Connect with us

Education

What’s next for international education policy? Australia’s sector leaders weigh in

Published

on


  • Visa fee hikes and perceived enrolment caps are dampening international student demand, especially in the VET and short-term study sectors
  • Calls grow for special consideration for students already invested in the Australian system, including those progressing from schools to university
  • Sector leaders are hopeful about improved government-sector collaboration, with Julian Hill seen as a genuine advocate who understands the industry

Days before the government announced its National Planning Level of 295,000 international student places for 2026, Luke Sheehy, CEO of Universities Australia spoke candidly about Australia’s de facto cap on international enrolments, telling delegates at The PIE’s Gold Coast conference that Australia has “caught the sniffles of the Canadian disease in terms of demand”.

Sheehy said the new overseas commencements (NOSC) limits, implemented through visa-processing directive Ministerial Direction 111, have “decimated” demand in parts of the sector, along with additional damage caused by the lingering impact of Ministerial Direction 107. He compared the situation to Canada, where government caps have sharply reduced student interest and left institutions struggling to meet numbers.

For Felix Pirie, CEO of Independent Tertiary Education Council Australia (ITECA), one of the biggest challenges with Australia’s so-called “cap-not-cap” lies in perception.

“For businesses to work towards a system that isn’t a cap that is being enforced or managed as though it is a cap, that’s incredibly difficult for a business to manage, particularly with their offshore relationships when the perception offshore is that it’s in fact a cap,” said Pirie.

According to analysis seen by Pirie, the VET sector is on track to fall significantly short of its national planning target – likely reaching less than 50% of the planned level.

“If that is in fact the case, then we probably need to recalibrate the design of the system, the mechanisms we’re using to distribute and so forth, across all sectors, schools, English language, everywhere,” he said.

Although the schools sector is exempt from government-imposed NOSC limits, Simone Fuller, executive director at the Department of Education International, Queensland, explained that there is a knock-on effect. International students who have already invested significantly in their Australian education now face uncertainty around university placements. Fuller called for special consideration to be given to these students.

Elsewhere, sector leaders have been vocal about the impact of the government’s student visa fee hikes. However, Phil Honeywood, CEO of the International Education Association of Australia (IEAA), reiterated hopes that ongoing lobbying efforts will lead the government to reduce the recently increased AUD $2,000 student visa fee for specific cohorts of short-term students.

“The reality is that hiking visa fee is exorbitant for a student who’s going to come over here for experience for one term,” said Fuller.

“For us in Queensland, it’s about half of the tuition fee. While we won’t potentially see that impact now, that would come next year, we would like to see that fee reduced also for the study abroad market.”

With Labor re-elected and Julian Hill appointed assistant minister for international education (also covering home affairs, citizenship and multicultural affairs), panellists were optimistic about future sector‑government dialogue. Sheehy highlighted Hill’s unique role spanning both home affairs and education, while Honeywood called him an “absolute champion of international education”.

Time will tell whether we can advocate strongly enough that everybody gets their fair share of the pie, that we don’t discriminate against private providers, that we don’t kill off the crucial, stand-alone English language sector and that we support the skills sector as well
Phil Honeywood, IEAA

“He’s really the only federal politician we’ve had on the inside of politics who has worked in international education, so he totally gets it,” said Honeywood.

Despite this optimism, Honeywood warned that “time will tell whether we can advocate strongly enough that everybody gets their fair share of the pie, that we don’t discriminate against private providers, that we don’t kill off the crucial, stand-alone English language sector and that we support the skills sector as well”.

Hill addressed delegates via video message, with a clear call to action: the future of international education in Australia hinges on “a ruthless focus on quality and a great student experience – both of which are central to Australia’s value proposition and our global reputation”.

He outlined the government’s mission to “support genuine students and quality providers”, and reiterated its commitment to managing “the size and shape of the onshore student market and supporting sustainable growth”.

International student numbers are now “trending to sustainable levels”, he told the Gold Coast audience but said “further work remains to address issues of distribution, composition and integrity”.

Conversations at the Gold Coast conference turned to plans to ban onshore commission to stop international students switching from one course to another after the six-month window during which immediate course changes are prohibited. The theory is that agencies will refrain from “poaching” students if they can’t earn a commission for transferring the student.

Opinions differ on whether this will be sufficient to eliminate onshore poaching. However, Honeywood argued that there remains a “legitimate role” for some onshore commission – citing the example of a student progressing from an undergraduate degree to a master’s, who may feel that neither their current university nor their private higher education provider offers a suitable course.

Elsewhere, Sheehy said the universities sector has a big job to do to deliver on its domestic mission to make Australia “more prosperous, better skilled, more curious, and more capable to take on the opportunities and challenges of the next century”.

“International education, like it or not, has been the way that we have funded that expansion in research and teaching for Australia over the last four decades, ostensibly, particularly over the two decades. The work to get that right begins now,” he explained.

The Universities Australia CEO is optimistic about the recently launched interm Tertiary Education Commission. “If that is properly skilled, properly autonomous, and does really good work, we can work out a way to navigate how to get our sector back onto a growth trajectory, which is what the government wants,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Education

Back 2 School: Local districts experimenting with AI learning tools in the classroom – WGRZ

Published

on



Back 2 School: Local districts experimenting with AI learning tools in the classroom  WGRZ



Source link

Continue Reading

Education

The Need for AI Literacy in Indian Legal Education

Published

on


Artificial Intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing the contemporary landscape, harnessing the power of vast datasets to automate complex tasks and deliver tailored solutions. This transformative technology is reshaping our approach to longstanding challenges. India is at the leading edge of this AI evolution, ready to use the rapid technological progress to achieve remarkable growth in technology.

Legal education serves as the cornerstone for promoting social justice, equity, and a robust democracy, providing individuals with the expertise to navigate a society regulated by law. To accomplish this objective, society must cultivate proficient lawyers who serve essential functions within their communities. This necessitates a comprehensive framework that enables legal practitioners to address the changing demands of Indian society.

The obstacles presented by globalization, rising expenses, and ongoing judicial delays highlight the urgent necessity for technological advancement in the legal field. India’s dedication to Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4) established in 2015, which prioritizes accessible and equitable quality education, corresponds with the National Education Policy 2020s objective to modernize legal education. By embracing global norms and new methodologies, the legal industry may markedly improve access to justice, safeguarding it as a fundamental right for all individuals.

After India’s independence in 1947, education was vital in fulfilling the moral needs of the newly liberated population. And, the main goal of the legal system was to realize the Constitution’s objectives, leading to the enactment of various laws for social reform, such as the Dowry Prohibition Act (1961) and the Hindu Marriage Act (1955). Today, India’s educational aim is to create a fair and just society. The Indian court system is struggling with a backlog of cases, corruption, and slow resolution times. The Supreme Court highlighted the importance of improving legal education to tackle these challenges and adapt to new global trends, advocating for the use of AI in the courts.

India’s current legal education and research framework is based on the common law tradition, and emphasizes upon critical thinking, teaching using Socratic methods, legal writing skills, oral advocacy, risk aversion, issue identification, and legal ethics. Although, these strategies have shaped generations of competent lawyers, yet they are now regarded as insufficient. Because, it places greater importance on theoretical understanding rather than on the practical abilities that are essential for contemporary legal practice. Lawyers are now anticipated to possess strong analytical skills and be proficient in utilizing legal technologies such as document automation and predictive analytics.

The expectations for newly graduated lawyers have changed considerably. They are now required to have robust technological skills, adaptability, and the capability to work alongside professionals from different fields, in addition to their conventional responsibilities in legal research and advocacy. Clients today look for legal professionals who can serve as strategic partners, grasping the connections between law, technology, and business. In this context, it is crucial for legal educators to integrate frameworks that align technical comprehension of AI with ethical and practical training. This method guarantees that students are prepared not just to use AI tools, but also to evaluate their results critically.

Consequently, the traditional method of legal education requires the implementation of more flexible and tailored curricula to tackle the growing complexities of legal matters in a rapidly globalizing and digital environment.

There is a notable trend towards incorporating AI literacy in various legal fields, prompting many law schools worldwide to either introduce or revise their AI courses introducing new courses centred around AI, such as Programming for Lawyers, AI Ethics and Privacy, AI and Experiential Learning etc. The National Law University of India in Bengaluru, OP Jindal University in Sonipat, and the Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Rights in IIT Kharagpur have incorporated AI-focused courses into their curriculum. This initiative aims to equip students with the skills to utilize AI tools, addressing the technological needs of the profession, also understanding AI technologies can improve their job security and enhance their competitiveness in an ever evolving industry. Legal firms and experienced lawyers may expect younger associates to leverage generative AI technologies, given their familiarity with the changing tech landscape. AI will not replace lawyers; instead, those who adopt AI will likely excel over those who do not. An AI-focused curriculum can help cultivate lawyers who are less susceptible to being replaced. It is essential for students to not only learn how to use AI tools effectively but also to receive guidance on their optimal application.

While coding skills aren’t a requirement for lawyers but familiarize themselves with tools and platforms that are beneficial in the legal sector. Legal professionals can utilize these tools to streamline contract automation, conduct legal research, and monitor compliance effectively. This not only makes it easier to do analyses of vast datasets, automating complex tasks, providing customized solutions and uncover different interpretations of laws across jurisdictions, and can also assist judges with routine tasks which will allow them to focus on more complex issues.

The incorporation of AI into legal education is essential to meet the growing need for faster, more accurate, and accessible legal services. AI’s ability to perform tasks in seconds that traditionally take much longer necessitates a thorough overhaul of the legal curriculum to embrace digital advancements. Law schools in India are grappling with a pressing challenge such as outdated curriculum, many teachers are not well-versed in data science, machine learning, and artificial intelligence. This gap in knowledge, coupled with a resistance to shift from traditional teaching methods, hampers the integration of these technologies into legal education. Furthermore, the current infrastructure is inadequate for overseeing AI usage, as there are no clear guidelines for its proper application.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) is responsible for regulating legal education in India, established under the Advocates Act of 1961. The BCI’s primary role is to supervise the legal profession, ensuring lawyers adhere to professional conduct standards and safeguard the profession’s interests. Over time, the BCI’s mandate has expanded to include establishing standards for law colleges, including curriculum, infrastructure, faculty qualifications, and student admissions. This standardization ensures quality but limits the capacity of law schools to innovate and experiment with new approaches. Many law programs follow a strict curriculum, limiting opportunities for integrating innovative interdisciplinary subjects. The BCI has released a directive promoting the incorporation of subjects like blockchains, electronic discovery, cyber-security, robotics, artificial intelligence, and bio-ethics into curricula. However, law schools in India have neglected to integrate AI into their curricula, as the existing curriculum is extensive. Educators often shy away from integrating new technology in their classrooms due to the extra workload it entails. Even with access to labs and advanced tools, many schools struggle to deliver up-to-date, AI-enhanced learning materials. This gap arises from a lack of staff expertise in utilizing AI effectively, leaving students without the benefits of modern educational resources.

Ensuring digital inclusion is crucial for the sustainable integration of AI, as it ensures fair access to digital tools and resources for all students, regardless of their socioeconomic status or geographic location. Students enrolled in law colleges located in rural or semi-urban regions may experience a disadvantage in accessing technology and education in artificial intelligence relative to their metropolitan counterparts. Elite educational institutions and communities often have sophisticated digital infrastructures, such as high-speed internet, modern gadgets, and cloud computing resources, allowing them to adopt cutting-edge EdTech solutions.

Law schools in economically disadvantaged or rural regions encounter difficulties stemming from obsolete gear, unreliable internet connectivity, or a total absence of access to AI resources. The prevalence of AI materials and technologies in English constitutes a substantial obstacle to accessibility for non-English speaking students.

In addition to revising the curriculum to incorporate AI subjects, it is equally crucial to train the faculty and staff. This ensures that students are well-informed about the effective use of AI, fostering a sense of comfort and confidence. Such an approach is vital for achieving optimal outcomes in education and beyond.



Linkedin


Disclaimer

Views expressed above are the author’s own.



END OF ARTICLE





Source link

Continue Reading

Education

First lady calls AI training a national responsibility for US students

Published

on


First Lady Melania Trump has urged the nation’s business and technology leaders to back artificial intelligence (AI) education in schools, framing it as essential for preparing children for future jobs, reported India Today

White House Task Force on AI education

Speaking at the inaugural meeting of the Artificial Intelligence Education Task Force, which she chairs, Trump balanced optimism with caution. “As leaders and parents, we must manage AI’s growth responsibly. During this primitive stage, it is our duty to treat AI as we would our own children — empowering, but with watchful guidance,” she said.

Education Secretary Linda McMahon joined the event, alongside Cabinet officials and industry leaders. Trump pressed the group to invest in AI training for schoolchildren, describing it as a national responsibility. “AI can be a powerful tool, but only if we teach our young people how to use it with wisdom,” she noted.

National contest and call for leadership

The First Lady also highlighted her recently launched nationwide contest for students in grades K–12, encouraging them to apply AI to projects or community challenges. She said the initiative is aimed at showcasing both the opportunities and limitations of the technology.

“America must lead in this field,” Trump told the gathering. “And leadership starts in our classrooms.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending