AI implementation needs a reason to believe change is possible
This claim supports the broader principle: values-based-ai-implementation.
Claim
AI implementation work needs a motivating account of why change is possible, not only a theory of change, logic model, policy, or tool plan.
Stance
Supported by the source article as an implementation and leadership claim.
Evidence
- Do You Believe Change Is Possible? Notes on AI, Education, and the Pope’s Encyclical argues that theories of change and logic models often leave unexamined the deeper question of what compels people to believe change is possible.
- Potkalitsky contrasts the encyclical’s theological ground for change with secular AI implementation work in schools and universities, where no guaranteed endpoint exists.
- He argues that educators need some account of the possibility of change because AI implementation is defined by uncertainty, ambiguity, and institutional inertia.
Practical implication
AI implementation leaders should make the motivating ground of their work explicit—such as human dignity, educational purpose, student agency, public mission, or another shared value—rather than treating implementation as only a sequence of tools, policies, pilots, or logic-model steps.
Related big ideas
- Schools should start with learning values before choosing AI tools
- District AI work is a long-term redesign project