The AI Trap: Why Solving Teacher Workload Isn't Enough (And What to Do Instead)

As an educator and researcher, I see the same look on the faces of school leaders everywhere: a mixture of excitement and anxiety. The wave of artificial intelligence is no longer on the horizon; it’s crashing onto the shores of our schools. Every week brings a new app, a new platform, a new promise to revolutionize learning. In this dizzying landscape, the pressure to "do something" is immense.

Too often, this pressure leads to one of two predictable, and equally flawed, responses. The first is strategic paralysis—the "wait and see" approach. Overwhelmed by choice, secondary school leaders do nothing, only to find themselves in a panicked scramble to adopt any tool when a neighboring district grabs headlines with its new "AI Initiative." This reactive decision-making almost always leads to poor choices, vendor lock-in, and wasted budgets.

The AI-Driven Educational Renaissance: Bridging the Innovation Gap through Systems Design and Pedagogical Mastery

Summary
The Fourth Industrial Revolution, catalyzed by Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a General Purpose Technology (GPT), presents an unprecedented temporal challenge for all parts of society. Unlike the multi-decadal adoption curves of steam, electricity, or ICT, AI promises a productivity revolution within a single decade. It will affects all sectors of the economy, and education is no exception.

This report argues that our current educational infrastructure is dangerously misaligned with this velocity. By applying systems design thinking, we identify the critical "knowing-doing" gap in pedagogy—specifically the underutilization of active learning pedagogies. We propose a radical restructuring of the ISCED framework, supported by AI-enabled "Mastery Guides," to synchronize the Society-Wide Innovation System with the Educational Pipeline.

1. Theoretical Systems Analysis: a Mindmap of Interconnected Systems

To understand the urgency of reform, we must visualize the educational landscape not as a static hierarchy, but as a dynamic flow chart interacting with the broader economy. Imagine a mindmap dominated by two massive, cyclical, mutually interdependent systems: The Society-Wide Innovation System and The Education Pipeline.

System A: The Society-Wide Innovation System

At the macro level, we observe a feedback loop where AI acts as a force multiplier. In this system, AI enables humans to work "smarter" (augmenting cognitive capacity), while humans simultaneously work to make AI "smarter" (refining algorithms and applying them to novel domains).

The health of this system is measured not just by capital investment, but by the efficiency of the Triple Helix model—the symbiotic relationship between:

• Government: Providing regulatory frameworks and funding.
• The Private Sector: Driving commercial application and labor demand.
• The Knowledge Sector (Universities/Research): Generating human capital and intellectual property.

Currently, this system is accelerating. The cycle of innovation is tightening. However, an innovation system is only as robust as its inputs. If the human capital entering this helix is unprepared, the system stalls. This leads us to the second system.

System B: The Education Pipeline (ISCED Levels 0-8)

This system is the "supply chain" for the Innovation System. It is currently functioning with the obsolescence of a 19th-century factory. I do not pretend to know the purpose of education, but it is no longer creating barely literate or numerate workers, or obedient soldiers.

Initial Input: Early Childhood (ISCED 0).
Process: The pipeline must graduate a sufficient density of students (per 100,000 inhabitants) who at the end of the journey possess a dual-competency profile:

• Essential Soft Skills: Problem-solving, complex communication, storytelling, and teamwork (cultivated in ISCED 0-1).
• Hard STEM Skills: High proficiency in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics as measured by PISA surveys (solidified in ISCED 2-3).
• Global and AI Fluency: Proficiency in at least two foreign languages to facilitate cross-border collaboration.

This vision of the goal of education is widely contested, but at least it focuses on a concrete contribution of education to society. Moreover, it does not mean other purposes can not be added.

The Nexus: Masters and Doctoral Education

The critical intersection of these two systems, the innovation and the education systems, occurs at the graduate level ISCED Levels 7 and 8 (Master’s and Doctoral). There is a direct causal link: there are no innovative startups or sustainable employment creation without a strong graduate education system.

World-class universities (ISCED 6-8) act as the engine room of the innovation Triple Helix. They are where research transitions into commercial viability. However, a university cannot function without a robust undergraduate pipeline (ISCED 6). If students arrive at university accustomed to passive rote memorization, they cannot transition to the knowledge-creation demands of Levels 7 and 8. The failure of the lower levels to prepare students for active inquiry creates a bottleneck that strangles the entire Innovation System.

2. The Pedagogical Paradox: The Knowing-Doing Gap

If we accept that the goal is to produce problem-solvers for an innovation system, we face a paradox.

The Question: Why are the most effective teaching techniques and course design practices the ones that are least frequently applied?

The Evidence: Research by Dr. Carl Wieman (Stanford) and meta-analyses by John Hattie have conclusively demonstrated that "active learning"—specifically methods that put the problem first rather than the lecture first—results in significantly better learning outcomes, retention, and grade performance (Wieman, 2017).

The Friction: Despite this evidence, the "lecture" persists. In my perspective, this is not due to teacher incompetence, but due to systemic bandwidth constraints. Designing high-quality Problem-Based Learning (PBL) or Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) requires immense preparation time. It requires creating realistic scenarios, scaffolding resources, and personalized feedback mechanisms. In a fossilized system, teachers are overwhelmed by administrative burdens and standardized testing pressures, leaving no capacity for complex course design.

The AI Solution: This is where AI serves as the bridge. AI does not replace the teacher; it removes the friction for course and assessment re-design, allowing the teacher to implement high-impact pedagogy at scale.

3. Practical Part: The AI-Enabled Mastery Guides

The following guides illustrate how AI serves as a "pedagogical co-pilot" to operationalize research-based, active learning. For all activities, probably the most important usage of AI is its ability to adapt reading or writing sytems.

Mastery Guide 1: Project-Based Learning (PBL) – Outside the Classroom

Concept: Students tackle real-world challenges that require extended engagement over time.

Examples; Queenland University of Technology or Delft University have built a special labs where students can work on their projects.
The Friction: Creating locally relevant, complex projects with proper milestones is time-consuming.
The AI Augmentation:

• Scenario Generation: AI can scan local news and economic data to suggest project topics relevant to the community (e.g., "Design a water filtration system for the local river using available materials").
• Resource Scaffolding: AI generates a "Project Pack" for the teacher, including timelines, rubric templates, and a list of required materials.
• Student Mentorship: /Specialised AI chatbots serve as "on-demand consultants" for student teams, answering technical questions and prompting critical thinking without giving away the final solution.

Mastery Guide 2: Problem-Based Learning – Online and Inside the Classroom

Concept: Learning is driven by open-ended problems with no single correct answer. The problem comes before the instruction. The activities are lead by the students and take place in the classroom, except the research done between the first, goals session and the second, presentation section.

Examples: PBL is used in most medical programs, and 12 universities decided to deliver all their undergraduate courses in PBL format.
The Friction: Developing "ill-structured", wicked problems that are calibrated to the exact skill level of the class is difficult. It normally requires several iterations.
The AI Augmentation:

• Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment: AI analyzes student performance data to generate different problem sets that adapt in real-time. If a group struggles, the AI provides a "hint" or a bridging concept. If they excel, it introduces a new variable.
• Socratic Tutoring: Instead of providing answers, AI interfaces can be programmed to ask guiding questions (e.g., "What principles of physics might apply to this bridge collapse?"), forcing students to articulate their reasoning.

Mastery Guide 3: Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) – Role-Playing and Simulation

Concept: Students act as professionals (scientists, historians, diplomats) to explore questions. IBL consists of linking each activity or stage to the main, large inquiry questions. The role playing sections can be prepared by doing online simulations on platforms such as Flint. 
The Friction: Organizing complex simulations (e.g., a Model UN, decision-making in a corporate boardroom, or a simulated market lab experiment) used to requires massive logistical coordination.
The AI Augmentation:
Simulation Engines: AI can generate text-based or visual simulations. For a history class, an AI can simulate a diplomatic crisis in 1914, where students interact with AI agents representing different countries.
Persona Adoption: AI allows students to "interview" historical figures or scientific theorists. A physics student could debate quantum mechanics with a simulated Niels Bohr, deepening conceptual understanding through dialogue.

Mastery Guide 4: Educational Leadership – Program Coordinators

Concept: Managing the transition from passive to active institutional models.
The Friction: Leaders lack data on which pedagogical interventions are working in real-time, although the Journal of Problem-Based Learning .
The AI Augmentation:
Curriculum Mapping: AI analyzes course syllabi across the institution to identify gaps in skills progression and redundancies in content.
Predictive Analytics: AI identifies students at risk of dropping out based on engagement patterns (not just grades), allowing leaders to intervene with support services proactively.
Resource Allocation: AI optimizes schedule and room usage to facilitate small-group collaboration rather than large lecture halls.

4. Institutional Redesign Strategy: Reimagining the ISCED Framework

To support these Mastery Guides, the physical and organizational structure of education must evolve.

Level 0 & 1: Early Childhood & Primary (The Foundation)

Change: Shift from "subject silos" to "phenomenon-based learning." Programs that involve parents by teaching how to play with their young children, for example, are cost-effective and have positive effects over generations.
Linkage: Focus on oral storytelling and pattern recognition. AI is used here for speech therapy and personalized reading companions, ensuring every child enters Level 2 with high literacy.

Level 2: Lower Secondary (The Pivot)

Change: Introduction of "Interdisciplinary Blocks." Instead of 45 minutes of Math then 45 minutes of Biology, students have 3-hour blocks to solve problems requiring both.
Linkage: Preparation for Level 3 involves mastering the process of inquiry. PISA readiness is achieved not by test prep, but by applying math/science to solve the "ill-structured" problems generated by AI.

Level 3: Upper Secondary (The Specialization)

Change: The "School as Incubator." Students spend 30% of their time on external projects (internships, community research) facilitated by AI project management tools.
Linkage: The curriculum splits into specialized streams, but all streams require a "Capstone Project" that demonstrates readiness for Level 6 (Bachelor's) autonomy.

Level 4 & 5: Post-Secondary/Short Cycle (The Bridge)

Change: Rapid upskilling. Curricula are updated quarterly based on AI analysis of labor market trends.
Linkage: Direct pipelines to local industry. Assessment is competency-based, not time-based.

Level 6: Bachelor's (The Core)

Change: Death of the lecture hall. Content delivery is flipped (consumed via AI-guided adaptive learning outside class). Class time is 100% devoted to discussion, debate, and lab work.
Linkage: Students must demonstrate "research readiness" to progress to Level 7.

Level 7 & 8: Master's & Doctoral (The Innovation Engine)

Change: Integration with the Triple Helix. Dissertations are not just written; they are often prototypes or policy proposals co-developed with industry partners.
Linkage: These levels feed back into the system, producing the educators and policy makers who will refine the cycle for the next generation.

Conclusion

The "atrophied, sclerotic" state of our current education system is not a permanent condition; it is a design flaw. By leveraging AI to democratize access to high-level pedagogical design (Mastery Guides) and restructuring our institutions to value inquiry over memorization, we can close the gap between the speed of AI innovation and the capability of human intelligence.


References

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123.

Hattie, J. (2008). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.

OECD. (2011). ISCED 2011 Operational Manual: Guidelines for Classifying National Education Programmes and Related Qualifications. OECD Publishing.

Wieman, C. E. (2017). Improving How Universities Teach Science: Lessons from the Science Education Initiative. Harvard University Press.

Learning is Like Growing a Tree: we will do it faster and better

Introduction

Imagine a big garden. In this garden, we plant seeds. These seeds are like students. We want them to grow into big, strong trees.

For a long time, schools were like factories. Everyone sat in rows. Everyone learned the same thing at the same time. The teacher talked, and the students listened. It was a little bit boring.

But the world is changing. Now, we have a new helper in the garden. This helper is technology. Specifically, it is Artificial Intelligence, or AI.

From the Forum to the Feed: Why Sulla, and the Threats Against Senator Mark Kelly Show Us That a Classical Education Still Matters

 

From the Forum to the Feed: Why Sulla, and the Threats Against Senator Mark Kelly Show Us That a Classical Education Still Matters

In the relentless churn of the modern news cycle, it’s easy to become numb to the outrageous. Yet, some moments still possess the power to shock. Recently, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, publicly attacked Senator Mark Kelly, a retired Navy Captain and astronaut, disparaging the character of a decorated combat veteran who has commanded the Space Shuttle

The target of this vitriol was Senator Mark Kelly. This is not a man of ambiguous character or service. Captain Kelly’s 25-year career in the United States Navy and NASA is a testament to courage under fire and the pursuit of discovery. He flew 39 combat missions during Operation Desert Storm and later commanded the Space Shuttle Endeavour, representing our nation at its highest heights. His strength of character is further defined by his resilience at home, standing steadfastly by his wife, former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, following her attempted assassination. Kelly advocates for gun control, motivated by this attempted assassination. By any traditional measure, he is the embodiment of a life dedicated to the service of the American republic.

And yet, in a social media post, his former commander-in-chief declared that Kelly “was suffering from a terminal case of Trump Derangement Syndrome” and mused that his alleged actions were “an act of Treason, punishable by DEATH.”

Faced with this, we have two options. We can see it as an isolated, unprecedented spasm of political fury—the chaotic noise of our current era. Or, we can recognize it for what it is: a political tactic so old its origins lie not in social media algorithms, but in the sun-baked marble of the ancient world.

To understand the strategy at play, we need to trade the digital glow of our screens for the Roman Forum of 82 BC.

The Playbook Written in Stone: Sulla’s Proscriptions

After winning a brutal civil war, the Roman general Lucius Cornelius Sulla declared himself dictator. To consolidate his power and eliminate his rivals, he revived and perfected a terrifying tool: the proscriptio.

Sulla had lists of names posted publicly in the Forum. Any man on that list was immediately stripped of his citizenship, his property, and his legal protections. He was declared an enemy of the state. A bounty was placed on his head, and anyone could kill him without penalty. His assets were confiscated by the state, and his sons and grandsons were barred from holding public office.

This was not simply a list of enemies. It was a brilliant and brutal piece of political communication. As a historian, I can tell you it served three strategic functions that are startlingly relevant today:

1. It Created a Single Source of Truth: In a city rife with rumors, Sulla’s list was the only one that mattered. It authoritatively defined who was a friend and who was an enemy. There was no room for debate.
2. It Weaponized the Public: The proscriptions turned ordinary citizens into instruments of the state’s purge. Neighbors turned on neighbors, driven by fear or greed for the reward. Sulla didn’t need to use his own soldiers for every killing; he had outsourced the terror.
3. It Isolated and Dehumanized the Target: A man who was a respected senator one day was, by the next, a hunted animal. The proscription severed all his social and political ties, making him utterly vulnerable and serving as a chilling example to anyone else who might consider dissent.

The Forum Becomes the Feed

Now, fast-forward two millennia. The technology has evolved from stone tablets to digital screens, but the strategic function of public denunciation remains the same. A powerful political figure’s social media feed has become the modern Roman Forum.

When Donald Trump publicly attacks General Kelly, he is not merely venting. He is executing a modern proscription.

He is attempting to strip a man of his most valuable asset: his public character. The goal is to reframe a four-star general with a lifetime of decorated service as a "traitor." The threat of "DEATH" is not a literal order, but it serves the same function as Sulla’s bounty: it signals to a mass following that the target is no longer part of the tribe. He is an enemy, and any attack on him is justified.

Look at the mechanics. A single post creates an authoritative "truth" for millions of followers. It weaponizes them to amplify the message, swamp social media, and attack the target’s reputation. And it isolates the target, casting him out from the political movement he once served at the highest level. The playbook is identical.

Why a Classical Education Is Not a Luxury, But a Necessity

This brings us to the crucial question: So what? Why does a 2,000-year-old parallel matter?

It matters because without this historical context, we are civically blind. We see the event with Trump and Kelly in a vacuum, dismissing it as more partisan chaos or the unhinged behavior of one individual. We fail to recognize the pattern.

A classical, humanistic education—one grounded in history, literature, and philosophy—is not about memorizing dates or long-dead figures. It is about learning the patterns of human nature, power, and rhetoric that are timeless. It provides the framework to understand that while the costumes and the technology change, the fundamental dramas of power, loyalty, and betrayal do not.

Studying Sulla doesn't just teach you about the late Roman Republic. It teaches you how authoritarians consolidate power. It shows you that publicly denouncing former allies is a classic move to enforce absolute personal loyalty over institutional allegiance. It gives you the vocabulary and the conceptual tools to identify a proscription when you see one, whether it’s chiseled in stone or posted online.

This type of education is the antidote to historical amnesia. It allows us to distinguish the signal from the noise. It transforms us from passive consumers of shocking headlines into discerning citizens who can say, "I have seen this before. I know what this is. And I know where it can lead." It allows you to disregard all the noisy news of the day, and identify what the really important stories, in this case, will the electorate let President Trump get away with another indecency and illegal act?

The tools may have changed from the Forum to the feed, but the echoes of history are a clear warning. A liberal arts education is not an indulgence for the elite; it is a foundational requirement for anyone who wishes to understand the forces shaping our world and safeguard the future of our own republic. It is our responsibility to learn how to listen.

Reference

Cartwright, M. (2016, May 6). Sulla's second civil war. World History Encyclopedia. https://www.worldhistory.org/article/913/sullas-second-civil-war/

Your PhD is a Toolkit, Not a Destination

Today, 32 years ago, the European University Institute conferred me a full-time, research doctorate. 

The world of learning, for me, began much earlier as a card catalogue. I was twelve, standing in the hushed grandeur of the Royal Dutch Library. My mother, a researcher herself, taught me how to navigate that universe of knowledge, one meticulously typed card at a time. I can still recall the scent of aging paper and wood polish, the satisfying click-clack of the small drawers, each one a portal. 

That library was a promise: if you followed the system, if you learned the structure, you could find anything. You could chart a course from A to B, from question to answer. This was the map I would follow for years.

The Education Money Myth: A Data Analysis of 12 EU Nations Reveals Why Some Countries Get Top PISA Scores for Less.

Executive Summary

This analysis investigates the correlation between per-student education expenditure and student performance, as measured by average PISA 2022 scores, across 12 selected EU countries. Utilizing a framework based on the Sapir (2005) classification, the study groups nations into Nordic, Continental, and Southern blocs to compare systems with similar socio-economic structures, and traditions in education. The central research question is whether increased financial investment in education is associated with improved academic outcomes.

The study reveals a statistically significant, moderately strong positive correlation (r = 0.68) between spending and performance across the entire sample. This indicates that, overall, higher expenditure is associated with better PISA scores. The relationship is most pronounced in the Southern bloc (r = 0.72), where systems appear more sensitive to financial inputs, and weakest in the Continental group (r = 0.31), suggesting other factors may have a greater influence. The findings highlight that while Nordic countries generally pair high spending with high performance, outliers like Portugal and Poland achieve strong results on a modest budget, whereas France underperforms relative to its investment.

The analysis frames secondary school achievement as a crucial precursor to the production of tertiary-level STEM graduates, which is identified as a primary driver of economic innovation and growth. Consequently, the core policy recommendation is to prioritize increased investment in primary and secondary education, particularly within the Southern European countries where the link between funding and performance is strongest. The report concludes that while financial investment is a key lever for improvement in under-resourced systems, maximizing returns also requires a focus on spending efficiency and effective educational strategy to achieve the desired outcome of a larger pool of STEM graduates.

Introduction

The relationship between national investment in education and student performance remains at the heart of educational economics and policy reform in Europe. In particular, ongoing debates question whether increased financial inputs—measured as per-student expenditure—lead to improved educational outcomes, as captured by standardized assessments such as the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). 

This inquiry is especially salient within the European Union, where significant similarities exist but also disparities persist in both education spending and student achievement across geographic and economic blocs. We analyzed education spending and student Performance in a subset of countries in the EU, based on the Sapir's report of European socio-econonomic systems, and perform a correlational analysis using OECD's PISA 2022 data on the academic performance of 15-year olds.

Are We Teaching All Wrong? Frequency vs. Effectiveness and a Surprising Negative Correlation

---

Executive Summary

This report provides a comparative analysis of the frequency and effectiveness of eight widely used pedagogical methods across global educational systems. Drawing on data from the World Bank EdStats, OECD Education at a Glance 2023, UNICEF Global Education Monitoring, and peer-reviewed literature, we examine the correlation between usage frequency and instructional effectiveness. 

The findings reveal a significant mismatch between the most frequently used methods (e.g., Direct Instruction) and the most effective ones (e.g., Collaborative and Inquiry-Based Learning). We present two correlation coefficients (Pearson and Spearman), identify statistically significant relationships, and recommend evidence-based shifts in instructional strategy to improve learning outcomes globally.

---

Introduction

Education systems worldwide aim to optimize student learning through instructional strategies. However, there is often a disconnect between methods that are most commonly used and those that have been shown to be most effective. This report seeks to bridge that gap by comparing the frequency and empirical effectiveness of eight pedagogical methods across different regions. It also evaluates whether countries most heavily rely on the pedagogies that actually yield the highest learning gains, particularly in reading, math, and science.