Impact of Technology on New Zealand Tertiary Education over the Next Decade
The Ministry of Education is consulting on the topic of "Realising the potential for technology to support personalised and tailored learning in the future". Details are on their website https://preview.education.govt.nz/have-your-say/consultation-long-term-insights-briefing-topic/details. Technology is a catalyst that is accelerating the challenges facing the tertiary education system. Those challenges are not a consequence of technology and framing a Government response on a purely technocratic basis will fail to address the needs of New Zealanders over the coming decade. Read on for my submission.
Introduction
The education system is an institution of society that embodies a collective behavioural response to the needs of the community combined with the tendency to maintain the stability of institutional features resulting from the history of its development (Jupille et al., 2013). Any response to technology will be driven primarily by two features:
- the extent to which technologies change broader social perception of normal life and expectations of behaviour in a range of social contexts relevant to communities, and
- the extent to which technologies are able to sustain established institutional systems and norms.
This inherent stability is a consequence of a number of features of tertiary education systems and acts to mitigate the technocratic drives for innovation and transformation that frequently dominate discussion of the changes enabled and catalysed by technology (Marshall, 2018b).
Education context
Our education system intersects with global systems and the systems of other countries. There is an immense stability imposed through the isomorphism responses to a global script of modernity (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Jupile & Caporaso, 2022, p. 51) sustaining the degree model of qualifications. However, it is becoming less clear that the degree has value other than as a transition point for school leavers. The financial value of qualifications beyond the first set needed for entry into a profession or industry is unclear except in highly specialized contexts and even there recent research by Deming and Noray (2020) suggests that the earnings premium from degree education in technology-intensive jobs declines rapidly as specific skills learned in school become obsolete.
A major driver in higher education is the tension between the positional and utilitarian or material value of education (Marshall, 2018a). Positional value is maintained by limited access created through unmet demand and is inherently conservative with regard to the use of technology. Utilitarian value is driven by pressure to deliver outcomes of immediate short-term need while minimizing transaction costs, including monetary expenses, systems complexity, and time. This tension is further complicated by the rise of alternative credentials and micro-credentials, which are challenging traditional degree structures (Kato et al., 2020) but which have yet to show that they are sustainable both in terms of the underlying business model and as an educational format, particularly in a global context .
New Zealand's higher education and tertiary education sectors are threatened as the financial viability of the system is dependent on international student revenue. Educationally, this is driven substantially by the positional aspects, setting aside the major role that immigration settings have, which are not educational goals. Acting against this is the increasingly unaffordable cost of higher education, particularly when considered in relation to the holistic cost of study, including cost of living, lost earnings, and fees, as well as the poor wage premium resulting from qualifications in New Zealand (OECD, 2024a) a problem likely to be exacerbated by recent declines in wages since 2019 (OECD, 2024b). Research by the New Zealand Productivity Commission (2021) highlights these challenges and suggests that the tertiary education system needs significant reform to meet the future needs of learners and the economy.
There is a relative shift in importance between the school leaver and older student populations. This shift is a combination of the changing age composition of the population, a legacy of poor participation and success in recent decades, and pressure for increased skills development. Economic pressures are driving the need to deliver education in a way that minimizes impact on existing employment, while social pressures demand education delivery into communities without disruption. The concept of lifelong learning has gained prominence, with the OECD (2023) emphasizing its importance for individual and societal well-being in the face of rapid technological change.
Community is a necessary part of learning. In-person interaction is important for transitions into new social contexts, such as for school leavers. Where possible, existing communities are better than having to create new ones as substitutes. A model where learning occurs deliberately within a supportive social community as the primary driver will automatically be better placed to address pastoral care aspects and increase the likelihood that effective support is present.
In addition to pressure to change where education is experienced, there is evidence that a shift is occurring in the capabilities needed by graduates and how these are developed (Marshall, 2024). The World Economic Forum's Future of Jobs Report (2023) highlights the growing importance of analytical and creative thinking combined with self-efficacy, and a growing literature acknowledges that radical changes in the future skill sets needed from graduates (Ehlers & Eigbrecht, 2024). A consequence of this shift in expectations of graduates is significant pressure on existing models of courses, including learning activities and the use of historically established models of teaching and assessment driven by the increased use of collaboration tools, far greater access to information, and the development of a variety of artificial intelligence tools (not limited to GPTs). Existing low-cost assessment models are no longer fit for purpose, and all credible alternatives are more expensive.
Technology change drivers
Technology-catalyzed change drivers are significant (Marshall, 2018b). In assessing the impact of technological change it is essential to recognise that technologies are not experienced in isolation or in a singular form. It is useful to recognise the operation of technologies as part of an interconnected platform or ecosystem, with changes in multiple dimensions occurring simultaneously, and with the socialisation of the process fundamental to the ways technologies are used at scale. For example consider that for many the use of artificial intelligence will occur as a feature embedded into a collaborative tool like a word processor accessed through an web browser being used on a portable device such as a tablet. For the vast majority of users they will see that simply as a writing tool and will not stop to consider all of the technologies being used to provide that experience.
The availability of technology-enhanced cognitive and knowledge capability will continue to be a major driver of its adoption, and perceptions and expectations of what it means to be educated will continue to be shaped by this, as literacy, numeracy, and memorized content have done in the past. Social acceptability of technology is an important influence on the uses to which it is put and the pace of adoption. This can see technology use prevented even when its value to individuals can be clearly demonstrated, as seen in responses to systems like Google Glass AR or device bans in various educational settings. Generalized technological literacy and adaptability will increasingly be more important than specialized knowledge and skills, but excellence in both will be a major driver of individual success. As Alvin Toffler (1970, p. 414) presciently stated, "The illiterate of the 21st Century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn." This sentiment is echoed in more recent work by the World Economic Forum (2020), which emphasizes the importance of reskilling and upskilling in the face of rapid technological change.
Shifting cost models are also a factor, with access to hardware and bandwidth likely to continue becoming cheaper. However, software and information are likely to be increasingly driven by two-speed business models. On one hand, there will be low-cost, poor-quality options driven by advertising and monetization, with risks of manipulation and exploitation of individuals and communities. On the other hand, there will be high-cost premium information services offering high reliability and user-driven focus. The inequity of this situation is further amplified by the need to have environments conducive to learning in the home, and equality of sustained individual access to basic infrastructure such as devices and internet bandwidth. This evolving digital divide is a growing concern globally (UNESCO, 2023).
Finally, there is a concern about the degradation of the public free-access internet itself. This is driven by cost models and uncontrolled use of AI content, amplified by commercial interest in market segmentation and control through apps and monetization-driven management of intellectual property through tightly controlled channels. The implications of this for education and knowledge access are significant as commercial pressure influences and manipulates public institutions, cultures and individuals through the use of information at scale (Couldry & Mejias, 2019; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004; Zuboff, 2019).
Government responses
Technology is a catalyst that is accelerating the challenges facing the tertiary education system. They are not a consequence of technology and framing a Government response on a purely technocratic basis will fail to address the needs of New Zealanders over the coming decade.
Government’s role is to ensure the operation of education as a social institution enabling success for New Zealanders. The function of an institution is defined by Hamilton (1932, p. 236) "…to set a pattern of behavior and to fix a zone of tolerance for an activity or a complement of activities." Government should act to ensure that the tertiary education system is enabled and supported through funding, regulatory settings and agency activities to evolve education in response to technology at a pace that ensures social tolerance of the system is sustained. This objective suggests that:
Regulation should focus on protecting the system and New Zealanders from the exploitation of education by commercial interests and technology providers focused on extracting information and exerting control through their control of the evolving technology platform. Public good dimensions of the business models used to enact artificial intelligence and collaboration systems (including but not limited to social media) should be protected in order to sustain a knowledge and community “commons” that sustains diverse social outcomes.
The education system needs help to ensure New Zealanders are educated for their own and our collective success. Graduate outcomes beyond direct employability, particularly in low skill work, must be invested in and valued through funding mechanisms and success measures. Beyond this, a widening of the contribution made by employers to create lifelong opportunities for adults to learn and develop new skills is necessary and should be pursued through changes to tax policies and immigration settings.
The ongoing pace of change needed in the system imposes a significant risk burden on education institutions. Investment is critically needed in staff capability development, a widening of the skills used to develop and deliver education in modern settings and to more ambitious outcomes, and the tools and systems that support this. The tertiary system is financially unsustainable in its current form even without any change and there is simply no capacity for institutions to invest for change. Failure by Government to address this will see further inequality in outcomes persist and greater dependence on external funding and providers with interests that will inevitably compromise our democracy and social values.
References
Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). The costs of connection: How data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism. Stanford University Press.
Deming, D. J., & Noray, K. (2020). Earnings Dynamics, Changing Job Skills, and STEM Careers*. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(4), 1965–2005. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjaa021
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Ehlers, U.-D., & Eigbrecht, L. (Eds.). (2024). Creating the University of the Future. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-658-42948-5
Hamilton, W. H. (1932). Walton Hamilton, “Institution,” Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 1932. http://archive.org/details/Hamilton1932Institution
Jupile, J., & Caporaso, J., A. (2022). Theories of Institutions. Cambridge University Press.
Jupille, J., Mattli, W., & Snidal, D. (2013). Institutional Choice and Global Commerce. Cambridge University Press.
Kato, S., Galán-Muros, V., & Weko, T. (2020). The emergence of alternative credentials (OECD Education Working Papers, No. 216). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/b741f39e-en
Marshall, S. J. (2018a). Qualifications as a Defining Feature of Higher Education. In S. J. Marshall (Ed.), Shaping the University of the Future: Using Technology to Catalyse Change in University Learning and Teaching (pp. 123–139). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7620-6_6
Marshall, S. J. (2018b). Technology as a Catalyst for Change. In S. J. Marshall (Ed.), Shaping the University of the Future: Using Technology to Catalyse Change in University Learning and Teaching (pp. 147–166). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7620-6_8
Marshall, S. J. (2024). Future Higher Education in New Zealand: Creating a Universal Learning Community for Future Skills. In U.-D. Ehlers & L. Eigbrecht (Eds.), Creating the University of the Future: A Global View on Future Skills and Future Higher Education (pp. 589–611). Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42948-5_30
New Zealand Productivity Commission. (2021). New Zealand firms: Reaching for the frontier. New Zealand Productivity Commission. https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2024-05/pc-inq-nzfrff-final-report-frontier-firms.pdf
OECD. (2023). OECD Skills Outlook 2023: Skills for a Resilient Green and Digital Transition. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/27452f29-en.
OECD. (2024a). Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en
OECD. (2024b). OECD Employment Outlook 2024: The Net-Zero Transition and the Labour Market. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/ac8b3538-en
Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. The John Hopkins University Press.
Toffler, A. (1970). Future shock. Bodley Head.
UNESCO. (2023). Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? UNESCO Publishing.
WEF. (2023). Future of Jobs Report 2023. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2023/
Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. Profile Books.