Brain builders youth development initiative(BBYDI)

A strong first Global Dialogue on AI Governance should go beyond big picture conversations and lead to clear, practical outcomes, especially for how AI is actually used in children's lives and in education systems. The dialogue needs to acknowledge a critical gap: governance cannot stop at national policies. While laws and frameworks matter, the real impact of AI happens on the ground, in schools, classrooms, and learning platforms. If governance doesn't reach these spaces, it won't meaningfully shape how AI is used. Also the dialogue should produce simple, flexible guidance that institutions, especially schools, can realistically apply. This means clear principles for responsible use, straightforward policies on what is acceptable, and basic monitoring approaches. These tools must be practical, not technical, something educators can implement without needing specialized expertise. Finally, success would include establishing mechanisms for accountability and continuous learning, ensuring that governance frameworks evolve with practice and feedback.

• AI capacity-building
• Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
• Protection and promotion of human rights
• Safe, secure and trustworthy AI

The priority areas I selected reflect what is most needed to make AI actually work well in real learning environments, especially in schools. 1. AI capacity building is important because teachers and school leaders need practical skills, not just awareness. If they do not understand how to use AI in teaching or how to guide students, then the tools will either be misused or not used at all. 2. Protection and promotion of human rights is essential, particularly for children. As students begin to use AI more, there is a need to protect their privacy, ensure fairness, and prevent issues like misinformation or over dependence on AI. 3. Transparency, accountability, and human oversight matter because teachers and schools must remain in control of how AI is used. They need to understand what the tools are doing, question the outputs, and take responsibility for guiding students properly. 4. Safe, secure and trustworthy AI is important because people will only use AI confidently if they trust it. In education, this trust is especially important since it directly affects how students learn and think. Overall, these priorities reflect the need to balance skills, responsibility, and safety so that AI can truly support learning rather than create new problems.

Yes, while the listed themes are comprehensive, a critical cross cutting issue that requires more attention is the gap between AI policy and real world implementation at the institutional level. Current global discussions largely focus on national and international frameworks, but the actual use of AI especially in education happens within institutions such as schools. In many cases, there are no clear, practical guidelines, monitoring systems, or accountability structures at this level. This creates a situation where strong national policies exist, but they do not effectively translate into safe and responsible AI use for end users, particularly children. Also, context sensitive implementation is often overlooked. AI governance approaches must be adaptable to local realities, particularly in low resource settings, where infrastructure, digital literacy, and educational contexts vary significantly. Addressing these cross-cutting issues will help ensure that AI governance is not only well designed at the policy level but also effective, inclusive, and impactful in practice.

In my context, the most significant governance gap is the disconnect between growing AI use and the absence of clear, practical guidance at the school level. Students and teachers are already using AI tools for assignments, research, and content creation, yet many schools do not have simple rules, monitoring systems, or shared expectations for responsible use. One major challenge is limited capacity. Many teachers are still trying to understand how AI works and how to use it effectively in teaching. Without proper support, this can lead to over reliance on AI, shallow learning, or misuse by students. There is also inconsistency across schools. Some are making progress, while others have little or no structure in place, which creates unequal learning experiences. Another challenge is around trust and accountability. Teachers are not always confident in the accuracy of AI outputs, and there are few systems to verify or guide usage. This makes it difficult to ensure that AI is supporting learning rather than replacing thinking. At the same time, there are strong opportunities. There is growing interest among teachers and students to use AI, which creates a good foundation for adoption. With the right support, AI can improve engagement, creativity, and access to learning resources. There is also an opportunity to build simple, school level frameworks that guide responsible use. By combining training with clear guidelines and monitoring, schools can move from unstructured use to more effective and safe integration. Overall, the situation presents both urgency and opportunity to shape how AI is used in education before poor practices become established.

The AI Dialogue can play a critical role in moving global conversations on AI governance from broad ideas to practical collaboration. Right now, many countries and institutions are working in silos, developing policies and experimenting with AI independently. The Dialogue creates an opportunity to bring these efforts together and align them. One important role it can play is building shared understanding. Countries are at different stages of AI adoption, and without a common ground, it becomes difficult to create meaningful global standards. The Dialogue can help bridge this gap by encouraging knowledge sharing and highlighting what is working in different contexts. It can also support the co-creation of flexible frameworks that countries can adapt to their realities. Instead of imposing rigid global rules, the Dialogue can promote principles that are inclusive and responsive to local needs, especially in education and child focused contexts. Another key role is amplifying voices that are often left out of global decision making, particularly from the Global South. By doing this, the Dialogue ensures that AI governance is not shaped only by a few countries but reflects diverse experiences and challenges. Finally, the Dialogue can act as a connector, linking policymakers, educators, technologists, and organizations to build partnerships that move from discussion to implementation. This is where real progress happens.

The AI Dialogue does not need to start from scratch. There are already several global and regional efforts shaping AI governance that it can build on and connect with. For example, organizations like UNESCO have developed guidance on AI in education, while OECD and the Global Partnership on AI are advancing principles around responsible and human-centered AI. These provide a strong policy foundation. However, beyond global frameworks, there is growing implementation work happening at regional and grassroots levels, particularly in the Global South. These initiatives are translating policy into practice through teacher training, institutional support, and local adaptation. In this space, practice-based platforms such as BBYDI, which is already training thousands of teachers and supporting AI governance implementation in African contexts, represent the kind of grounded innovation the Dialogue should connect with and help scale. The added value of the AI Dialogue lies in bridging these layers. It can connect high-level policy frameworks with real-world application, ensuring that governance is not only discussed but operationalized. It can also promote cross-regional learning, enabling countries and institutions to adapt existing solutions rather than starting from scratch. Ultimately, the Dialogue can shift the focus from principles to practice by linking global expertise with local implementation and amplifying models that are already delivering impact.

For the AI Dialogue to be meaningful, it needs to go beyond formal presentations and create space for real participation from different stakeholders. Governments can contribute by sharing policy experiences and challenges they face in regulating AI. Educators and school leaders can bring practical insights on how AI is actually used in classrooms. Technology providers can offer transparency on how their systems work, while civil society organizations can highlight ethical concerns and community perspectives. The format of the Dialogue should reflect this diversity. Instead of long speeches, it should include smaller, interactive sessions where participants can engage directly. Breakout discussions, case study presentations, and problem solving workshops can make the conversation more practical. It would also help to include sessions focused on real life scenarios, where participants work together to address specific governance challenges, such as AI use in assessment or student data protection. To ensure continuity, the Dialogue should not be a one off event. It should have follow up mechanisms such as working groups or communities of practice that continue the conversation and track progress over time.

Many global conversations on AI governance are still dominated by policymakers, large technology companies, and institutions from developed countries. This leaves out important voices that are directly affected by AI but have limited influence in shaping how it is governed. Educators, especially those working in low-resource settings, are often underrepresented, even though they are at the frontline of AI use in education. Students, particularly from marginalized communities, are also rarely included, despite being key stakeholders. Voices from the Global South, including African practitioners and organizations, are another group that is not adequately represented. Their realities are different, and solutions designed without their input may not work in their contexts. To address this, the Dialogue should intentionally create space for these groups. This can be done by providing funding support for participation, using inclusive formats that allow virtual engagement, and prioritizing contributions from grassroots organizations. It is also important to move beyond token inclusion. These voices should not just be present but actively involved in shaping discussions and outcomes. This is how governance becomes more balanced and effective.

To make the AI Dialogue truly engaging, it needs to move away from traditional conference formats and create more interactive and practical experiences. One effective approach is using scenario based discussions. Participants can be given real-life situations, such as a school using AI for grading, and asked to work together to identify risks and solutions. This makes the conversation more concrete. Another format is live demonstrations of AI tools, followed by guided discussions on their ethical implications. This helps participants understand both the opportunities and the risks in a more tangible way. Storytelling can also be powerful. Hearing directly from teachers, students, or practitioners about their experiences with AI brings a human perspective that policies alone cannot capture. Small group workshops and roundtable discussions can encourage deeper participation, especially from those who may not feel comfortable speaking in large forums. Finally, digital platforms can be used to extend engagement beyond the event itself, allowing participants to continue sharing ideas, resources, and progress over time.

Effective AI governance in education is strongest when it combines clear policies, practical implementation, and continuous capacity building. One key approach is the development of institutional AI guidelines that define ethical use, data protection, and accountability. However, policies alone are not enough; they need to be supported by systems that help educators apply them in real contexts. Teacher capacity building is a critical part of this. Educators need practical skills to use AI tools responsibly, evaluate outputs critically, and ensure safe and meaningful integration into teaching and learning. A strong example of this in practice is BBYDI, a platform that is actively training thousands of teachers across Africa through both physical workshops and online programs. It works with government and private schools, supporting the responsible use of AI in real classroom settings. BBYDI has developed a structured AI governance framework and curriculum that can be adapted across sectors. Its approach focuses on making AI use practical, ethical, and context relevant, helping institutions move from awareness to implementation. Teachers trained through this platform report improved confidence in using AI, more engaging and effective teaching practices, and in many cases, cascading the knowledge to other educators within their schools and communities. This kind of model demonstrates how AI governance can move beyond theory into measurable impact. By combining policy direction, educator empowerment, and scalable training platforms, institutions are better positioned to use AI responsibly while improving learning outcomes.