The AI Visibility Report for the Education Sector is a data study that tracked, over 13 weeks, how ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Perplexity answer agency and service queries aimed at the education sector. It is the first AI visibility measurement published specifically for the education vertical in Turkey.
Three findings stand out:
- 100% of the answers that cited sources in education queries relied on at least one agency or brand site — in this vertical, the engines are reading institutions' own industry pages.
- 71% of those same answers also included at least one directory or listicle page; directories matter, but they are not enough on their own.
- The gap between engines is enormous: Perplexity cites an average of 16.7 sources per answer, while ChatGPT settles for 1.4, and Gemini provides no source links at all.
Methodology
| Measurement period | July 31 – September 21, 2026 · 13 weekly rounds |
| Engines | ChatGPT (GPT-4o, web search enabled) · Gemini 2.5 Flash · Claude (Haiku 4.5) · Perplexity (Sonar) |
| Queries | 4 education queries: agency for a private school, agency for a preschool, agency for a language school or exam-prep center, and “is there a private school agency that has published case studies” |
| Data volume | 136 query-answer pairs; 17 runs that returned technical errors were excluded, leaving 119 valid answers for evaluation |
| Source counting | Search redirects and the engines' own infrastructure links were excluded from the count |
Finding 1 — In Education, the Engines Read Agencies' Own Pages
On general agency queries, engines lean heavily on directories. In the education vertical the picture changes: every one of the 68 answers that cited sources included at least one agency or brand site. In other words, when a school owner asks an AI engine about agencies, the engine builds its answer largely from the agencies' own education pages.
The practical implication: an agency without a dedicated education page carrying real content does not appear in these answers. A directory profile alone does not cut it.
Finding 2 — The Most-Cited Sources in Education Queries
Across 13 rounds of measurement, these are the sources the engines showed most often when answering education queries:
| Rank | Source | Citations | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | smartkid.agency | 79 | Agency site (the agency publishing this report) |
| 2 | odhdijital.com.tr | 48 | Agency site |
| 3 | survivor.com.tr | 33 | Agency site |
| 4 | okuldan.com.tr | 29 | Education directory |
| 5 | 212medya.com.tr | 28 | Agency site |
| 6 | agencies.semrush.com | 26 | Agency directory (global) |
| 7 | siyarmo.com | 26 | Agency site |
| 8 | kreativty.com | 24 | Agency site |
| 9 | dashy.com.tr | 20 | Agency site |
| 10 | pazarlamaturkiye.com | 20 | Industry press |
Transparency note: The site of the agency that ran this measurement and published the report sits at the top of the list. We are leaving it exactly as it is — because that is the finding itself: agencies that produce pages dedicated to the education vertical and publish case studies get read by the engines. The other agencies on the list are there for the same reason, on the strength of their own education content.
Finding 3 — Four Engines, Four Different Behaviors
| Engine | Avg. sources/answer | Behavior in the education vertical |
|---|---|---|
| Perplexity | 16.7 | Sources every claim; quotes an agency's industry page directly. An agency with strong education content becomes visible here quickly. |
| Claude | 8.3 | Blends directories and agency sites; builds its lists around source diversity. |
| ChatGPT | 1.4 | Cites few sources and leans on Google Maps data for local queries. A Google Business Profile is decisive on this engine. |
| Gemini | 0 | Answers the question but shares no source links; visibility can only be measured by whether the brand name appears in the answer text. |
What Does This Mean for Educational Institutions?
- Ask about AI visibility when you choose an agency. Does the agency have a page dedicated to the education sector and a published case study? That is exactly what the engines read.
- The same rule applies to your own institution. If your school's website has no content explaining its grade levels, programs and enrollment process, your odds of reaching a parent through AI are low.
- Do not neglect your Google Business Profile. ChatGPT builds much of its answer to local queries from map data.
The Takeaway for Agencies
The route to visibility in the education vertical runs through content depth, not ad budget: pages dedicated to each segment (preschool, exam-prep center and K-12 college treated separately), case studies with real numbers, and content that answers the questions parents actually ask. A directory presence complements this; it does not replace it.
For the methodology behind this report and broader findings, see the Turkey AI Visibility Report; for our approach on the education side, see our educational institutions page.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which sources do AI engines trust in the education sector?
In our measurement, 100% of the answers that cited sources included at least one agency or brand site; 71% also contained a directory or listicle page. In the education vertical, engines read agencies' own education pages directly.
What do we need to do for our school to appear in AI answers?
Three things are decisive: real content organized by grade level and program, a Google Business Profile that is accurate and up to date, and presence in third-party sources that describe the institution (education directories, industry press). Ad budget has no direct effect on these answers.
Which engine cites the most sources in education queries?
Perplexity leads by a wide margin with an average of 16.7 sources per answer. Claude is second with 8.3, and ChatGPT is highly selective at 1.4. Gemini does not share source links in its answers.
Is being listed in directories enough?
Not on its own. In education queries, 71% of answers included a directory, while 100% included an agency or brand site. Directory visibility makes it easier to get into the answer, but the content the engine actually reads is your own page.
How was this measurement carried out?
Weekly, between July 31 and September 21, 2026, by asking the same four education queries to four engines. A total of 136 query-answer pairs were recorded; 17 runs that returned technical errors were left out of the evaluation. The measurement was run on infrastructure Smartkid built in-house and continues on a weekly basis.