Designing Humanity-Centred Futures: A Conversation with Aruj Khaliq

Aruj Khaliq has spent more than thirteen years working at the intersection of AI governance, teacher agency, and sustainable development. As an interventionist, her work has reached over a million learners and educators across the World, and her research on teacher agency in AI-infused education is already influencing international policy conversations. We spoke with Aruj about her path from volunteering as a child to becoming an AI policy advisor, her novel research on “The Thinking Machine Paradox” at the University of Oxford, her contributions on “Whole School Approaches to Sustainability”, her intervention science work on ECO Schools amongst a few other avenues, and her hopes and warnings for the future of human-centred education.

Roots of an Intervention Scientist

Aruj traces the origins of her work not to academia, but to her childhood. Growing up in a family deeply involved in community volunteering, she learned early that “every individual has a responsibility to contribute to social change”. That instinct to intervene, to make something better, stayed with her.

Her defining professional moment came years later, when she designed Asia’s first teacher development toolkit for Education for Sustainable Development. Presenting the work at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris showed her how far a single intervention could travel. “What began as an independent dissertation became a nationwide project,” she said. The framework that started as a student project now informs ECO Schools, Pakistan’s largest sustainability-education intervention- launched by her socio-creative enterprise called ALIF, with Interloop as its funder and University College London as the Knowledge Partner.

The Thinking Machine Paradox

During her post-graduate studies in science at the University of Oxford’s Department of Social Policy and Intervention (DSPI), Aruj conducted what is described as the first global qualitative evidence synthesis on teacher agency in Artificial Intelligence-infused classrooms, with the supervisory mentorship of Dr Gabriela Pavarini and Dr Jun Zhao. Her research explored an under-examined territory while featuring data from 18 countries world-wide on: how teachers, not students or policymakers, experience and negotiate autonomy as AI becomes entangled with pedagogy.

She further developed AI policy recommendations for Pakistan based on comparative policy research, with the support of Professor Jane Gingrich. Ms Khaliq also chalked out an independent pilot research focused on AI Children’s competencies in Pakistan with Learning Alliance International as a Case Study school, drawing on UNESCO’s AI Competency Framework for Students.

Her proposed, The Thinking Machine Paradox, builds on Alan Turing’s question “Can machines think?” and applies it to classrooms. The paradox captures the tension between two “agents” now coexisting in learning spaces: the human teacher and what she calls the “tutoring teacher” – AI tools capable of influencing decisions and shaping learning tasks.

As she explained: “Two forces are navigating power and agency between themselves. At times, the human teacher supersedes; at others, the Turing teacher takes precedence. It may look beneficial on the surface, but hidden challenges emerge beneath.” 

One of those challenges is what she calls humanity’s growing tendency to “outsource thinking.” As she put it, “What makes us human is our ability to think. And if we outsource that thinking to a thinking machine… where does humanity lie?” “
For Aruj, the danger is not the presence of AI in classrooms but a slow erosion of human judgment. If teachers begin relying on AI-generated decisions without reflection, the cost is not efficiency but agency itself.

Across 18 countries, she observed sharp contrasts with regard to the adoption of Artificial Intelligence in education. In the Global North, teachers questioned ethics, data privacy, and the authenticity of AI-generated tasks. In the Global South, she found “a mass inertia” – rapid adoption without adequate infrastructure, training, or contextual alignment. Both trends expose vulnerabilities in policy design and implementation.

Where Policy Meets Practice

Aruj has one foot in research and the other firmly in real-world practice. She has worked closely with teachers, school leaders, ministries, and global organisations. That dual role gave her a clear view of the disconnects in the realm of AIED. She sees three layers – policy, school leadership, and teachers – moving at uneven speeds.

“The biggest issue is misalignment. Policy leaders think one thing, school leaders think another, and teachers need something else entirely,” she said. Teachers consistently reported the same frustrations: training is often one-off, disconnected from real problems, or inaccessible to those in rural or under-resourced communities. Without teacher-first design, she warns that AI risks deepening existing inequalities rather than reducing them.

She sees international frameworks, such as the UNESCO AI Competency Framework, as useful starting points. But she also emphasises that implementation must be contextual. “Classrooms are not the same everywhere; there is no one-size-fits-all solution,” she noted, and national strategies must reflect that reality.

Accessibility, feasibility, and applicability – these three principles, she says, should guide all AI-in-education efforts.

The Challenges – and the Responsibilities

The most eye-opening part of her research was realising “how much we don’t know.” The field is evolving too quickly for tidy conclusions. She calls for rigorous, ethical, transparent research – noting that AI has become a buzzword, and superficial studies risk shaping policies that will affect millions.

Equally important to her is epistemic justice: ensuring that underrepresented communities are heard. She highlights the imminent need for further research centred on early-years education, parenting practices, low-resource schools, and cognitive and economic inequalities in the realm of AI-embedded education. These voices, she says, are still underrepresented and oftentimes missing from the global conversation.

Oxford, Curiosity, and the Shape of Impact

Her time at Oxford University strengthened her intellectual discipline but also broadened her humility. “Oxford reinforced that we often do not know enough, all opinions are open to debate and reality often is not black and white but is grey. My time here at the Department of Social Policy and Intervention equipped me with tools and strategies to pursue the science of evidence-based interventions and policies in addition to fostering the ability to think critically about solutions to the world’s problems, with the ancient principle of “primum non nocere” (First, do no harm) as the North star. Oxford – and most specifically my college Lady Margaret Hall (LMH), offered spaces of expression where I got to rekindle my love for literature and drive community building”.  The environment, mentors, and exposure to global thinkers sharpened her curiosity and sense of responsibility. Yet she is equally committed to ensuring academic work does not remain trapped in journals and as she says “trapped in ivory towers”. Research, she believes, must translate into actionable practice that improves real lives.

Looking Ten Years Ahead

Asked what classrooms will look like a decade from now, Aruj offers both possibility and warning. Yes, AI will be more integrated. Yes, tools will proliferate. But she expects an eventual “AI saturation” point – a moment when societies must confront what purposeful and humane use of AI actually means.

“If we use AI mindfully, it can reduce inequalities rather than deepen them. But historically, technology tends to be divisive before it becomes inclusive.” The challenge, she argues, is designing interventions that push the trend in the right direction.

Her future work will continue to explore AI’s entanglement with inequality, violence, and governance in educational spaces, especially in under-resourced countries. She is committed to making her research accessible – not only through academic publications but through public-facing work and eventually, multilingual resources.

Staying Committed

What sustains her? Two things.

First, her own “inertia towards impact” – a deep desire to contribute in whatever way she can. Second, her parents and mentors. “I have been very lucky. My parents and mentors are the reason I believe there is always room in the world to be kind, for I have witnessed them role-modelling it,” she exclaimed. Much of her motivation comes from wanting to honour that legacy by helping humans remain empowered in AI-rich environments.

Advice for the Next Generation

For young researchers, teachers, or OEB’s own 30 Under 30 cohort, Aruj’s advice is deceptively simple:

Start with your “why.”
Identify a real gap, not just a trendy one.
Guard your well-being because research and the pursuit of social impact can be a path that is often lonely and laden with innumerable obstacles.
Ask for help – it is always there in the Universe in some way and form, waiting to be sought.
And above all, stay persistent. Grit, I believe, is a trait you must acquire to be an effective Social Scientist.

“Some research changes narratives. It’s difficult, and dare I say – unpredictable work. But support always comes, clad as people or resources. Stay resilient and you will see that things will work out sometimes, roadblocks will resolve on other times and you will keep moving forward, all the time!”

This interview was conducted for OEB Global 2025 by Maude Renaud. Thank you for your time Aruj Khaliq!

Meet Aruj Khaliq at OEB 2025, during the OEB Plenary Debate: This House believes that catering to shorter attention spans is dumbing down education.