Free Minds in Automated Times

The intersection between AI and critical thinking has become a central topic in today’s educational debate. AI is entering classrooms and homes with promises to personalize learning and expand access to knowledge. However, it also raises deep concerns about how it affects the ability of new generations to think critically.

This is not the first time a technology has sparked alarm about its cognitive impact. Since antiquity, advances such as writing, printing, and even calculators were feared to weaken human mental faculties. These concerns are not unfounded; poorly used, technological tools can erode intellectual skills that should be cultivated and preserved.

In the 21st century — with students growing up surrounded by smart devices and digital assistants — we must reflect on how AI influences the development of critical thinking. In a recent UNESCO forum, experts agreed that AI must be used to strengthen critical thinking and human interaction, never to replace these profoundly human dimensions.

AI and the Development of Critical Thinking in Students

The accelerated adoption of AI tools in education has brought clear benefits, such as immediate access to information and the automation of repetitive tasks. However, it also introduces fundamental challenges, one of the most urgent being ensuring that students continue developing solid critical thinking in an era of instant answers.

We live surrounded by information just one click away. Therefore, forming students capable of analyzing, questioning, and reflecting has become an urgent task.

International studies reveal concerning gaps: only 29% of university students feel prepared to apply critical thinking in real situations, and only 15% of 15-year-olds in OECD countries reach high levels of problem solving and critical thinking. These data suggest that schools and universities still have unfinished work when it comes to teaching students how to think systematically.

Figure: Percentage of U.S. teenagers who have used ChatGPT for schoolwork, comparing 2023 (13%) and 2024 (26%). The use of AI tools among students has doubled in a single year, illustrating their growing dependence on these technologies for learning.

Allies or Cognitive Shortcuts?

The popularization of generative AI systems such as ChatGPT exemplifies this new reality. Surveys show that more than a quarter of teenagers already use chatbots for school assignments. While these assistants offer immediate support, there is a risk that students may “delegate” their thinking processes to the machine.

Recent research is beginning to show this effect: an international study found that the more confidence a person has in an AI’s ability to perform a task, the more they tend to let go of their own critical thinking.

In other words, believing that “AI is smarter than me” can lead to an uncritical acceptance of its answers. Conversely, when users distrust or recognize the limitations of AI, they activate their critical skills, evaluating and improving the generated responses.

This finding suggests that the impact of AI on student thinking is not uniform — it depends largely on how it is used: passively, as a cognitive shortcut, or actively, as a tool subject to scrutiny.

From a positive perspective, AI can also become an ally of critical thinking if integrated pedagogically. Rather than forbidding its use, some educators propose leveraging AI to teach students to think about thinking. For example: having students analyze chatbot responses, identify errors, biases, or missing elements, and thereby exercise their judgment.

UNESCO proposes this approach: using generative AI applications to spark critical reflection in students. This involves detecting biases — both from developers and the model itself — and strengthening students’ critical thinking and humanistic formation.

Cognitive and Cultural Risks of AI Overdependence

Excessive reliance on AI carries cognitive risks that researchers are already documenting. A study with hundreds of academic and professional participants detected a strong correlation between high AI dependence and lower critical thinking skills, with a notable drop in test performance among frequent AI users (r = -0.68, p < 0.001).

The mechanism behind this phenomenon is cognitive offloading. When people know a machine can handle a mental task, they reduce their own effort and stop exercising their cognitive “muscles.” Over time, this reduction in mental exercise may lead to a true atrophy of abilities such as critical evaluation, problem solving, and sustained attention.

The study found that frequent AI users struggled more to evaluate information critically and solve problems reflectively compared to those who relied less on these tools. Many young users even admit fearing they may be losing thinking skills due to constant use of digital assistants.

Mental Fatigue and Automation Bias

Psychologically, overreliance on AI can induce automation bias: the tendency to trust machine-generated solutions without question. This undermines the critical mindset and cognitive vigilance normally applied to information sources.

As a result, a student accustomed to receiving instant AI answers may stop questioning their accuracy, becoming a passive receiver of knowledge.

In the long term, researchers warn that this could lead to unlearning the ability to solve problems independently — especially in low-demand tasks where it is tempting to let technology do all the work. Ironically, the youngest users may be the most affected. One study suggests that individuals aged 17 to 25 showed greater AI dependence and lower critical thinking scores than older groups.

From Automated Thinking to Cultural Erosion

From an anthropological perspective, AI overdependence raises subtle yet profound cultural risks. One is the potential homogenization of thought. Generative AI systems are trained on massive global datasets, often dominated by certain languages and cultural perspectives (primarily English-speaking, Western viewpoints).

If students worldwide rely on similar AI tools for “prefabricated” answers, the diversity of ideas and approaches in education could shrink.

Studies on AI-assisted creative tasks have found that these tools often produce more convergent and less varied solutions, reducing the richness of perspectives. This is particularly concerning for cultural identity: local narratives, languages, and ways of reasoning may be overshadowed by standardized algorithmic suggestions.

A World with Less Intellectual Diversity?

Another risk is the flattening of knowledge. When students become accustomed to accepting AI responses without deepening, they may stop valuing the historical, ethical, or social contexts of knowledge.

In practical terms, this means that without encouraging reflection, future generations may lack the intellectual tools to question information, discern truth from misinformation, and make autonomous decisions. Human agency — the capacity to think and decide independently — may erode in favor of algorithmically guided behavior.

UNESCO analysts warn that the more decision power we delegate to unregulated AI systems, the more human autonomy shrinks. This can only be avoided if AI is deliberately designed to expand human agency, not replace it.

The Educational Value of Critical Thinking

In an era of automated knowledge, it may seem tempting to outsource intellectual effort to machines. If AI can answer factual questions or even write essays, why invest time in developing hard-to-measure human skills?

The answer from the educational world is clear: human skills — especially critical thinking — define us as learners and citizens. They allow us to use AI without losing our essence.

The more tasks AI can handle, the more important the non-automatable becomes: contextualizing knowledge, questioning implications, innovating, and making informed ethical decisions.

Thinking Well: The Great Differentiator

International forums on the future of work and education emphasize that higher-order human skills will be the differentiating value in a technology-driven society.

The World Economic Forum ranks critical thinking (also described as analytical thinking) and problem solving at the top of the skills growing most in demand through 2025.

The OECD and other organizations describe the “21st-century skills,” which include critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, and emotional intelligence — inherently human capacities that complement AI.

Between Knowledge and Judgment

In education, this means rethinking the purpose of school: not just to transmit content, but to form judgment. Memorized or procedural knowledge can often be delegated to machines — but knowing how to ask questions, connect concepts, and discern valid from unreliable information becomes more valuable.

UNESCO’s vision for education in the AI era emphasizes protecting student autonomy and critical thinking.

As Stefania Giannini, UNESCO Assistant Director-General for Education, states:

“Education is and must remain a deeply human act rooted in social interaction.”

No technology can replace dialogue, the teacher’s challenging question, or the intellectual epiphany that emerges from personal reflection.

Educating to Avoid Delegating Thinking

The relationship between AI and critical thinking reflects how we imagine the coexistence between humans and machines. From an anthropological perspective, we must define which traits we want to preserve as essentially human in the technological revolution.

Critical thinking emerges as an indispensable trait: the spark that lets us question the status quo, imagine alternatives, and maintain control of our intellectual destiny.

Improperly used AI could lull society into intellectual complacency — but we are still on time to choose a different path. A new educational model is emerging: one where students learn to work with AI, but with their hands firmly on the reins.

They may ask a question to an algorithm — but then ask themselves:

“Do I agree with this answer? What is missing? What are the consequences?”

This dialogue between human mind and machine places critical thinking as the arbiter and guide.

UNESCO and other leaders remind us that we must return agency to learners. AI is not an inevitable fate. It is a tool — powerful, yes — but one that must be oriented by human values.

Conclusion

Critical thinking in the era of artificial intelligence is not a luxury; it is the cornerstone of a truly human education. It ensures that AI becomes what it should be: an ally that amplifies our capabilities without eclipsing our thinking humanity.

If we achieve this balance, we will have transformed a potential dilemma into a fruitful synergy.

To educate for a world with AI is, fundamentally, to educate so that humanity continues shaping its own story — with clarity of mind, vibrant creativity, and critical awareness, even (and especially) when sharing the classroom with artificial intelligences.

The Human Bond That Drives Education and Business

Trust is the foundation of every human team, whether in a classroom or in an office. When trust is mutual, it transforms impersonal relationships into strong bonds where everyone becomes fully invested in the shared mission. Conversely, without trust, it becomes difficult to collaborate, innovate, or solve problems effectively. Numerous studies confirm that cultivating a culture of trust boosts performance, efficiency, and commitment within organizations.

Trust is essential in both educational and workplace settings. To build it, key strategies must be developed to generate trust in teams—whether among peers (horizontal trust) or between leaders and group members (vertical trust).

Building Trust in Education

In educational contexts, trust between teachers and students creates a climate conducive to learning. When students trust their teachers, they participate more actively, feel comfortable asking questions, and express their concerns. This trust opens the door to more honest dialogue and reduces the fear of making mistakes.

Research shows that in environments where students feel trust toward their teacher, they are more likely to seek help and accept feedback to improve. When this bond of mutual trust and respect exists, students engage more with school and are less prone to risky behaviors. In other words, trust generates a virtuous cycle: it promotes participation, and participation in turn strengthens trust.

Trust not only benefits the teacher-student dynamic; it is also a critical factor among teachers and school administrators. A long-term study found that schools with high levels of relational trust (strong trust ties between teachers, administrators, students, and families) were far more likely to achieve significant improvements in student learning compared to schools with low trust.

In Chicago elementary schools, approximately half of those with high trust levels showed significant academic improvements—up to 20% higher gains in math over five years—while schools with chronically weak trust showed virtually no improvement. This finding, reported by Bryk and Schneider, highlights that trust acts as a social lubricant, facilitating teacher collaboration, the adoption of new educational practices, and the acceptance of decisions that drive school improvement.

In education, trust creates an environment where staff and students are willing to make the extra effort to learn and grow because they feel supported and emotionally safe.

Trust in Work Teams

In organizations and workplace teams, a similar dynamic occurs: trust is the basis of outstanding performance. A recent meta-analysis examining data from 57 studies found that horizontal trust (trust among colleagues) has a stronger relationship with job performance indicators than vertical trust (trust in supervisors). Although both types of trust matter, lateral trust among peers proved to be a key driver of organizational performance.

Feeling supported and valued by colleagues translates into more productive and committed teams. This finding suggests that promoting a culture of collaboration and mutual support may be more effective for improving outcomes than focusing solely on the authority of the leader. When employees perceive that their coworkers trust them, healthier and more productive work environments emerge.

Of course, vertical trust is also crucial. Leaders need to trust their teams—and earn their trust—in order to delegate tasks, take calculated risks, and implement complex plans. Likewise, when employees trust their leaders, they are more willing to raise concerns openly and collaborate on solutions, resulting in better decisions and performance.

Google’s well-known Project Aristotle confirmed that the number one factor in high-performing teams is psychological safety—a climate of trust where everyone feels safe to take risks, ask questions, and even show vulnerability without fear of consequences. In teams with high psychological safety, Google observed a 30% increase in productivity compared to the average. This group trust enables innovation, learning from mistakes, and strong commitment to shared goals.

In summary, in the workplace, trust enables genuine collaboration. Without it, interactions become cautious and superficial; with it, teams unlock their full creative and productive potential.

Strategies for Building Trust (Horizontal and Vertical)

Building trust within a group does not happen overnight. It is a gradual process shaped through everyday interactions and maintained consistently over time. Both educators and business leaders can apply proven strategies to foster trust—whether toward themselves (vertical trust) or among team members (horizontal trust).

Consistency and Keeping Commitments

Consistency is essential. Being predictable in decisions and actions—behaving in alignment with what one says—creates a sense of security for others. If you promise something, fulfill it; if you establish a rule, apply it fairly. Acting congruently and fairly demonstrates integrity, a pillar of trust.

Open Communication and Active Listening

Trust flourishes where there is transparency. Maintaining open, honest, two-way communication is key. This includes sharing relevant information and explaining the reasons behind decisions. Equally important is active listening—showing empathy and validating others’ experiences. This signals that every voice matters.

Empathy, Respect, and Benevolence

We work with people, not “resources.” Showing genuine interest in others’ well-being humanizes relationships. Benevolence—demonstrating good intentions and care—is another pillar of trust. Recognizing colleagues’ achievements, understanding students’ struggles, and supporting others after mistakes strengthens emotional safety.

Delegating and Giving Autonomy

Trusting means empowering others. Delegating responsibility communicates “I believe in you.” Avoiding micromanagement boosts motivation and creates a cycle of growing trust. In classrooms, teachers can offer students leadership opportunities; in companies, leaders can give teams freedom to propose solutions.

Ethical Integrity and Honesty

Acting ethically—being honest, admitting mistakes, behaving fairly—is essential for building trust. Integrity builds long-term credibility, while even small unethical behaviors can erode trust quickly. As Warren Buffett famously said: “It takes 20 years to build a reputation and 5 minutes to ruin it.”

Leading by Example and Showing Vulnerability

Sometimes the best way to foster trust is to take the first step. Asking for input, acknowledging limitations, or requesting help can strengthen trust because it signals authenticity. Leaders who show humility tend to inspire greater trust than those who project infallibility.

Trust is built slowly but can be lost instantly. Every interaction counts. Small actions—meeting a deadline, listening patiently, being fair in conflict, expressing gratitude—accumulate into a group’s “trust bank account,” forming a buffer that sustains relationships in difficult moments.

Conclusion: A Fundamental Human Bond

In both education and workplace management, trust is an essentially human ingredient for collective well-being. In both domains, building trust means putting people first: understanding their motivations, demonstrating respect and reliability, and cultivating an environment where everyone feels safe to give their best.

Titles and hierarchies matter less when relationships are built on sincerity and mutual consideration. Ultimately, a high-performing team—whether a group of enthusiastic students or an innovative business department—resembles a community: its members know they can count on one another.

To trust is to empower. Investing in trust not only improves tangible metrics (such as academic performance or business productivity), but also elevates morale, creativity, and commitment. When people feel trusted and supported, they achieve together what would be impossible in environments of fear or suspicion.

Building and maintaining trust is an ongoing challenge, but its results—united, effective, and human teams—make the effort unquestionably worthwhile.Cultivate a culture of trust

Are we born with soft skills, or do we learn them?

Is a leader born or made? This question has always sparked debate in education, business, and psychology. Competencies such as empathy, resilience, or leadership — are they innate talents or abilities that anyone can develop through practice?

Science now offers solid answers: although genetics has an influence, the environment and constant training can substantially shape and improve our socio-emotional abilities.

The influence of genetics on soft skills

Personality psychology — from the pioneering work of Lewis Goldberg that shaped the Big Five (OCEAN) model — shows that there is a hereditary component in our basic traits.

What do studies say?

Research with twins indicates that around 40–60% of the variation in traits such as extraversion, agreeableness, or openness is explained by genetic factors. This means we may be born with predispositions. For example, someone may have a naturally more empathetic or more introverted temperament depending on their genetics.

Neuroplasticity and training: the other half of the story

However, heredity is not destiny. The influence of environment, education, and experience is equally — or even more — important in shaping our soft skills.

The human brain has extraordinary neuroplasticity. It can create and strengthen new neural connections throughout life in response to learning and practice. This means that even abilities with a biological basis can be developed through appropriate training.

Practical examples

A personality trait such as extraversion may facilitate interpersonal communication, but an introverted person can also become an excellent speaker if they train public speaking and social skills in supportive environments.

Similarly, individuals who are naturally less empathetic can increase their empathy through perspective-taking exercises, mentorship, and frequent contact with diverse realities. Neuroscience has shown that deliberate practice of compassion and empathy produces functional changes in the brain — activating “synchronization” circuits between people — which strengthens empathetic capacity over time.

Openness to experience (curiosity, imagination) can predispose someone to creativity, but creativity can be cultivated. Exposing a person to novel challenges, brainstorming techniques, art, or open-ended problem solving tends to improve their creative thinking. In fact, decades of research on creativity training confirm measurable improvements in creative performance among trained individuals. A recent meta-analysis found moderate but significant positive effects after training programs, demonstrating that “creating” is also learned with the right strategies.

In summary: genetics and environment

Soft skills are not completely “written” in our genes. Genetics sets a starting point, but the final development of our socio-emotional abilities depends largely on education, practice, and the experiences we accumulate.

No one is “born” knowing how to lead or manage stress; these are competencies forged through interaction with others, facing challenges, and reflecting on them.

Dr. Beatriz Abad, psychologist and researcher in Human AI R&D projects, summarizes it this way: “Although some people possess these abilities naturally, everyone can develop them with the right training… with proper education and a supportive environment, anyone can cultivate the skills they need.”

In other words: soft skills are “made more than born,” as long as motivation and learning conditions exist.

Are all competencies trainable?

The short answer is yes: every socio-emotional competency can be improved through practice. However, there are nuances in how they are trained and how long it takes to see change:

Competencies that improve quickly

Specific and situational soft skills — such as active listening, time management, or public speaking — tend to show noticeable improvements within weeks when practiced intentionally.

A professional may refine their ability to give constructive feedback after a short course and some supervised practice. A student may learn collaborative study techniques or mindfulness in a single term and improve self-regulation of stress.

Competencies that require more time

More complex competencies — such as resilience, leadership, or an innovative mindset — require more time and, above all, real experiences in which to apply them.

Resilience, for example, is strengthened by progressively overcoming difficulties, reflecting on setbacks, and seeking support from mentors; it is not something acquired from reading a manual, but by experiencing challenges with proper guidance.

Forming an effective leader involves theory, personalized coaching, and opportunities to lead projects in safe environments where they can make mistakes and learn. These types of abilities develop over months or years, with continuous on-the-job learning.

The key: measurement + feedback + continuous practice

Successful initiatives tend to follow this pattern:

1. Evaluate the initial level of the competency (360° questionnaires, personality analysis, or AI-based assessment such as Human AI).
2. Offer specific feedback on strengths and areas for improvement.
3. Implement a plan of deliberate practice (exercises, training, mentorship).

This cycle does not occur only once, but repeatedly. Organizational research confirms that leadership training programs work. On average, they produce substantial improvements in trained leaders’ behaviors and outcomes. But results endure only when training is reinforced through periodic practical application and continuous feedback.

The Human AI approach: measure to improve

At Human AI, we observe that all soft skills can be developed if the right environment is created. We have applied educational programs in which, after rigorously evaluating individuals’ socio-emotional competencies, personalized improvement and support plans are designed.

With this approach, abilities such as communication, collaboration, or emotional regulation flourish even in profiles where they were initially underdeveloped. A low starting point is not a definitive sentence. With a clear itinerary, positive changes in behaviors and attitudes are real and measurable.

Given that soft skills are both crucial and malleable, at Human AI we have committed to an artificial intelligence–based solution to evaluate and develop them objectively, quickly, and personally.

How does it work?

Our technology combines AI algorithms with principles of psycholinguistics to analyze natural language and extract indicators of personality and socio-emotional competencies. Instead of relying exclusively on traditional tests or questionnaires, the system can evaluate more than 35 competencies from texts written by the person (for example, a free essay or responses to open questions), obtaining objective results without long testing procedures.

Thanks to language-processing models trained to recognize subtle linguistic patterns associated with distinct traits and abilities, certain words, expressions, and structures in our speech reveal — for example — levels of empathy, resilience, or collaborative thinking. By analyzing these patterns, Human AI “translates” words into data, and this data into personalized reports. In other words, it turns any written response into a quantified socio-emotional profile.

Advantages of this approach

The analysis is immediate and free from some typical biases of human evaluation (such as conscious or unconscious evaluator prejudice). Moreover, it is performed in context — using content generated by the student or professional — which allows a more dynamic assessment grounded in each individual’s reality. The results include strengths, areas for improvement, and practical recommendations for each person.

For example, a report may reveal that a certain student excels in critical thinking and curiosity (strengths) but shows improvement areas in emotional regulation and empathy; from there, concrete activities are suggested to work on these (mindfulness guidelines, focused tutoring, classroom role-playing dynamics, etc.). This objective and actionable information helps prevent future difficulties in academic performance, students’ socio-emotional well-being, and even vocational guidance.

Practical applications

The Human AI approach has been validated in both educational environments (secondary schools, universities) and corporate human-resource settings.

School tutors and counselors now have scientific data about students’ socio-emotional competencies, enriching personalized guidance: they can detect early which students may need extra support in, for example, resilience or self-esteem, and implement interventions before those deficits affect their results or lead to school dropout.

In the business world, talent-management teams use the tool to identify employee potential beyond what their CV states. An internal leadership candidate, for example, can be objectively evaluated in key competencies (emotional intelligence, strategic thinking, etc.) and personalized development plans can be designed to prepare them for managerial roles.

Human AI reports thus facilitate strategic decision-making based on data, both in educational centers and HR departments, connecting socio-emotional profiles with adequate training and promotion initiatives. In summary, we provide practical insights to convert talent into real impact, aligning people’s development with educational and labor-market needs.

Conclusion: from potential to action

In today’s era, soft skills are no longer optional or “complementary”: they are the foundation of innovation, employability, and personal and collective well-being. As automation advances, intrinsically human abilities — creativity, empathy, critical thinking, collaboration — will make the difference.

The good news is that we are not chained to the dispositions we are born with: we can continually develop.

If you can measure it, you can improve it; and if you can improve it, you can transform how you learn, work, and lead.

Technology and science give us the tools to put this into practice. Understanding and cultivating socio-emotional competencies is key to turning talent into real impact, especially in a world where emotions directly influence professional performance, employability, and mental health.

Thanks to advances such as artificial intelligence applied to education and people management, the question is no longer “Are soft skills born or learned?” but “How are we going to develop all that human potential?” Every student and every professional has a wide margin for growth in their soft skills if we provide the right feedback and support.

Ultimately, investing in soft skills is investing in the future: in our organizations, our communities, and ourselves as ever-evolving individuals.

If you want to turn “words into action,” we invite you to measure and strengthen your team’s or students’ soft skills with our tools. Request your free demo and discover how Human AI can reveal the hidden socio-emotional profile and catalyze its development toward new levels of success and well-being.

During two weeks, part of the Human AI Tech team participated in the Desafía Mexico program, promoted by ICEX and Red.es, an itinerary designed to connect Spanish startups with one of the most vibrant innovation ecosystems in Latin America.

Our CEO, María Beunza, and our Head of Innovation, Iñigo Benito, traveled through Mexico City and Monterrey with a clear purpose: to continue building an ethical artificial intelligence that enhances human development, learning —and collaborating— with top-level educational institutions, business organizations, and public actors.

This is the summary of a trip that confirms something essential: innovation grows when cultures, perspectives, and shared challenges meet.

Mexico City: education, talent, and a warm welcome

The first stop was Mexico City, where the agenda focused on the intersection between ethical AI, education, and talent.

Meeting with Grupo Educa of the Red Aprende

A space filled with valuable questions about how AI can support teachers, school leaders, and students in the development of socio-emotional competencies from the classroom. The conversation revealed a shared interest: when technology is placed at the service of well-being, the educational community responds with openness and a forward-looking vision.

Visit to Grupo Gigante at the ICEX headquarters

We were able to present our evidence-based approach and understand how major Mexican organizations integrate innovation into their talent and organizational culture strategies.

In these first days, an intuition was confirmed: Latin America is fertile ground for driving a human-centered AI.

Monterrey: applied research, educational technology, and public policy

The second stage of the trip took us to Monterrey, where collaboration with educational and governmental actors opened new possibilities.

Work with Tecnológico de Monterrey

We participated in sessions with companies, organizations, and members of Tec itself who were interested in our solutions. The dialogue with César Sánchez and Rodrigo Correa, from the Institute for the Future of Education (IFE), was especially inspiring:

• we explored opportunities for applied research,
• technology transfer initiatives,
• and the creation of joint ecosystems for education and innovation.

As our CEO shared, these sessions were not only for presenting but also for listening: understanding the real challenges related to talent, education, and socio-emotional well-being in the Mexican context.

Visit to the IFE Living Lab

A space where educational technology with real impact is tested. Here, we were able to delve deeper into how AI can contribute to measuring and developing human competencies in real and diverse contexts.

Meetings with the Government of Nuevo León

We met with the Ministry of Economy and the Ministry of Equality, discussing solutions that strengthen employability, well-being, and talent in the state. Our thanks to Cristóbal Cárdenas, from the Nuevo León entrepreneurship ecosystem, for opening such meaningful doors.

Meeting with CAINTRA Nuevo León

The dialogue with the Chamber of Commerce allowed us to explore collaborations with the business sector to promote the development of human capital based on measurable and actionable socio-emotional competencies.

A common thread: innovation with purpose

Throughout the trip, something appeared in every conversation: educational technology makes sense when it enhances human development.

At Human AI Tech, we deeply believe this:

• when it helps better understand students, teachers, and teams;
• when it sheds light on the socio-emotional competencies that sustain learning and coexistence;
• when it is integrated with ethics and scientific evidence.

This trip confirmed that Mexico is building a vibrant ecosystem where science, education, and humanistic innovation can grow together.

Thanks to those who made it possible

ICEX and Red.es, for driving Desafía Mexico.

New Ventures, for creating real bridges between projects, institutions, and opportunities.

All the organizations, educational institutions, and professionals who welcomed us with generosity, curiosity, and a collaborative spirit.

We return with new questions and new alliances

We return to Spain with the certainty that this trip was just the beginning. Because building an ethical and human-centered AI requires more than technology: it requires alliances, listening, and diverse perspectives.

We will continue building bridges between Spain, Mexico, and all of Latin America to move toward a more human, more conscious, and better-prepared education for the future.