The book gives an overall account of AI education, moving from the direction of technological development to a philosophical direction. In particular it argues that in the coming AI era people need an AI way of thinking — that is, turning real-world problems into computational problems of the kind AI handles. I think this is actually a distinctively valuable point, and I gained a lot from it.
Its views on development — its discussion of future technological iteration, the advance of ways of thinking, and how people will live and develop from now on — are especially profound. Moreover, the part on the relationship between AI and other disciplines combines the basic theories of the natural sciences and the content of the humanities with the development of AI technology, forming an analysis of the new shape of society to come. This is the curriculum design philosophy behind the AI general education course designed in the book: it is not purely AI technical content, but AI combined with life, AI combined with the traditional foundations of knowledge, and AI combined with future society. That is why I say this book thinks about these questions from a philosophical angle — just as, in primary and secondary schools, subject competencies always include something about thinking. For example, mathematics teaching does not just present formulas but mathematical thinking; physics teaching is not just physics knowledge but also physical ideas; and when it comes to information technology classes, the several dimensions of subject literacy that are proposed are not purely technical content either.
As for the goal design of AI general education courses at the primary and secondary stages, the book offers a description somewhat different from the Ministry of Education documents. I think this part should be seen as another understanding of the academic capacity goals for the three stages. Take primary pupils: whether through experience or activities, their ultimate goal is not simply to master technology; cultivating interest and scientific spirit is another side of our goals. So I think this is also quite good. The progression through lower and upper secondary is really more like looking at children's mental growth from a psychological angle, rather than simply describing knowledge content. This is one way of solving the problems we have seen when AI general education courses were set by grade in the past: since students' understanding of AI can basically be regarded as starting from zero, once twelve years of learning content are laid out with no repetition of knowledge, students in the upper grades — lacking the learning experience and accumulation of the lower grades — actually find it hard to start directly from the middle stage. So the way the book divides things should be more reasonable.
As I understand it, an AI general education course is not purely about learning technology; it is more about changing ways of thinking and understanding future society, and at least in my view the book's philosophical thinking is in step with that. However, for frontline teachers — especially those whose understanding of AI general education is fairly shallow — the book pitches at a high level, and many frontline teachers may not be able to grasp what it means.