Do You Believe Change Is Possible? Notes on AI, Education, and the Pope’s Encyclical
Source: Nick Potkalitsky Substack Author: Nick Potkalitsky Original source: https://nickpotkalitsky.substack.com/p/do-you-believe-change-is-possible Published: 2026-06-07 Source type: essay
Private backup: the full article text is archived in the private repository at archives/articles/nickpotkalitsky-substack-com-do-you-believe-change-is-possible.source.md. It is not published on the public Quartz site.
Summary
Nick Potkalitsky reads Pope Leo XIV’s AI-and-technology encyclical through the lens of implementation: not just what it says about technology, but how it imagines change happening. He argues that theories of change and logic models often skip a prior question: what makes people believe change is possible in the first place? The encyclical grounds that possibility theologically, through human dignity, redemption, the common good, and education as a route to value conversion.
Potkalitsky then turns the question back toward AI implementation in K–12 districts and higher education. In secular institutional settings, implementers do not have a guaranteed endpoint or single shared ground for change, so they work through multiple theories of action, provisional logic models, and iterative cycles of implementation. His practical conclusion is that educators need some explicit account of why change is possible—whether grounded in human dignity, education, institutional mission, or another durable belief—because AI implementation otherwise becomes overwhelming under uncertainty.
Pull quotes
Ground of change
“What they tend to leave unexamined is the deeper question: what compels a person to believe that change is possible in the first place?”
Education as lever
“Education, in particular, emerges as the encyclical’s primary mechanism for transforming our relationship with technology — the chief apparatus for changing structural features of society through individual ‘conversion,’ meaning a shift in values and orientation.”
Secular uncertainty
“In more secular settings, no such assurances exist.”
Need a possibility of change
“We all need some understanding of the possibility of change — some small notion that we can make a difference in this work.”
Durability note
The immediate hook is a 2026 religious encyclical, but the durable wiki value is the implementation frame: AI strategy needs a motivating account of why change is possible, not only a policy, tool list, theory of action, or logic model.
Big ideas
- Schools should start with learning values before choosing AI tools
- District AI work is a long-term redesign project
Claims
- AI implementation needs a reason to believe change is possible
- AI tool choices should be judged against stated learning values
- District AI implementation needs living guidance and teacher-led redesign
Key evidence and examples
- Potkalitsky distinguishes between a theory of change, a logic model, and the deeper “ground” or “possibility” of change.
- He reads the encyclical’s theological account of human dignity and the common good as the source of its confidence that technological development can be redirected.
- He identifies education, especially schools, as the encyclical’s main institutional mechanism for changing social relationships with technology.
- He contrasts the encyclical’s theological assurance with secular AI implementation work, where districts and universities must operate through provisional theories of action, institutional constraints, and adaptive cycles.
- He argues that implementers need some grounding belief—human dignity, education, institutional mission, or another source—that sustains action amid AI uncertainty.
Education relevance
Highly relevant for district AI strategy, implementation planning, AI policy design, leadership framing, and professional learning. The article helps explain why values, purpose, and belief in change are not motivational extras; they shape whether AI implementation work can persist under ambiguity.