Google plans to launch smart glasses powered by artificial intelligence (AI) in 2026, after its previous high-profile attempt to enter the market ended in failure.

The tech giant set expectations high in 2013 when it unveiled Google Glass, billed by some as the future of technology despite its odd appearance with a bulky screen positioned above the right eye.

Google pulled the product in 2015, less than seven months after its UK release, but is now planning on re-entering the market with smart glasses with a cleaner look.

But it comes after Meta has already made waves with its smart specs, which have sold two million pairs as of February.

Google’s new tech will let users interact with its AI products, such as its chatbot Gemini.

It plans to launch two different varieties – one designed to provide assistance without any kind of screen, and another which has a display on the glasses themselves.

Google has not said what the first of the two types of AI glasses it is working on will be, but it will be ready in 2026.

Technology analyst Paolo Pescatore told the BBC that the tech firm “must avoid the pitfalls of its previous failed attempts.”

“Arguably, the move was ahead of its time, poorly conceived and executed,” he said.

“Now represents an opportune moment, thanks to the success of Gemini.”

Google will also have to contend with Meta, which unveiled its own AI-powered glasses earlier this year, having built on its existing collaborations with luxury eyewear brands Ray-Ban and Oakley.

According to market research firm Counterpoint Research, the sector saw a surge in the first half of 2025, driven by demand for Meta’s devices and the launch of similar products by smaller brands.

It said sales of AI glasses had grown by more than 250% compared to the previous year.

Google Glass was launched in 2013 as a pair of thin, wireframe glasses with a chunky right arm to accommodate a camera built into the corner of the right lens.

Wearers could use the camera to take images and record their surroundings while simultaneously interacting with a digital display.

The device created a lot of excitement when it first appeared at a Google event in June 2012.

But after its launch the following year, concerns about its impact on privacy, potential for abuse and questions about its style and usefulness arose – and grew until Google said it would stop making them in that form in 2015.

A revamped version, Google Glass Enterprise, appeared two years later but was retired in 2023.

Former BBC Technology Correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones was among those who deemed Google’s device in its initial form “a failure.”

The success of so-called wearable computers, he wrote, would likely depend on having the tech to bring their potential to life and them being “both attractive to wear and so easy to use that you forget that you have them on”.

Today, tech giants have tried to make AI and smart glasses more wearable by partnering with designer eyewear brands – and can pack more power and features into smaller, sleeker frames.

But there remain concerns about privacy and usability.

A secondary school in east London celebrated for its high academic results fostered a “particularly harmful” disciplinary culture for vulnerable students, an independent safeguarding review has found.

The report, commissioned by Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy (MVPA), found that shouting, public humiliation, and a lack of support for students with special needs took place.

The Mossbourne Federation expressed its commitment to ensuring the best outcomes for every child attending its schools.

Hackney Council said it would explore how to further strengthen support for its local education offer. The Department of Education said the findings were “deeply concerning.”

MVPA, part of the Hackney-based Mossbourne Federation, is among the top-performing comprehensive schools in England.

But the review, authored by Sir Alan Wood, said this success had been achieved “at too high a cost for some pupils,” particularly those who struggled with what it described as a rigid and inflexible behaviour system.

A City & Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership report examined 73 accounts relating to MVPA, alongside testimony from parents, pupils, teachers and external professionals.

It concluded that compliance and control were often prioritised above pupil wellbeing and said concerns raised by parents or staff were sometimes dismissed as “vexatious”.

Governors were criticised for failing to scrutinise behavioural practices or examine sanction data.

The report identified several practices of concern, including:

• Routine shouting at pupils
• “Desking,” where children are placed at hallway desks for minor issues.
• Sanctions given to pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) for behaviours linked to their conditions
• Some groups, including pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and certain ethnic groups, are disproportionately sanctioned, and there is no evidence that this was monitored.

Mental health professionals told the review the school’s culture could intensify anxiety and other conditions.

Some young people reported long-term effects, including a loss of confidence and distress linked to school experiences.

Sir Alan, a former director for children and young people’s services at Hackney Council, said the findings revealed a “paradox” of “success, but not for all”, noting that while many children thrived at MVPA, others experienced significant harm.

He called for major changes to governance, leadership culture, behaviour tice. Send support and complaint handling.

“Academic excellence that traumatises some pupils is not true excellence,” Sir Alan wrote.

“Discipline through fear is not preparing young people for life as confident, independent adults.”

Parents described struggling to have concerns acknowledged, with some saying emails and calls went unanswered. The complaints process was viewed by some as a “defensive shield” that protected the school rather than children.

Staff testimonies described a “climate of fear”, pressure to reprimand pupils publicly and a culture in which empathy was discouraged.

One anonymous teacher quoted in the review said, “This term, ‘healthy fear’, was explicitly used as the title of training sessions provided to staff, where we were instructed on methods to ensure that children remained intimidated.”

A former pupil told the review author, “During Year 9 I started to self-harm because the teachers made me feel as though I didn’t deserve to live because of my grades.”

One parent, Andy Wilson, said that while his son attended Mossbourne Community Academy and not MVPA, the issues identified in the review “came as no surprise”.

He described the school as “almost resistant to any engagement”, adding, “It’s like they ringfenced the school rather than protecting the child.”

Mr Wilson said his autistic son was shouted at on his first day and told he was “a disgrace for the length of his hair” and later received “10 detentions in one week” for behaviour linked to his neurodiversity.

“He had so much trauma there… he cannot physically go near the place,” Mr Wilson said.

Jim Gamble, chair of the City & Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership, told BBC Radio London the findings exposed serious cultural and leadership failings that could not be explained away by the school’s academic reputation.

He said the review highlighted “practices that shouldn’t be occurring in any school” and warned that “students getting shouted at… that’s not about dignity and respect.”

Mr. Gamble also expressed concerns about disproportionate sanctions, noting that pupils from ethnic minority backgrounds were “about twice as likely to receive a sanction” and adding that governors “should have been aware of this.”

“What we’ve identified here is a small but significant minority of children who are going to a school where the balance is wrong,” he said.

“You can’t hide that type of behaviour behind academic excellence.”

Mr. Gamble said the federation’s senior governing members must demonstrate accountability and “come up with a plan.”

“Because that’s what’s going to count, action, not words,” he said.

In a statement, the Mossbourne Federation said it had received the review and was considering it “carefully and in detail” alongside its Members Trust, board and senior leadership team.

It said the report acknowledged “the strong outcomes the schools achieve for pupils alongside high levels of support from parents and staff”.

“In the meantime, we thank our hard-working staff, pupils and parents for their ongoing commitment, focus and support and reiterate our ongoing commitment to enabling students from all backgrounds to thrive and achieve their full potential,” the academy trust added.

The Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review was launched following reports by the BBC and other media outlets into a “toxic culture” at MVPA and the Mossbourne Community Academy.

Last month a separate review by Anne Whyte KC found Mossbourne’s safeguarding policies were broadly compliant but highlighted weaknesses in culture, communication and parental engagement.

It said some families felt their concerns were not heard and recommended improvements in how the federation listens and responds to them.

The Mossbourne Federation said, “We have already recognised the importance of engaging effectively with parents and are working to implement all the recommendations made by Anne Whyte KC.”

Hackney Council said the publication of the review was “a critical moment” in addressing concerns about children’s experiences at the academy and acknowledged the report may cause “upset” for pupils, families and staff.

It said it was considering the findings and how it could further strengthen support for schools to ensure Hackney’s education offer “unequivocally puts the wellbeing of our children and young people first”.

The council said its influence over academy policies was limited but added that statutory freedoms around curriculum and behaviour must still respect Department for Education guidance.

Tuesday’s review came on the heels of a BBC News investigation into the Mossbourne Federation’s administration of two secondary schools it took over in Thurrock, Essex, at the beginning of this year.

It revealed around 150 pupils had been withdrawn amid parents’ claims of harsh discipline, reduced support for children with additional needs and poor communication following the takeover.

Also responding to the MVPA review, Thurrock Council said it supported all of the recommendations and had written to the education secretary urging her to ensure the federation acts on them.

The council said some Thurrock parents had raised concerns similar to those detailed in the report, particularly around discipline, and that some families felt their worries were not being taken seriously.

In their letter, council leaders said the findings suggested children with special educational needs were “suffering most due to the schools’ ‘climate of fear'” and that “there are issues here that need addressing”.

They added that the authority had seen “an increase in parents choosing to take their children out of Mossbourne-run schools”.

The Department for Education said the findings are “serious and deeply concerning”.

It added that school behaviour policies should promote respect and a positive environment, and said it will continue to engage with the trust to ensure changes needed are implemented.