AI to Learn 2.0: A Deliverable-Oriented Governance Framework and Maturity Rubric for Opaque AI in Learning-Intensive Domains

TL;DR

AI to Learn 2.0 introduces a governance framework for AI-assisted work in learning contexts, focusing on deliverable quality, capability evidence, and auditability to address proxy failure issues.

Contribution

It reorganizes governance ideas around final deliverables, operationalizes a maturity rubric, and enables structured third-party review for opaque AI in education.

Findings

Framework separates polished outputs from auditable workflows.

Worked scoring demonstrates effective differentiation of AI-assisted workflows.

Framework supports accountability and validity in AI-assisted educational practices.

Abstract

Generative AI is entering research, education, and professional work faster than current governance frameworks can specify how AI-assisted outputs should be judged in learning-intensive settings. The central problem is proxy failure: a polished artifact can be useful while no longer serving as credible evidence of the human understanding, judgment, or transfer ability that the work is supposed to cultivate or certify. This paper proposes AI to Learn 2.0, a deliverable-oriented governance framework for AI-assisted work. Rather than claiming element-wise novelty, it reorganizes adjacent ideas around the final deliverable package, distinguishes artifact residual from capability residual, and operationalizes the result through a five-part package, a seven-dimension maturity rubric, gate thresholds on critical dimensions, and a companion capability-evidence ladder. AI to Learn 2.0 allows opaque AI during exploration, drafting, hypothesis generation, and workflow design, but requires that the released deliverable be usable, auditable, transferable, and justifiable without the original large language model or cloud API. In learning-intensive contexts, it additionally requires context-appropriate human-attributable evidence of explanation or transfer. Worked scoring across contrastive cases, including coursework substitution, a symbolic-regression governance contrast, teacher-audited national-exam practice forms, and a self-hosted lecture-to-quiz pipeline with deterministic quality control, shows how the framework separates polished substitution workflows from bounded, auditable, and handoff-ready AI-assisted workflows. AI to Learn 2.0 is proposed as a governance instrument for structured third-party review where capability preservation, accountability, and validity boundaries matter.