Ben Gomes, Google head of learning, has emphasised that the most fundamental element of education is a human quality that no algorithm can currently replicate. In a shift from the prevailing industry focus on automated tools, Gomes identifies motivation as the primary hurdle in modern learning—a problem he believes artificial intelligence is unequipped to solve.
- +Education real problem beyond algorithm – Gomes
While technology can refine the mechanics of how a person learns, Gomes maintains that the “why” remains a deeply human phenomenon.
While technology can refine the mechanics of how a person learns, Gomes maintains that the “why” remains a deeply human phenomenon. This is a notable stance for an executive at a firm investing billions of dollars into AI-powered educational infrastructure.
According to recent reports, Gomes insists that high-achieving individuals are rarely “unlocked” by static resources like books or software. Instead, breakthroughs are almost always facilitated by a person—typically a teacher who provides a unique perspective or changes a student’s emotional relationship with the learning process.
This distinction between what AI enables and what it cannot create is central to how Gomes views the future of schooling. He argues that as society moves away from decades of hyper-specialisation, education systems must adapt to a world where the desire to learn is the only sustainable competitive advantage.
Using the evolving roles of web engineers and designers as an example, Gomes notes that traditional boundaries are blurring. With modern design tools, engineers can perform design tasks, while designers are increasingly capable of basic coding. This shift suggests that the specific syntax of a language is becoming less relevant than the underlying logic.
Gomes reasons that schools should focus on higher-level conceptual understanding—such as abstraction and interface logic—rather than the “mechanics of doing,” as these tasks are rapidly being automated. If motivation is indeed the “real problem,” the gap in educational equity may not be defined by access to tools, but by access to the mentors who inspire their use.
