面對隨著AI技術、大數據和演算法的廣泛應用，出現「學習化導向」現象，教育治理模式也發生顯著變化。本研究首先分析數據治理與AI對於學校教育的挑戰；進而討論全球化背景下智慧學習是如何影響教育公平和終身學習，並對「學習化導向」的工具化傾向提出批判性反思；接著再轉向晚期Foucault治理性與美學式的自我存有，分析教育機構作為社會控制和知識生產的重要場域，並探討規訓權力與生命權力面對AI技術控制的可能解釋；最後則分析能力取向的核心內涵，並將之與Parsons、Giddens與晚期Foucault等觀點加以整合，提出「學習化導向」教育治理應緊扣人性尊嚴與人權之價值，據以開展能力取向教育社會學的新視野；最後，本研究指出AI技術雖有助教育品質的提升，不免仍會有教育工具化的風險，故建議未來研究可進一步探討技術化教育治理如何能更有效地整合能力取向理論，確保AI時代的教育發展不能僅關注技術效率面向，同時要能以從制度性規範與主體能動性的辯證，確保教育能支持學習者的實質自由與能力能動性之開展。

Facing the widespread application of AI technology, big data, and algorithms, “learnification” has emerged, leading to significant changes in educational governance models. This study first analyzes the challenges that data governance and AI educational applications pose to school education. It then discusses how smart learning in the context of globalization affects educational equity and lifelong learning, reflecting critically on the instrumentalization tendencies of “learnification.” The study then shifts to the later works of Foucault on governance and the aesthetics of self existence, analyzing educational institutions as important sites of social control and knowledge production, and exploring possible explanations for disciplinary power and biopower in the face of AI technological control. Finally, the study analyzes the core content of the capabilities approach. It integrates it with the perspectives of Parsons, Giddens, and later Foucault, proposing that “learnification-oriented” educational governance should closely adhere to core values such as human dignity and human rights, thereby developing new horizons for the capabilities-based sociology of education. Based on the theoretical research findings, this study points out that although AI technology can help improve the quality of education, there remains a risk of educational instrumentalization. It is therefore suggested that future research further explore how technological educational governance can better integrate the capabilities approach theory, ensuring that educational development in the AI era does not focus solely on technical efficiency but also dialectically balances institutional norms with individual agency to ensure that education supports the substantive freedom and capability agency of learners.