The digitalization of the school has been an ongoing process for over 50 years. Often, investments in digital technology have been argued for in relation towards the future, mainly to a future society and working life where new knowledge (linked to the new digital technology) is needed. However, the expectations associated with digital technology have rarely been met and the recurring initiatives have, after evaluations, been followed by a debate on failure, which is not infrequently directed at the school and its staff (Eriksson-Zetterqvist et al., 2006). The concept of disruptive innovation taken from marketing theory has been used by Christo Sims (2017) to describe this phenomenon. There are signs that AI in education (AIED), is the next major digital innovation directed to schools, discursively described as a disruptive innovation with great potential for improving, changing and streamlining education (Sims 2017). This presentation reports from a literature review that aims to explore the discourses that surround AIED and the hopes that are put into education through AIED. The literature review will focus on research from the last decades in the area of AIED, to investigate the hopes and anticipations tied to AI or put it another way what problems AI should solve in relation to schools and education? Methodologically, the literature review will start with a systematic analysis of peer-review articles that will quantify the articles in different categories. The results and the conclusions in the articles will thereafter be analysed with a theoretical framework labelled by Bacchi (2012) as a “What’s the problem represented to be” – analysis. Expected finding could be related to the fact that digitalisation of education has more than many other fields within been influenced by big corporate edu-business (Ideland, Jobér, & Axelsson, 2021; Lundahl, 2016; Player-Koro, Bergviken Rensfeldt & Selwyn, 2018; Rönnberg, 2017; Williamson, 2015) one hypothesis is therefore that financial arguments could be found rather than possibilities for AIED to increase equality, democracy, and diversity (Dixon-Román et al., 2019; Hsratinksy et al., 2019; Selwyn et al., 2020; Williamson, 2018; 2015a,b). Another hypothesis is that citizenship and democracy have become commodities, something to trade within the ed-tech business rather than improving fundamental values as stated in the steering documents. The results from the analyses will be related to the Nordic context and the Nordic steering documents and what they state regarding digitalization in general and AI and algorithms in general. The conclusion focuses on what kind of figurations and narratives that are brought forward in the research in order to identify further research needs but also discuss how this might shape and form the future ed-tech field.