Education news

Drew University Is Opening an AI School. Does It Teach?

A New Jersey university is opening an AI-powered school for grade schoolers, and the announcement skips the one question that matters: is there any evidence it teaches? There is not, yet. Here is the test that cuts straight through the AI label.

Laura Lurns Last updated August 30, 2026 · 10 min read

Drew University Is Opening an AI School. Does It Teach?

If you have watched your child collect badges in a learning app while their actual skills stood still, you already know the gap between looking busy and learning. So when a university announces an AI-powered school and promises to reinvent how children learn, the right instinct is not awe and it is not panic. It is a question. On its Madison, New Jersey campus, Drew University is opening a private school for grades 1 through 8, built on adaptive software and set to open in fall 2026, and the announcement is long on mission and silent on evidence. There is one question that cuts through the AI label and tells you whether a school like this teaches, and you do not have to trust anyone’s marketing to ask it.

TL;DR

Drew University is opening The Drew School, an AI-powered private school for grades 1 through 8, on its Madison, New Jersey campus in fall 2026, built on the 2HR Learning platform.
The school pairs adaptive learning software with adults it calls learning coaches, and is led by Brian Holtz, a co-founder of Alpha School; NJBIZ reports tuition of $30,000 a year for roughly 10 to 12 founding families.
No independent, peer-reviewed evaluation of the 2HR Learning platform or Alpha School has been published; the network’s progress claims rest on internal assessment data that has not been independently reviewed.
The only quantified claim in the announcement coverage is Holtz’s statement to NJBIZ that 2HR Learning schools have seen “double digit enrollment growth” year over year, a business metric rather than a learning outcome.
Learning research points to step-level interaction (VanLehn, 2011), effortful retrieval (Roediger and Karpicke, 2006), and spaced practice (Cepeda and colleagues, 2006) as what makes tutoring software work, though none of those studies tested 2HR Learning.

Context the coverage leaves out

What the coverage gets wrong

The announcement coverage was almost entirely celebratory, and that is the problem. Story after story repeated the mission language, creativity, rethinking learning, real-world skills, and the partnership with a university, without once asking the obvious question: is there any evidence this model teaches? There is not. No independent study of 2HR Learning or Alpha School has been published, and the coverage let that gap pass unremarked. Worse, the one hard number in the reporting, double-digit enrollment growth, is about how fast the network signs up families, not about what its students learn, and it was presented as if it were a mark of success. Fast growth is a business result. It is not proof that a child is learning to read.

Drew University is opening an AI-powered school, and parents are asking what an AI school actually is and whether it teaches. Here are the questions that come up most.

Common questions

What is an “AI school,” and does it teach?

An AI school runs its core academics on adaptive learning software instead of a teacher-led classroom, usually with adults on hand to coach. Whether it teaches has nothing to do with the AI label and everything to do with the mechanism: does the software make a child pull answers from memory and respond at the level of each step, or does it mostly keep them clicking? The label tells you nothing. What the software makes your child do tells you everything.

How do I tell if an adaptive program is teaching my child or only keeping them busy?

Watch one session. A program that teaches asks your child to produce and recall answers, and it responds when the reasoning goes off track. One that mostly entertains hands over the answer or rewards clicks and streaks. Then check the yardstick, because progress measured on a program’s own tests tends to look better than progress measured on an independent one. Ask what your child is being measured against.

Is there proof that the 2HR Learning model works?

Not in the independent record. No peer-reviewed evaluation of 2HR Learning or Alpha School has been published; the network’s progress claims rest on its own internal assessment data, which has not been independently reviewed, and a state education department has described the instructional model as untested. The category of well-designed tutoring software has real research behind it. This specific platform has not been shown to be that kind of system, one way or the other.

My child is struggling and I am weighing an alternative like this. Should I get them evaluated?

Understanding where your child is stuck helps you choose, and starting sooner beats waiting to see. A screener is a starting point, not a diagnosis. If your child might need formal accommodations such as an IEP or 504 plan, or you suspect a vision, hearing, or medical cause, pursue a professional evaluation too, because that is the only route to those supports. Whatever a school or a tool promises, the most reliable help is steady, direct practice on the specific skill that is hard, alongside an adult who knows your child.

Share the idea

A university is opening an AI school for grades 1 to 8. The coverage skipped one question: is there proof it teaches? There is not, yet. Here is the test that cuts through the AI label.

Post on X Follow

What Drew University announced

On its Madison, New Jersey campus, Drew University is opening a private school for grades 1 through 8 called The Drew School, set to launch in fall 2026. It is built on a platform called 2HR Learning, which pairs adaptive learning software with adults the school calls learning coaches. Drew says it is the first university to host a school built on this model, and the founding class is small: NJBIZ reports roughly 10 to 12 founding families, around 15 to 20 students, at a tuition the outlet puts at $30,000 a year for those first families, citing the school’s website. The school will be led by Brian Holtz, a co-founder of Alpha School, the network the 2HR Learning model grew out of.

The pitch rests on three pillars the school lays out in its own materials: personalized learning, where every student moves at an individual pace on the adaptive software with a coach alongside; life skills, from public speaking and financial literacy to time management and leadership; and real-world projects. Drew University’s president, Hilary L. Link, framed the ambition broadly, saying the university recognizes “the importance of rethinking every stage of learning from age 6-60 and beyond.” Holtz put the mission in sharper terms, arguing that “most traditional schools are killing creativity in these uniquely inspired students who don’t run with the grain.”

Here is what the announcement does not include: any evidence that the model teaches. Across the press release and the local coverage, there is no test-score comparison, no independent evaluation, and no published study of 2HR Learning or Alpha School. The one number offered is about the business, not the children. Holtz told NJBIZ that schools “powered by 2HR Learning have seen double digit enrollment growth year over year during their first several years.” That is a statement about how fast the network is signing up families, not about whether its students are learning to read, write, or do math.

Most traditional schools are killing creativity in these uniquely inspired students who don’t run with the grain. — Brian Holtz, Co-founder of Alpha School
Laura Lurns · Learning Success expert

The test an ‘AI school’ has to pass

Coverage of AI in the classroom tends to sort into two stories: the technology that will personalize learning for every child, or the gimmick that dresses up a screen as a teacher. Both argue about the label. Neither asks the question that decides the outcome, which is what the software actually makes a child do. An “AI school” does not teach because it is labeled AI. It teaches, or fails to, on the strength of its mechanism.

Learning research has been pointing at that mechanism for years, and it names specific design features rather than a brand. Software that responds at the level of each step, catching where a child’s reasoning breaks down and prompting the next move, tends to help far more than software that only marks the final answer right or wrong; VanLehn’s 2011 review found well-built intelligent tutoring systems performing close to a human tutor, while answer-checking software barely moved the needle. The core of any good practice loop is being made to pull an answer from memory rather than being shown it (Roediger and Karpicke, 2006), and having that practice spaced out over time rather than crammed (Cepeda and colleagues, 2006). Those are the things worth looking for under the hood.

There is a catch, and it is the honest center of this story. That research validates a category of well-designed tutoring software. It says nothing about whether the 2HR Learning platform is that kind of system. No independent, peer-reviewed evaluation of 2HR Learning or Alpha School has been published; the network’s progress claims rest on its own internal assessment data, which has not been independently reviewed, and a state education department has described the instructional model as untested. Reporting on the model also notes something a parent should sit with: the software driving it looks closer to familiar adaptive-practice programs than to an AI tutor, whatever the marketing suggests. And watch the yardstick. When a program does report glowing numbers, Kulik and Fletcher’s 2016 review found gains tend to look much larger on tests built to match the program than on independent, standardized ones. A number measured against a program’s own material tells you less than it seems.

Key takeaways

The news: Drew University is opening an AI-powered private school for grades 1 through 8 in fall 2026.
The real test: An AI school teaches by its mechanism, retrieval and step-level feedback, not by the label on the door.
No proof yet: No independent, peer-reviewed evaluation of the 2HR Learning platform has been published anywhere.

What this means if you are considering it

None of this is a verdict on the Drew School, and it is not a reason to write off an AI school out of hand. It is a way to look past the label and decide for yourself. The model bundles together things a parent might genuinely want, small groups, mentorship, a focus on life skills, and self-paced progress, with a core engine that has not been shown to work. Those are separable. You are allowed to like the coaches and still ask hard questions about the software.

So ask them. Watch a child use the platform and see whether it makes them produce and recall answers or mostly watch and click. Ask how progress is measured, and whether it is measured against the program’s own material or an outside yardstick. Ask what the learning coaches actually do when a child is stuck, because the human relationship around the learning is the part decades of research keeps returning to, and no software replaces it. And weigh the screen load honestly. A model built on a couple of hours of daily software use is a real consideration, and for younger children especially, screen-delivered practice is a weak fit as the main way to learn.

The deeper point travels well beyond one school in New Jersey. The trap is not artificial intelligence, and it was never the screen. It is treating the tool itself as the teacher. A screen is a delivery vehicle. Whether it teaches depends on whether it is built around how children actually learn, effortful recall, spaced over time, with feedback that tells a child what to do next, and on whether it frees a caring adult to do the relationship work no app has done yet. If you want to see what building around those principles looks like, how it works is a reasonable place to start. The most useful thing you own is not a school choice. It is the question that tells you whether your child is doing the learning or watching it happen.

We recognize the importance of rethinking every stage of learning from age 6-60 and beyond. — Hilary L. Link, President, Drew University
Laura Lurns · Learning Success expert

You do not need to understand how a language model works to tell whether one is teaching your child. You need the right question, and you start from the belief that your child is more capable than any label, on a screen or off it, gives them credit for. The villain in this story was never artificial intelligence, and it was never the screen. It is the substitution fallacy, the quiet assumption that the tool itself is the teacher, when a tool only ever teaches if it is built around how children actually learn and it frees a caring adult to do the rest. That is the standard Learning Success was built around. Our All-Access membership opens an assessment that asks about every processing system your child’s learning draws on, and a roadmap that names what to build first. A screener is a starting point, not a diagnosis. If your child might need formal accommodations such as an IEP or 504 plan, or you suspect a vision, hearing, or medical cause, pursue a professional evaluation too, because that is the only route to those supports.

See what All Access gives your child

Is your child struggling in school?

Get your free personalized learning roadmap

You describe what you see at home. We turn it into a plan you start this week.

Answer 5 short questionnaires about what you already notice, 30–45 minutes at your own kitchen table
Your child sits no test and gets no score: nothing to schedule, nothing for them to dread
You do the answering, the AI does the writing, and a person reviews it before it reaches you
Access all 40+ courses instantly: reading, math, focus, processing and more, with new ones added regularly

Why we use AI, plainly: it writes from a knowledge base our team maintains and audits. We work through it line by line and pull anything the evidence stops supporting. The roadmap you get on Tuesday reflects what we corrected on Monday, and a human still reads it before you do.

Your school district must evaluate your child free of charge if you ask in writing, whatever your income and whatever the outcome (US, 34 CFR 300.111 and 300.301(b)). That route takes time and answers a different question than you do. This one starts today, from what you already know.

Get my free assessment & 7-day trial Cancel anytime during your trial.

Your answers stay yours. We do not sell your personal information, and we do not hand identifiable assessment data to outside AI companies to train their models.

A screener is a starting point, not a diagnosis. If your child might need formal accommodations (an IEP or 504 plan), or you suspect a vision, hearing or medical cause, pursue a professional evaluation too. That is the only route to those supports.

References

News 12 New Jersey — Drew University to launch AI-powered private school for grades 1-8
PR Newswire — Drew University announces launch of The Drew School
NJBIZ — Drew University to open AI-powered school in 2026
Morristown Green — Drew University announces launch of The Drew School
Wikipedia — Alpha School (background on the 2 Hour Learning model)

Laura Lurns · Learning Success expert Writes about the learning brain for parents who want plain answers. Every article is grounded in current neuroscience and classroom practice.