Over the past year in my role at a large global technology organisation, I have been developing and testing an approach I call Cognitive Augmentation — a way of using advanced technologies to help educators perceive and support their learners more deeply without ever removing the human from the loop.
The first pilot, which I initiated independently, produced remarkable results: faster learning, higher retention, and a renewed sense of meaning among participants. Those outcomes led to a formal pilot this year, now being explored across several regions.
As interest grew, however, I noticed a familiar drift. Technical and business teams increasingly focused on the tools — automation, efficiency, scalability — while losing sight of the methodology and the human-centred principles that made the approach succeed in the first place.
During a recent high-stakes meeting, I drew directly on ideas from the MSc in Digital Education — Arantes’ distinction between personalised learning and personalisation, Pelletier’s critique of the depoliticisation of pedagogy, and McLuhan’s reminder that media reshape perception. These gave me the vocabulary and conceptual grounding to reframe the entire conversation.
Instead of replacing educators, we explored how technology can amplify their capacity to understand learners. What began as a technical debate became a plan to empower teachers. For the first time, I watched theory bridge engineering, business, and education in real time.
This experience also helped me answer a question Professor Davies once posed to me: is there still hope within the current neoliberal system?
I believe there is. When institutions realise they can achieve better outcomes — and even greater efficiency — by helping people become more human, rather than less, change becomes possible. The real challenge is communication: building translators between these disconnected worlds.
Another of my current initiatives is directly inspired by what we’ve been developing throughout the MSc. A short excerpt from its conceptual foundation captures the spirit of this work:
“Education is not about memorizing information. It is about being qualified to perform a role, understanding yourself within the broader context of work and society, and collaborating effectively with others. Today, education systems often focus only on memorization — the very thing that generative AI can now do better than humans. What we need are professionals who can think, connect, and apply — using AI responsibly, without cognitive offloading. The current structure does not prepare them for that reality.”
This statement has become the philosophical anchor of a large-scale learning redesign project. The response has been extraordinary. It is demonstrating, in practice, that a more human, reflective, dialogical use of technology can lead to stronger educational and organisational outcomes. While there has naturally been some resistance, there is also a steady and undeniable movement in the right direction.
This is why I continue to develop Reciprocal Critical Technical Practice (RCTP) — a framework to bridge the social sciences and technology. The meeting I led confirmed once again that we can transform systems from within when we learn to speak both languages.
These bridges do exist. And everything I brought into those discussions came directly from what this programme has given me. I am deeply grateful — not only because it has shaped my thinking, but because it has strengthened my capacity to act.