An upcoming assessment, not a set of results
The OECD plans a Media and Artificial Intelligence Literacy domain, or MAIL, for PISA 2029. Its project page describes an assessment of responsible engagement with digital content, media platforms and AI systems, using questions and simulated environments. It includes evaluating credibility and considering social and ethical consequences. The published framework is identified as a first preliminary draft from January 2026 and may change. Results are expected in December 2031. There are no PISA 2029 MAIL results to report today, and this project is not an instruction to replace a country’s curriculum.
Move from “Is it true?” to “How would we check?”
A true-or-false vote can reveal an opinion without revealing the reasoning behind it. Give learners a fictional message such as “Our town’s library will close next Monday” and ask what information is missing. They might need the name of the library, the date of the message, the original announcement and whether “close” means a one-day closure or something permanent.
Ask pairs to write a verification plan before searching. Which source would be in a position to know? What would count as confirmation? What would make them withhold judgement? Learners can compare plans even when the classroom has no internet connection. The aim is to practise choosing an appropriate next step rather than rewarding the fastest confident answer.
Separate a claim from its packaging
Prepare two versions of the same invented announcement: one as a plain paragraph and one with a dramatic headline, impressive layout and urgent request to share. Keep the underlying evidence identical. Ask learners which feels more convincing and why. Then examine whether any design choice supplies actual support for the claim.
Extend the discussion to a cropped image. Show an original classroom-made picture alongside a crop that changes the apparent story. Learners describe what is visible, what is inferred and what remains unknown. This gives them a vocabulary for uncertainty without requiring them to identify every synthetic image by appearance, an unreliable challenge to make into a competition.
| Task | Reasoning to listen for |
|---|---|
| Choose a source | Why is this source in a position to know? |
| Check a date | Does the claim still describe the relevant time? |
| Compare accounts | Are these independent accounts or copies of one claim? |
| Inspect an explanation | Which step is supported, and which needs checking? |
| Decide whether to share | Who could be affected if this is incomplete or wrong? |
Check an AI explanation one step at a time
For a teacher-led activity, prepare a short explanation of a familiar topic containing one deliberate mistake. Tell the class that the example was made for the lesson. Ask learners to mark the step where the reasoning stops being supported and use their textbook or another suitable source to repair it. The lesson works without giving children accounts on an AI platform.
Next, compare a hesitant correct explanation with a fluent incorrect one. Ask learners to justify their choice with evidence rather than tone. A learner who says “I do not know yet, but this is what I would check” may be showing better judgement than one who chooses confidently and cannot explain why. Keep that distinction visible in feedback.
Make sharing part of the task
Media literacy also concerns what people create and pass along. Give a group a fictional school-event notice that omits the venue and includes a personal phone number. Ask them to prepare a version suitable for a public noticeboard. They must preserve useful information, identify missing details and decide what should not be made public.
Have another group review the revised notice from the audience’s point of view. Can a reader tell what is happening, when, where and who organised it? Is an opinion presented as a fact? Is a photograph needed, and do the people pictured expect it to be shared? Use imaginary names and details throughout the exercise.
Assess the explanation, not just the answer
- Ask learners to name the evidence they used.
- Give credit for spotting missing information and revising an initial view.
- Distinguish an observation from an inference or an opinion.
- Include a responsible decision about whether to share.
- Let learners show reasoning orally, in writing or with an accessible alternative.
A short reflection can close the lesson: “What changed your mind, and what would you check next?” Collect a few examples across the term to see whether explanations become more precise. The valuable classroom question is how learners make and explain judgements. An international assessment offers a reason to discuss that work; it should not turn it into a collection of tricks for a test that is still being developed.
Sources & further reading
Reviewed 28 Oct 2026. Sources were checked for this article. Policies and developing stories may change after this date.
