measures.
FE students supporting increased AI integration
HE students supporting increased AI integration
Students requesting more structured guidance
National findings (Jisc, 2024; Freeman, 2025) strongly indicate student enthusiasm for deeper curricular integration of AI, coupled with explicit ethical training and guidance. This preference is equally strong among Luminate students: a clear majority across FE and HE (approximately 59% FE and 55% HE respondents) support increased AI integration in classrooms. However, similar to national findings, a substantial minority remain unsure or cautious about expanding AI's educational role without robust guidelines and training, suggesting a nuanced approach is necessary.
Digital equity remains a critical consideration nationwide, with national studies highlighting disparities in AI access and confidence based on socioeconomic status (Freeman, 2025). In response, Luminate Education Group is proactively addressing these issues through institutional measures like universal Chromebook provision and the recent roll-out of Gemini AI to all staff and students. This strategic approach places Luminate ahead in tackling digital equity compared to many national peers, directly addressing concerns raised by Attewell (2024) about unequal access potentially widening existing divides.
National reports (Jisc, 2024) emphasise the need for ongoing institutional dialogue around AI implementation and ethical practices. Luminate is already well-positioned here, benefitting from established groups like the AI Steering Group and Digital Steering Group. These collaborative structures are actively fostering internal dialogue, shared learning, and consistent policy interpretation across FE and HE sectors, reflecting best practices recommended nationally.
Based on our internal research and external UK-wide studies, the following recommendations are specifically aligned with the Luminate Education Group's current practices, strengths, and areas for further development:
Both FE and HE students are actively integrating AI into their educational experiences, viewing it as essential for academic success and future employability. However, their enthusiasm is tempered by ethical concerns and confidence gaps. Aligning closely with national trends, Luminate's survey highlights a clear demand for institutional policies, formal training, and ongoing dialogue around AI use. Proactive steps to enhance student and staff AI literacy, combined with clear ethical frameworks and equitable access initiatives, will help institutions harness AI's potential responsibly and effectively.