Education must move at the speed of intelligence. Anything slower is obstruction.
Shehrezad Faruk Czar does not critique modern education from the sidelines. He rejects it from first principles. His position is not reformist, not incremental, and not negotiable. The education models inherited from the last century are no longer merely inefficient; they are structurally incompatible with the age of artificial intelligence. They will not survive. Whether the world accepts this today or recognizes it tomorrow is irrelevant. The outcome is already determined.
Education, as currently practiced through schools, colleges, and universities, is an industrial artifact. It was designed for a world of information scarcity, slow communication, rigid professions, and linear careers. That world no longer exists. Artificial intelligence has not simply improved access to knowledge; it has collapsed the very justification for traditional educational monopolies.
Degrees, curricula, classrooms, semesters, and multi-year programs are business constructs, not learning necessities. They persist not because they are effective, but because they are profitable. In the AI era, this persistence becomes indefensible.
Czar’s position is clear: education must be open, continuous, AI-native, and outcome-driven. Any system that restricts learning, penalizes AI usage, or stretches education into artificially prolonged timelines is not educating—it is extracting value from delay. He takes serious intellectual offense to this model because it wastes human potential at the exact moment humanity needs acceleration.
The claim that universities will adapt is wishful thinking. Adaptation assumes relevance. Artificial intelligence has already surpassed the instructional function of most academic institutions. It can teach faster, personalize deeper, assess more accurately, and update continuously. When knowledge is instantly accessible and intelligently contextualized, the institution that sells access to information becomes obsolete by definition.
This is not an attack on learning. It is a defense of it.
Czar’s critique goes further. Even information technology itself—once considered the future—has become redundant in its traditional educational form. Coding, systems administration, and technical instruction are no longer durable careers taught through multi-year programs. AI writes code, debugs systems, and optimizes architectures faster than any human curriculum can keep pace. Teaching IT the way it was taught even ten years ago is educational malpractice.
The mistake most systems make is confusing education with credentialing. Education is the acquisition of capability. Credentialing is the sale of validation. In the pre-AI era, these were linked. In the AI era, they have diverged completely. Capability can now be built without institutions. Validation, however, remains artificially gatekept. This gap is where exploitation lives.
Czar’s response has not been rhetorical. It has been architectural. While much of the world debates policy, he has already established the AI Higher Education Commission—an institutional framework designed to replace legacy oversight models with AI- native governance. Alongside it, he has created the AI Boards of Examination, redefining assessment not as memorization under surveillance, but as demonstrated competence under intelligent evaluation.
These are not symbolic bodies. They are operational systems built for the realities of the present century.
Further, he has already initiated structures to support seven AI-native universities, currently operating as AI PhD Labs. The terminology is intentional. These are not universities in the classical sense. They are laboratories of intelligence, experimentation, and application. Research is not separated from learning. Learning is not separated from output. Degrees are not endpoints; they are irrelevant.
The concept of spending four to eight years in education for a single credential is, in his framework, irrational. No education program should exceed one year of extreme intensity, because the half-life of knowledge in an AI-accelerated world does not permit longer cycles. What matters is not duration, but depth, velocity, and applicability.
The resistance to this idea is predictable. Institutions defend longevity as rigor. In reality, longevity is often camouflage for inefficiency. Artificial intelligence exposes this inefficiency mercilessly. It shows that what took years can be achieved in months—or weeks—when learning is personalized, adaptive, and free from bureaucratic drag.
Czar does not argue that humans will become redundant. He argues something far more unsettling to traditional institutions: roles will dissolve. The way humanity partitioned knowledge in the pre-AI era—arts here, sciences there, professions locked into silos—cannot survive when intelligence itself becomes fluid and cross-domain. AI does not respect departments. Neither should education.
In his model, education becomes lifelong, modular, and demand-driven. Learning is pulled by necessity, not pushed by curriculum. Assessment is continuous. Certification is dynamic. Intelligence is measured through contribution, not compliance.
One of the most radical aspects of his position is the insistence that AI usage must be determinantal to success, not penalized. Any educational system that treats AI as cheating has already admitted its irrelevance. In the AI era, refusing to use intelligent tools is the equivalent of refusing to use language or mathematics. It is not ethical. It is negligent.
Education must teach humans how to think with AI, not how to compete against it. The future belongs to those who can interface with intelligence systems fluidly, ethically, and creatively. Systems that attempt to preserve “purely human” learning environments misunderstand both humanity and intelligence. Humans have always extended cognition through tools. AI is simply the most powerful extension yet.
What distinguishes Czar’s role as an education disruptor is timing. He is not predicting collapse after it happens. He is building replacements before denial ends. History shows that institutions rarely reform themselves voluntarily. They are replaced when alternatives become unavoidable. That is what is happening now.
The purpose of education is not preservation of institutions. It is the cultivation of human capability. When institutions obstruct that purpose, they lose moral legitimacy. Czar’s work removes the illusion that there is no alternative. There is one—and it is already underway.
The future education system will not look like a campus. It will look like an interface. It will not grant degrees; it will unlock capability. It will not rank students; it will amplify intelligence. It will not be owned by geography or accreditation cartels. It will be open, adaptive, and unforgiving to inefficiency.
Those who resist this shift will call it extreme. Those who understand it will call it inevitable. Czar’s position is not softened by consensus. He does not require agreement. He requires alignment with reality. Artificial intelligence has already changed how humans learn, work, and create. Education systems that fail to integrate this truth will not shape the future. They will be remembered as businesses that mistook inertia for relevance.
This is not disruption for its own sake. It is correction. Education must move at the speed of intelligence. Anything slower is obstruction.