A PAṬISAMBHIDĀ 4–BANI–RAAT MODEL FOR EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION IN THE AGE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Abstract

This conceptual academic article develops a framework for educational administration in the age of artificial intelligence by bringing Paṭisambhidā 4 into dialogue with the BANI and RAAT frameworks. It advances a wisdom-based and governance-oriented model for educational administrators preparing their institutions for future-oriented educational transformation. Education 6.0/7.0 is not treated as a fixed universal standard; rather, it is used as a future-oriented scenario through which administrators can consider technological, ethical, data-related, transparency, and accountability challenges surrounding the use of artificial intelligence in education. The article has three objectives: 1) to analyse the conceptual relationships among Paṭisambhidā 4, BANI, and RAAT in AI-driven educational administration; 2) to synthesise a human-centred artificial intelligence governance framework; and 3) to propose a knowledge model for educational administrators. Methodologically, the article employs an integrative conceptual synthesis of Thai and international primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, including Buddhist textual sources, Thai education law and policy documents, Thai and international AI governance guidelines, and scholarly literature on BANI, RAAT, Artificial Intelligence in Education, and futures studies. The synthesis indicates that BANI offers a diagnostic lens for examining brittleness, anxiety, nonlinearity, and incomprehensibility in AI-era educational environments. RAAT converts this diagnosis into leadership responses through resilience, attentiveness, adaptation, and transparency, while Paṭisambhidā 4 supplies an interpretive and ethical wisdom base for meaning-making, causal analysis, communicative clarity, and timely judgement. The article therefore proposes the P4–BANI–RAAT AI Educational Administration Model and argues that artificial intelligence should be positioned as an augmentative infrastructure for human capability, equity, and value-based accountability, rather than as a substitute for the professional judgement and ethical responsibility of educational administrators.