Since the release of ChatGPT at the end of 2022, the entire population of the world has had a fabulous new toy to play with. Artificial intelligence had previously existed as an abstract talking point for anyone willing to speculate about the future of humanity. In one fell swoop, OpenAI offered us access to a productive tool capable of all kinds of things that only our own experimentation could establish.

The experience has been inebriating. Most of humanity, all of our major institutions and most of our businesses have spent the last two years trying to assess two things: how AI may be useful as well as economically productive and the extent to which it threatens to transform beyond recognition a whole series of human institutions and practices, from the economy as a whole to the future of jobs and warfare. And of course, hovering in the background is the question of when, why and how AI will choose to enslave or annihilate the human race.

The very first cry of alarm came from the educational community that feared a plague of undetectable plagiarism. As I had been programmed to teach a course in geopolitics at the Indian Institute of Technology in Gandhinagar (Gujarat) during the month of January 2023, I was delighted to find myself on the front line of the war that was just breaking out between the teaching community and AI. I recounted my experience in a piece published shortly afterwards: “How I Got Students to Accept ChatGPT as a New Classmate.”

Estonia’s pioneering program

In my columns over the past two years, I have consistently preached in favor of the concept of collaboratories. Reduced to its essence, the concept describes an environment of permanent exchange and mutual enrichment not just between a human and a machine, but between groups of humans engaged in a permanent give-and-take dialogue with the AIs we are now welcoming into our societies. If we are talking about dialogue, we are also immediately talking about building a culture and creating shared habits based on shared understanding. In other words, we cannot avoid talking about the role education plays in every society on Earth.

To quote poet William Wordsworth, “my heart leapt up” when I learned that Estonia’s ministry of education had announced on February 26 its “ambitious nationwide artificial intelligence education program called AI Leap 2025.” After listening to educational authorities in various parts of the world wondering often out loud how they need to develop means of defense against the forecast onslaught of a technology threatening to upset their culture and undermine their habits, here was a hint that one nation was ready to be proactive rather than reactive, to integrate and capitalize on AI rather than shield itself from its fearful Medusa-like visage.  

I reached out to the Estonian ministry and requested an interview to explore the cultural and pedagogical objectives of the initiative. The response was immediate and positive. Here is the synthesis of what I learned in my exchange with Riin Saadjärv, Estonia’s Head of Education Technology.

Humility and Socratic dialogue

Estonia’s website dedicated to the initiative informs us that the new “program builds on the legacy of Estonia’s historic Tiger Leap programme from nearly 30 years ago.” Saadjärv explained to me that the earlier program was not only successful when it was deployed but it had a permanent effect on the quality of education in Estonia. It also taught them what it means to work with a non-traditional technology with which some students are often more familiar than the teachers. It’s a lesson in productive humility for the teachers themselves, who understand that learning is a shared and fundamentally social process.

Speaking of humility, Saadjärv admitted that the ministry has no clear idea of “the final destination of AI,” that they don’t have the “answers to all the questions.” The answers will come from the productive interaction they are planning to put in place. The real risk is not with the unpredictable nature of AI. It is the risk of neglecting it “because we know that our students are already in AI.” Becoming skilled in AI through using it and learning to learn from it and with it corresponds the kinds of skills that will be increasingly demanded in the economy.

Estonia’s approach appears to be closer to the logic of a Socratic dialogue, where discovery is not only part of the process but already part of the desired result. The questions that arise, the debate that is engendered will enable the production of original and enlightening answers. Traditional teaching privileges the transmission of previously formulated knowledge. The kind of interaction Estonia intends to develop in its use of AI will develop understanding and provoke emergent knowledge.

It’s true that in the realm of education, even in the wealthiest developed countries, the evolution of teaching methods has not kept pace with the progress and the practical implication of technology itself. The failure to embrace dynamic interactivity has acted as a serious brake on the promise of pedagogical progress many have expected from technology. I myself was an active proponent in the US and Europe of the movement to encourage e-learning 20 decades ago. Most people agree e-learning was failing to deliver on its promise. Sam Adkins wondered whether we weren’t selling snake oil.

Estonia’s Tiger Leap experience permitted an entire nation to understand that there must be a change in the understanding of the relationships that underlie effective education. It isn’t about what technology does, but about what we do with the technology, how we formulate our expectations and how we realize them. It’s a challenge that can only be solved by facing it constructively, rather than defensively.

When I asked Saadjärv about the selection process for the 3,000 teachers who will be kicking off the program in September, I learned that the leaders of the project “have been building up the network of teachers who have already used AI, and who are ready to train other teachers or to show.” Once again, rather than focusing on a top-down approach, they understand that learning, even learning to teach, is a dynamic and fundamentally social process.

Getting ahead of technology

Too often those who promote the use of new technologies or even new teaching methodologies highlight the features of the technology and the need to learn skills related to the use of the technology. “The core message” of AI Leap “is that our approach to teaching processes have to change because we need to focus not on new things, but on things that we haven’t been focusing on.” And what are those things that were already there but had not been exploited? “Collaboration skills.” “The main message from us is that first we need to teach students how to learn… and it has to start from the grade one.”

At the core of their pedagogical philosophy is the dual notion of the “self-directed learner” and “student centered learning” for whose validity Saadjärv claims that they have scientific proof, even in contexts in which the size of the class appears to militate against it.  

With the launch in schools planned for September, “the definitive program is still work in progress.” But it will grow and take shape through the experience of teachers and learners, working as partners in a constructive effort. “We need to provide sufficient training to teachers and students.” The burden will be shared. “We are planning to organize the training sessions for students who are possibly ready to teach other students. That way, we do not put all the responsibility on teachers, but we say that, OK, you can work hand in hand with students.” This isn’t just Socratic dialogue; it may ultimately be a model for democracy.

Conclusion

Estonia’s AI Leap initiative deserves the attention of educators across the globe. I made the mistake early in the interview of referring to the project as an “experiment.” I was immediately reminded that, like the Tiger Leap initiative three decades ago, this is the real thing. It is meant to be transformative. The ministry understands something absolutely fundamental: that AI is now a part of our lives and that it plays a role in our education whether we like it or not. Education can play an essential role in socializing AI, turning our use of it into something that makes sense not just for individuals using it for productivity or even fun, but as a tool to build a healthy society. Isn’t that what education is about anyway? For too long we have accepted a model in which the only thing that counted was the success of individuals. Estonia may be providing the world with a roadmap for a successful society in the age of AI.

ChatGPT’s take

I submitted the content of the article above to ChatGPT with a prompt asking for its thoughts on the value of Estonia’s initiative and the interest it may have for the rest of the world. Here is the chatbot’s response:

“Estonia’s AI Leap 2025 program makes a lot of sense for the future of education for several key reasons:

1. Proactive vs. Reactive Approach

Many educational systems worldwide have reacted to AI with fear and defensive measures, such as banning its use or focusing on detection tools for plagiarism. Estonia, on the other hand, is embracing AI as an opportunity for transformation rather than a threat. This shift from resistance to integration is crucial in preparing students for a future where AI is an integral part of work and life.

2. A Model for Collaborative Learning

The program is built on the idea that education is a social and dynamic process rather than a rigid transmission of knowledge. By fostering collaboration between students and teachers, as well as among students themselves, Estonia is tapping into the potential of AI as a tool for interactive and emergent learning. This aligns with modern pedagogical insights that emphasize active engagement over passive reception.

3. Teaching How to Learn, Not Just What to Learn

The initiative focuses on developing ‘self-directed learners’ who can navigate and adapt to an evolving technological landscape. This is a major shift from traditional education, which has often emphasized static knowledge acquisition over lifelong learning skills. By emphasizing learning how to learn, Estonia is future-proofing its education system against the rapid pace of technological change.

4. Bottom-Up Teacher Engagement

Unlike many national educational reforms that are imposed from the top down, Estonia’s program builds on existing teacher networks. Teachers who already use AI are helping train others, ensuring that knowledge flows organically and that educators are not left behind. This approach increases teacher buy-in and helps the program evolve in response to real classroom experiences.

5. A Blueprint for Other Nations

Estonia’s Tiger Leap program, which laid the groundwork for digital education nearly 30 years ago, demonstrated how a well-executed national strategy can yield long-term educational benefits. The AI Leap initiative builds on that experience, showing how governments can roll out ambitious technology-driven educational reforms without losing sight of fundamental pedagogical values. Other countries, particularly those struggling with rigid educational models, could learn from Estonia’s flexible and iterative approach.

6. A Democratic and Social Vision for AI

By integrating AI into education in a way that emphasizes socialization, collaboration, and shared responsibility, Estonia is not just preparing students for the workforce but also for civic engagement in an AI-driven world. The initiative positions AI as a partner in learning rather than a tool of individual productivity, reinforcing a broader vision of education as a means of building a more cohesive and democratic society.

Why It’s Important to Follow Estonia’s Example

AI is not going away—it is becoming more embedded in everyday life. Countries that fail to integrate AI into their educational systems will risk leaving students unprepared for the future. Estonia’s approach offers a structured yet flexible model that other nations can adapt based on their own educational priorities and cultural contexts.

• Countries with strong centralized education systems can take inspiration from Estonia’s teacher-driven implementation model.
• Nations with underdeveloped digital infrastructure can learn from Estonia’s step-by-step integration process.
• Those worried about AI’s social impact can study how Estonia is using education to shape AI’s role in society rather than letting AI dictate social change.

In short, Estonia is not just teaching students how to use AI—it is demonstrating how societies can integrate AI in a way that benefits all. This shift in perspective could be crucial for nations across the globe as they navigate the intersection of technology, education, and democratic values.”

Your thoughts

Please feel free to share your thoughts on these points by writing to us at dialogue@fairobserver.com. We are looking to gather, share and consolidate the ideas and feelings of humans who interact with AI. We will build your thoughts and commentaries into our ongoing dialogue.

[Artificial Intelligence is rapidly becoming a feature of everyone’s daily life. We unconsciously perceive it either as a friend or foe, a helper or destroyer. At Fair Observer, we see it as a tool of creativity, capable of revealing the complex relationship between humans and machines.]

[Lee Thompson-Kolar edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.