Teachers: The missing link in personalised learning

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

Personalisation: this word has come up with increasing frequency in conversations with school leaders over the past year, one word has come up with increasing frequency. The discussion often moves quickly to technology. AI tutors, adaptive platforms, and real-time dashboards promise to help schools understand what every child needs and respond accordingly. Perhaps, the bigger question is whether the question itself is being asked in the right order.

Imagine a hospital that installs the world’s finest diagnostic machines and then cancels the training budget for its doctors. The scanners hum, the dashboards glow, every ailment is flagged in real time but no patient is treated better than before. Nobody would call that personalised medicine. Yet that, to a large extent, is the current situation in the education ecosystem. For years, we have been investing in devices, adaptive software, and AI tutors. All of it is based on the quiet assumption that personalisation is something machines do.

It is not. Personalised learning is not a software feature but a teaching skill. Until the momentum behind education technology shifts from acquiring hardware to building teacher capability, the personalisation promise will stop at the classroom door. To be fair, technology has earned its place. Adaptive platforms have genuinely changed what is possible: checks for understanding that once took a week of correction now take a minute. A teacher can see, mid-lesson, exactly which children have mastered a concept and which have not. Nor is this a bubble. India’s ed-tech market, valued at $7.5 billion in 2024, is projected to reach $29 billion by 2030, according to Impact Study of EdTech in India: Driving Innovation and Creating Opportunities, IAMAI and Grant Thornton Bharat, January 2025. The tools are real, and so is the money behind them.

But consider what a tool actually knows. A dashboard can flag a child struggling with fractions but cannot know why. Did she misread the word problem, did not understand the concept, or has she simply learned to fear being wrong in front of others? Each reason demands a different response and only one person who can diagnose and act on it is the teacher. What happens in the 10 minutes after the flag determines whether personalised learning is a reality or a slogan? No software controls those 10 minutes.

The question, then, is whether teachers have the knowledge and conditions to do something with it. That is where personalised learning is won or lost.

First, data is not insight. Learning data becomes learning only when a teacher converts it into timely classroom action: a concept re-taught differently the next morning, a small group pulled aside that same week, a task adjusted for the child who is ready to move ahead. Without that conversion, a dashboard is just a more expensive way of discovering, too late, what a good teacher would have noticed anyway. The last mile of personalisation is human.

Second, capability is the multiplier.