evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

MEXT Generative-AI Pilot Schools — Japan's 52-School Testbed for Classroom and Teacher Use (FY2023 cohort)

Japan · Tokyo · See the Japan profile · See the Tokyo profile

Top 56% 47/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Japan's education ministry designated 52 'generative AI pilot schools' in FY2023 to test classroom use under provisional guidelines. Reported uses and risks are documented; learning gains are not yet measured.

MEXT Generative-AI Pilot Schools — Japan's 52-School Testbed for Classroom and Teacher Use (FY2023 cohort)

Details

Promoter
MEXT (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology)
Period
2023–2025
Keywords
school education, generative AI, pilot schools, teacher guidance

Description

In FY2023 Japan's Ministry of Education (MEXT) designated 52 schools under its Leading DX School Project as generative-AI pilot schools, ahead of and alongside its provisional and later (ver. 2.0, December 2024) national guidelines for generative AI in schools.
A 2025 conference paper (ICLEA 2025) by researchers at the Uchidayoko Institute for Education Research categorised the use cases reported by all 52 schools: pupils mainly used generative AI to develop and refine ideas and to create drawings, music and stories; teachers most often used it to draft documents; high schools showed more advanced uses such as detailed prompts for program creation.
The pilot programme's own end-of-year survey (2023 academic year), summarised by the EN-ICHI/IPP Japan site, suggests pupils' motivation and creativity may rise through trial and error with prompts, but also records cases of pupils accepting AI answers uncritically or being unable to judge when use is appropriate.
Guidance drawn from the pilot stresses that teachers need hands-on experience of both benefits and risks (hallucination, bias), that pupils should treat output only as reference and make final judgements themselves, and that boards of education should set an information-security policy and organise training.
Caveat: the evidence is descriptive and self-reported; no controlled learning-outcome measurement or sample-size detail for the survey was available, so the entry is scored conservatively.

Read the full analysis: https://ippjapan.org/en_ichi/en/archives/774

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful