Opinion
Lest we be accused of clickbait, the answer to the headline is presently no, but will a university’s AI approach become a key point of differentiation for student choice?
James Cook University’s announcement last week that they would be the first university in Australia to provide a paid Microsoft 365 Copilot licence to all staff and students is the latest in a series of announcements in relation to AI tools for students.
Will students be seduced by free access to Copilot or will they hold out for Claude? If they all are using ChatGPT for free for some of their daily duties is that a better brand to back? Or is there a compelling proposition in UNE’s in-house approach?
Universities have been forced to choose their own path to use of AI in teaching and learning and guarding against AI-enabled cheating in assessment. Documenting some of that journey is critical to compliance – in particular satisfying the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) that minimum expectations are being met.
Moving beyond compliance to virtue and/or value signalling by seeking to demonstrate leadership in the AI space is clearly a key trend in sector marketing right now.
As we dive into the traditional open day season, there is a growing trend to turn the chosen AI tools for students into a bid for marketing advantage, particularly given domestic enrolments are suddenly far more prominent in university strategies than they used to be, in the wake of international cuts.
The hierarchy of AI promotion is well established – not by logic or measurement, but by ease and convention. Boast most about the tangible – tools for students and researchers (We are buying a giant AI brain! We are giving students an AI tool they would normally have to pay for!).
Second, wax lyrical about pedagogy, culture and philosophy. Students rarely give a toss about this because evidence to back up the hyperbole is usually sparse or obscure. Nonetheless, this is critical, because tools without training in how to use them are not that useful.
Third, we have the lowest promotional tier for students, and highest for right wing culture warriors – assessment. This could become the top promotional tier for students, saving lots of money in AI subscriptions, if unis choose to lead the way in assessment across all disciplines. It is also the fastest way to respond to those incredibly damaging articles by staff and students saying that a degree is a waste of time because of alleged mass cheating (I paraphrase, but that is the message that many will take from these types of articles).
Differentiation in responses to AI is currently a significant point of vulnerability for institutions and the sector as a whole. Clarity and courage in applying tangible solutions to how learning, teaching and assessment are changing for the better is the latest battlefront in sector reputation.
Once we have got all the press releases about shiny new tools out of the way, and moved past investing in taglines to try to claim first mover advantage in AI adoption, we should see some exciting progress. There is an immense gap between the sector’s internal dialogue in addressing AI and the apparently horrendous public perception of the decline and fall of HE at the hands of the new technology.
Providing tangible evidence of progress and a digestible blueprint for change is the new communication frontier – not just to convince students, but also sceptical staff, sceptical graduate employers and outright oppositional right wing culture warriors
Demonstrating how universities will evolve both learning and teaching and also assessment will be critical in starting to bring communities along on the AI journey.
That’s not to say that access to tools such as JCU’s co-pilot manoeuvre is not important – it is a key step in bridging the AI divide. But it is also a skirmish in the ongoing battle to reclaim public trust.
Universities that do manage to convince stakeholders that they have a clear, evidence-based and convincing plan for learning, teaching and assessment will have a significant marketing advantage. Whether it is as significant as campus location remains to be seen, but it will be big.
Tim Winkler has worked in HE marketing for more than 20 years. He is Editor-In-Chief of Future Campus.