I remember perfectly when, during recess four years ago, a colleague showed us artificial intelligence on his phone. Apparently, he'd heard about it on the radio and, out of curiosity, had tried it out. In front of us, he asked it to compare Modernism and Noucentisme and even to generate a poem in the style of Maragall. Before we'd even finished our coffee, a long and exhaustive piece of work, just as he'd asked, started appearing on the phone screen. The poem too. It was like something out of a magic trick. What was the catch? Who was writing all this? We immediately saw that the tool was fantastic, but also dangerous for the world of education.

If we want to ride a dead horse, we are doomed to failure no matter how hard we try to change the saddle, create groups of experts to advise us on how to improve its efficiency, organize courses for riders on family constellations or mindfulness, etc. The only sensible thing to do is change horses, especially if ours was killed by our low expectations. But more likely, our discussions will focus on how to provide the dead horse with more innovative shoes.

At the Universitat Pompeu Fabra they are preparing what they consider to be an "educational revolution". In two years' time, students will have half or fewer lectures and more group sessions in which the teacher will be a coach or tutor, fewer multiple-choice exams and more reflection and participation in class. Inspired by the wave of educational transformation that for a decade has changed schools and institutes in the country and also by how the best universities in the world, such as MIT and Stanford, work, the UPF wants to move towards a university model which "faces the future".