In the past months, Claude and ChatGPT both launched "learning modes". They'll explain anything, adapt to your pace, never get impatient when you ask the same question three different ways.
They appear to be pretty good teachers.
So good, in fact, that the $47 billion online learning industry has a problem (yep, one more to add to the ever-growing pile): If AI handles the information transfer part, what's actually left for humans to do?
Especially as they enforce spaced learning, will not give you the solution right away, and implement advanced learning techniques.
Here's my take: As AI gets better at teaching, access to real experts becomes more valuable, not less. The people who understand this shift will dominate learning in 2026. The ones who don't will keep selling courses nobody finishes.
Here are my predictions for what changes heading into 2026.
ChatGPT can explain complex topics like marketing attribution in a 90-second conversation, with examples tailored to your business.
The €1200 course you recently bought with a pseudo-valued certification takes 6 hours to cover a similar ground.
At a maximum of 15%, the industry's average completion rates were already appalling. Now they might actually flatline.
The data: 86% of studies show adaptive learning works better. It stops wasting time on stuff people can get answered in a quick prompt or which is simply not relevant to their situation.
Break your content into atomic pieces. I call this micro-learning: One video = one problem solved. If someone can’t apply it within the next 30 minutes, it’s probably too theoretical.
Besides mandatory learning videos, nobody really cares that you completed 40 hours of coursework. They care if you can solve the problem in front of them.
The learner might see it differently. I actually think that these deep dives are worth a lot, especially for beginners who want to see multiple sides and really want to understand topics at a higher level. It's great for this specific kind of learner. Especially now that AI has opened a new path of least resistance, where we can get to an “okay output” within minutes.
Nowadays, it’s a highly important skill to dissect a workflow or process, to be able to apply it in the real-world, and grow knowledge throughout this process. This will become more important, as we lose advanced skills as they're gradually getting outsourced to our AI buddies.
But within a real-world context, I expect a shift.
Instead of: "Completed Advanced Marketing Analytics Certification"
Hiring managers want: "Built an attribution model for a $2M ad budget. Here's the dashboard. Here's what we learned."
If ChatGPT can explain attribution models, why would someone pay for your pre-recorded course on the same topic?
They wouldn't.
But they will pay for:
Pre-recorded webinars pretending to be live. "Expert" courses that rehash what's in 1,000 blog posts. Communities where the expert barely shows up.
CXL survey data backs this up. 53% of marketing managers mentioned time and resource constraints for upskilling. "Marketing moves so quickly..." was a common refrain. People need current answers, not evergreen content that's outdated before it is published.
The business model flips: Content becomes the lead magnet. Live access is what you charge for.
It’s an ongoing discussion. What makes sense to outsource to AI, and where are humans more capable?
We see it with companies that try to replace departments with AI agents, only to re-hire them a few weeks later.
Here's the division of labour that makes sense:
AI is better at: Explaining concepts. Answering straightforward questions. Providing examples. Being available at 2 AM when you're stuck.
Humans are better at: "Here's what didn't work and why." Reading between the lines. Calling out what you're missing. Unconventional approaches that aren't in the training data.
Layer 1: AI handles basics. A Custom GPT trained on your course library. They deliver instant answers to "What is [X]?" or "How do I set up [Y]?"
Layer 2: When AI fails, humans get notified. AI flags when someone's stuck (rewatched the same section 3x). Complex questions escalate to real experts.
I've seen this work with internal Slack bots. Type "/explain attribution" and get an AI answer. Still confused? Human expert gets notified.
What this frees up: Your time for high-value interactions. Not answering "Where do I find Module 3?" for the 50th time.
People are maxed out on screen time. But they still need to learn.
In case you don’t consider yourself a content creator, I think it’s time to accept this reality.
One topic should become:
You're not competing with Netflix any more. You're competing with ChatGPT giving instant text answers. So you better meet people where they are.
I look at my own camera anxiety guide and think: this could be a video tutorial, the current text format, an audio file, a PDF checklist, and a quick reference card. Also, 3 LinkedIn carousels for social and a newsletter summary. Same content, seven different use cases.
When to use what:
At the desk, focused? Long video or deep-dive text. Need a quick answer? Text summary or AI chat. Commuting? Audio. Doing the task right now? Checklist or visual guide.
The format matches the context. Not the other way around.
The old model made everyone take the same path. Module 1, Module 2, Module 3. Regardless of what you already knew.
That's dead.
The 2026 model starts with pre-assessment and builds a custom path based on what you actually need.
Duolingo's approach: A five-minute placement test, skip three levels if you test well. Struggling with verb conjugations? More conjugation practice. Crushing vocabulary? Move faster through those sections.
Will someone who lived in Spain for a year sit through "¿Cómo estás?" lessons? Nobody has time for that.
Marketing training example:
Corporate compliance training:
Instead of making your entire sales team watch 45 minutes on data privacy:
The framework is simple:
If you still make everyone start at Module 1, you're wasting their time. And in 2026, people will lose their patience over this
The tech exists. Most LMS platforms support this now. The question is whether you'll use it.
AI can generate "SEO best practices" content in 30 seconds. It'll be everywhere in 2026. And I believe - most of it will be useless.
The content that survives is specific, not generic.
Not this: "How to Learn Spanish Fast"
This: "I failed Duolingo for 2 years. Switched to conversation-only practice for 3 months. Here's what actually worked and why the 'streak' approach kept me stuck."
Not this: "Best exercises for weight loss"
This: "I trained 200 clients over 40. Here's why standard HIIT advice fails for this age group and the lower-impact progression that actually worked."
Real numbers from real projects. Failure stories. Contra-conventional wisdom. Nuance based on context: "This works for X but fails for Y because..."
If AI can write it, it's not worth creating. If it requires lived experience or proprietary data, you have something valuable.
People don't need more information. They need help applying it.
The shift is from "watch this video" to "here's how to do this in your business."
What this looks like:
Fitness: Not "Here's how to build a workout plan." Instead: "Here's a 12-week progressive overload spreadsheet. Enter your starting weight."
Career development: Not "Here are networking strategies." Instead: "Week 1: Reach out to 3 people. Use this template. Week 2: Follow up. Here's how."
Marketing: "Submit your Meta account for review." "Share your attribution setup, get feedback." "Post your results, we'll help troubleshoot."
The business model shifts: Content is the entry point. Implementation support is premium.
Since information will become more and more accessible, application is where value lives.
Look, this is a lot to process. And implementing it is even harder.
We have produced over 50 courses with B2B marketers, agency leaders, founders, and CEOs. We've seen what works and what gets abandoned after Module 2.
If you're sitting on a course library that feels increasingly outdated, or you're building something new and want to skip the mistakes everyone made in 2023, let's talk.
Phil and I are constantly learning and developing traditional courses into 2026-ready learning experiences. The adaptive stuff. The implementation support. The "how do we actually make this valuable when AI can explain the basics" problem.
I'm not going to sell you a 40-hour transformation program. But we will help you figure out what's worth keeping. What you need to change. How to build courses people successfully finish.
Schedule a call or email us at hello@taughtful.com to talk through your specific situation.
2026 isn't about better videos or nicer slide decks.
It's about recognizing that AI made information transfer more accessible. What drives value is access to experts who have a proven track-record and walk the walk. Implementation support. Nuanced insights from real campaigns with real budgets. Live troubleshooting when you're stuck.
The learning companies that survive won't be the ones with the best content libraries. They'll be the ones who figured out what humans are uniquely good at and built their entire model around that.
