High School & Sixth Form · Ages 16–18

Advanced AI and robotics projects that connect technical depth, research practice and future pathways.

CIRC high-school programmes are designed for students ready to move beyond guided demonstrations. Learners define requirements, work with data, integrate software and hardware, evaluate reliability and defend technical decisions. Projects can support A Level enrichment, EPQ-style research, university preparation, portfolios and international collaboration.

High-school students reviewing an autonomous robotics system and technical data
AI for High School · CIRC project-based learning

Ages 16–18

Research-led projects

Technical portfolios

University and industry pathways

01 / Programme model

From learning a technique to defending a complete system

01

Research question

Students define a focused question, identify assumptions and select evidence capable of supporting or challenging a conclusion.

02

Systems integration

Software, data, electronics, mechanics, interfaces and human procedures are treated as interacting parts of one system.

03

Verification

Performance is assessed through repeatable tests, baseline comparison, failure analysis and documented limitations.

04

Technical communication

Every project concludes with a portfolio, demonstration and viva-style defence suitable for academic or professional audiences.

02 / Autonomous systems project

Autonomous Search and Mapping Rover

Teams develop a rover that explores a controlled environment, identifies targets and produces a useful map or mission record. The project can be implemented in simulation, with educational robotics platforms or through a more advanced custom build.

Perception

Understand the environment

Students integrate distance, inertial, vision or marker data and document the limitations of each sensing method.

Planning

Select and execute a route

Teams compare rule-based navigation, graph search or other age-appropriate planning approaches against defined mission constraints.

Reliability

Design for failure

Testing includes changed lighting, sensor noise, communication loss, obstacles and recovery or safe-stop behaviour.

Output

Defensible mission evidence

The team submits architecture diagrams, code, test results, risk controls, a live demonstration and a technical evaluation.

03 / Computer vision research

Computer Vision in Context

Students build and evaluate a vision pipeline for a bounded task such as recognising recyclable materials, plant conditions or safety markers. The goal is not merely high accuracy, but understanding when a model is suitable for use.

01

Dataset design

Teams define classes, gather or curate permitted images, document provenance and examine representation, balance and label quality.

02

Model experiment

Students establish a baseline, train one or more models and keep variables controlled when comparing approaches.

03

Evaluation

Performance is examined using suitable metrics, confusion analysis and targeted tests outside the ideal training conditions.

04

Responsible use

The final paper considers privacy, bias, false confidence, environmental cost, human review and the consequences of error.

04 / Robotics and human factors

Human–Robot Collaboration Laboratory

Teams design a supervised task in which a person and robot share information or physical space. The project brings together engineering, interface design, psychology, ethics and safety.

Task

Allocate work appropriately

Students decide which steps suit automation and which require human perception, dexterity, responsibility or contextual judgement.

Interaction

Communicate state and intent

Interfaces use light, sound, screen or motion cues so the operator can understand what the robot is doing and intervene.

Safety

Control risk before autonomy

Teams create a risk assessment, operating boundary, emergency stop, speed limits and supervised test protocol.

Study

Evaluate trust and usability

Participants complete a defined task while students collect non-sensitive evidence about clarity, workload, error and confidence.

05 / AI product development

Responsible AI Application Studio

Students develop a web or mobile prototype that uses an AI capability to address a genuine education, community or sustainability need. The project follows a product process rather than beginning with an API.

01

Discovery

Teams research users, map the current problem and write measurable product requirements and responsible-use boundaries.

02

Architecture

Students plan interface, data, model or API, storage, permissions, fallback and human-review components.

03

Prototype

A minimum viable product is built in short sprints and tested against representative tasks, failure cases and accessibility needs.

04

Product review

The pitch explains value, evidence, risks, operating cost, limitations and the technical and governance work required for deployment.

06 / Data science project

Sustainable Campus Digital Twin

Students construct a simplified digital representation of a school system using real or simulated data. They explore scenarios without claiming that a model perfectly predicts the future.

01

System boundary

Teams choose a tractable domain such as energy, room use, transport, water or air quality and define what the model includes and excludes.

02

Data pipeline

Students clean, structure, visualise and document data, including gaps, uncertainty and permitted use.

03

Scenario testing

A dashboard or simulation compares possible interventions and makes assumptions visible to decision-makers.

04

Recommendation

The final output separates observed evidence, modelled scenarios and value judgements so that conclusions are not overstated.

07 / Independent research pathway

AI and Robotics Research Project

Suitable for EPQ-style work or a supervised research studio, this pathway supports an individual or small team through a defined investigation with an original practical or analytical component.

Question

Narrow a viable investigation

Students review existing work, identify a gap appropriate to available time and resources and write a question that can be answered with evidence.

Method

Design an ethical study

The plan defines variables, participants or datasets, equipment, risk, consent where relevant and an analysis method before collection.

Analysis

Interpret rather than decorate data

Students report uncertainty, anomalies, negative findings and methodological limitations alongside any positive result.

Dissemination

Write and defend

Outputs may include a research paper, poster, code repository, prototype and oral defence with questions from mentors.

08 / International capstone

Cross-Border Intelligent Systems Design Review

Teams in different countries address a shared challenge locally, exchange technical evidence and review one another’s systems. Collaboration is structured around engineering milestones rather than informal communication alone.

01

Common specification

Partners agree requirements, interfaces, test cases, documentation format, data rules and evaluation criteria.

02

Distributed development

Teams build complementary modules or contextual variants while maintaining versioned technical records.

03

Peer verification

A partner team attempts to reproduce a result, test an interface or challenge an assumption using the supplied documentation.

04

Joint defence

Students present where designs converged, where context required difference and what evidence changed their decisions.

09 / Assessment and pathways

A portfolio that demonstrates knowledge, judgement and professional practice

01

Technical evidence

Requirements, architecture, code, data documentation, model evaluation, engineering drawings and verification results.

02

Research evidence

Literature review, method, ethics, analysis, limitations, citations and a reasoned conclusion.

03

Team evidence

Role ownership, issue tracking, version control, design decisions, peer review and individual reflection.

04

Future progression

Projects create discussion material for university applications, apprenticeships, competitions and interviews without guaranteeing admission or employment.

10 / Feasible delivery

Scalable formats for different timetables and technical resources

6–8 weeks

Focused technical investigation

One tightly bounded system or research question with guided methods and a final technical presentation.

12–16 weeks

Advanced team studio

A full research, build, integration and verification cycle suitable for enrichment or extended curriculum time.

Two terms

International capstone

Partner formation, common specification, distributed development, cross-testing and a joint showcase.

Capacity

Teacher and mentor support

Planning, technical preparation, assessment resources and defined mentor review strengthen delivery while preserving student ownership.

Build the next programme

Ready to turn AI and robotics into purposeful student work?

We can shape a class project, school pilot, international team or multi-school pathway around your learners.