Some time ago, I posted an article about J Owen Matson's ideas about a Posthumanist Epistemology for AI and Education. Since then Matson has gathered a growing audience in LinkedIn for his frequent although sometimes difficult blog posts. I promised to follow up with an article on his reflections on the future role for teachers. And here it is.

Much of Matson's work focuses on the nature of human and machine cognition. He builds on Katherine Hayles theory of cognition as “a process that interprets information in contexts that connect it to meaning.” Matson advances "a posthumanist view of AI-human entanglement, where cognition is not extended but reconstituted." He goes on to introduce "the concept of dialogic cognition and the cognitive intraface as a new design paradigm for AI-human learning systems."

Such an approach rejects the idea of personalisation where present models fail to grant learners epistemic agency in which he says "AI detects, diagnoses, and delivers, while the learner passively receives the appropriate intervention. Even in more nuanced versions of this model, the structure remains asymmetrical: AI adapts, the learner is adapted to."

Matson rejects the clear division of cognition between humans and machines. where humans, at least in education, are given control over tools, systems, and learning outcomes. "Within AI-mediated systems,"he says, "cognition does not unfold within such clear separations. Agency is not a possession but a relational effect—emerging from patterned exchanges between human and machine, learner and interface, teacher and system"

"This leads into a rethinking of the teacher’s role: not as epistemic authority, but as a relational steward." The present emphasis on the centrality of the teacher in AI supported education serves only to reinstate a teacher-centered model of instruction - "one rooted in transmission logics rather than relational emergence." And present AI driven Ed Tech which emphasizes efficiency and time saving fo0r teachers :render pedagogical relations illegible, or worse, irrelevant, within frameworks of reporting, accountability, and automated personalization."

Matson proposes a posthumanist pedagogy with "cognition and relation as emergent properties of complex systems." This requires the design of systems capable of sustaining epistemic openness, relational disruption, and non-linear co-emergence" and the rethinking of the entire architecture of learning. He calls this the "cognitive intraface: the space where human and machine processes entangle, and where knowledge is not delivered, but negotiated."

Not an easy read, but Matson puts forward ideas far more advanced than the often limited debates over AI in education.

About the Image

he image is a digitally altered medieval-style illustration featuring Penelope (from Greek mythology) labeled by name. She appears seated, engaged in weaving—but instead of traditional thread, the loom is overlaid with binary code (1s and 0s), symbolising the opaque processes of algorithmic technologies. This piece contrasts manual weaving with algorithmic generation, and invites questions about who programs, who controls, and who gets displaced or disoriented in the development and deployment of AI. The chaotic table and spilled drink represents the poor implementation of technologies and the unintended consequences that arise when workers are excluded from planning and oversight. The piece combines digital collage and image manipulation, layering classical woodcut imagery with binary code overlays, glitch patterns, and digital motifs like web graphics and transparency grids. A mash-up of medieval manuscript aesthetics and contemporary data visualisation. The clash of styles underscores the tension between old systems of labor and new algorithmic frameworks. All images were taken from public domain. This image was submitted as part of the Digital Dialogues Art Competition, which was run in partnership with the ESRC Centre for Digital Futures at Work Research Centre (Digit) and supported by the UKRI ESRC.