At the Stockholm-based KTH Royal Institute of Technology, some faculty are not at ease with the use of AI until a clear global policy is outlined. They believe that the unregulated use of AI can potentially hamper students’ learning ability.

They value that learning involves freedom and discipline in gathering facts and probing the constellation of beliefs, techniques, data, and tools used to reach conclusions. A pedagogy that nurtures these habits of mind in the Age of AI must be built around –

  • Re-vision
  • Rigour
  • Recursion
  • Richness and
  • Relations

The unregulated use of AI can have deleterious consequences for these nascent elements of curriculum architectonics and pedagogy. Curriculum in the Age of AI is driven by multiple interpretations, incompleteness, and indeterminacy.

Before AI, schooling focused on the four R’s-

  • Reading
  • Religion
  • (a)Rithmetic and
  • (w)Riting

These remain critical. However, AI has added five layers to the education palimpsest – re-vision, rigour, recursion, richness, and relations.

Re-vision has to do with looking at a concept or process with fresh eyes or from a different point of view over time. Recursion aims at developing the ability to use something heuristically. Richness deals with curriculum depth, layers of meaning, multiple options, indeterminacy, lived experience, disequilibrium, problematics, and agitations. Relations refer to a curriculum design akin to a network or matrix with limitless cross-connections.

Alfred North Whitehead in his “Aims of Education” (1967, p. 30) believed that “the only avenue towards wisdom is through freedom in the presence of knowledge.” Growth and wisdom, therefore, come only when there is a balance between the creative opportunity that freedom can give and the knowledge we acquire from discipline.

Ideas do not emerge full-blown, nor are they systematically interwoven into a well-defined structure; they are “created piece-meal ad hoc” from “unexplored connexions,” from “possibilities half-disclosed” and “half-concealed” (p.17), inside a network.

In this “ferment” lie the possibilities to be made actual, to be created. The process of education in the Age of AI must be to order the ferment already stirring in the mind, not to impose a pre-set framework upon it as Tyler outlines in his, “Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction”, (1950) which is a mere variation of Descartes’ chain-link method described in his “Discourse on Method, (Trans. L.J. LaFleur, NY: Liberal Arts Press, 1950).

The AI curriculum matrix is not unlike the AI-Assemblage that feeds it. Both the curriculum and the assemblage are in flux. Both are open. The Open Syllabus is a live platform that involves the structured “Live” use of AI in the classroom with guardrails agreed upon beforehand.

The future of work is expecting a “Connecting Agent”. Work is searching for workers who can –

  • break orthodoxies
  • dare to take risks
  • have organizational awareness
  • craft and inspire vision
  • prioritize and plan
  • take ownership and are decisive
  • seek information and structure problem-solving
  • plan ways of working
  • synthesize message
  • cope with uncertainty
  • and understand digital ethics and digital collaboration.

Such workers will make unusual associations, combinations, and connections. This is precisely why Finland is focusing on transversal competencies and studies across school subjects. Collaborative classroom practices, where learners work with several teachers simultaneously or Tutoring Bars during periods of phenomenon-based project studies.

The core curriculum is now stipulated in the Basic Education Act, however, each education district has the autonomy to articulate the nationally set objectives using their district-grown innovative methods which can vary freely across municipalities. The era of a canned curriculum has ended. Lessons are not cans that are opened and poured without thinking about the interests of learners, their multiple intelligences and learning styles, and the jobs of the future.

Substructure subjects like the sciences and mathematics can be taken to new heights if imaginatively expressed in the Arts. Breaking open the silos of knowledge by teaching from the ground between strict domains and fields such as chemistry and physics involves taking new knowledge and using it differently. Intellectual sparks will set the class afire in unexpected places and it will need adaptable, confident teachers to cope with the energy released.

Creeds constrain. The school must foster in the learner the capacity to take joy in things beyond their understanding and to respond to the unusual with an open mind as AI does not pray or hope. There must be moments every day and each week during assembly and sanctuary, for learners of all faiths or none, to consider the deific dimension of human existence. This is a defining characteristic of the most attractive institutions of learning, including some of the best universities, primary, and secondary schools worldwide.

The US and the UK have signed on Monday 1st April 2024, a bilateral agreement that establishes AI Safety Institutes (AISI) to evaluate open and closed-source AI Systems. The EU’s AI Act is on its way to becoming law.

President Emmanuel Macron has selected Anne Bouverot to plan the world’s next AI safety summit that will focus on the open and democratic global governance of AI.

The inaugural summit in Bletchley Park, UK, concluded that AI has the potential to change and improve human well-being, harmony, and prosperity. Still, it adds that it should be designed, developed, and deployed responsibly.