- Posted on 2 Jun 2026
- 4-minute read
A unified national vision from educators is vital to ensure that all Australians can confidently, critically and creatively interact with AI.
Who is using it? How much? Am I using it too much? What impact is it having? And what happens if I get caught?
It’s enough to make you feel dirty. But, no, I’m not talking about porn. I’m talking about AI.
As the head of discipline for journalism at the University of Technology Sydney, I can tell you that the use and abuse of the technology is causing no end of conniptions across the university sector. It’s affecting everyone, from students to academics to upper management.
We all know action is needed, both inside and outside our learning institutions. There’s no greater proof of this than the Castlereagh Statement, a cross-sector call in April — shaped by more than 80 educators, leaders and students from over 30 Australian organisations — that urges Australia’s education and training systems to urgently adapt to the realities of AI.
So, what is happening in the university sector? A lot is the short answer. It feels like we are scrambling to catch up, because we are.
It demands a unified national vision from educators to ensure that all Australians can confidently, critically and creatively interact with AI. It’s not a small ask. The bigger picture proposes a national coordinating body be set up to link industry, government and educational institutions. A good idea, but it feels like the tables are unfairly weighted. Reining in big tech will need more than setting up a coordinating body.
So, what is happening in the university sector? A lot is the short answer. It feels like we are scrambling to catch up, because we are – AI is moving faster than institutions can cope. It’s Usain Bolt versus a park runner.
I hear concerns from students every day. Their worries aren’t just about the use of AI, but whether they will have a future. The young journalism-law student I spoke to this week hopes that by doing a multiple-path degree, he will double his chances of employment in the future. Journalism students remain optimistic, but they are worried. And it’s not just about AI erasing jobs before they graduate, but how they should be using it for their future.
I also speak with academics, who are so used to students submitting AI-written work that they have become adept at spotting the technology’s telltale signs. AI may well be a catalyst for efficiency, but how do we ensure that it does not erase creativity, ethics and judgement?
Macquarie University academic Kylie Moore-Gilbert recently wrote in The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age that she had advised her step-daughter to think twice about enrolling in university. She claimed that since ChatGPT was released, “Australia’s universities are committing widespread, industrial-scale fraud.” She believes the number of students who have given over their learning to AI is now out of control and that only a return to handwritten or oral exams will level the learning playing field.
This is the battlefront as I see it: universities are dictating that AI should be available to students, while laying out parameters of its usage. It is then up to those actually doing the teaching who are attempting to police its use. That is where the tension lies, and where the battle over the resources begins.
Universities are dictating that AI should be available to students, while laying out parameters of its usage. It is then up to those actually doing the teaching who are attempting to police its use.
At UTS, we are building a journalism course that will teach how to use AI. But that alone is not enough. Humans are capable of creativity and ethical judgment; computers are great at predictions. For educators, it is on us to integrate AI tools for efficiency and verification, and work out how to grade for curiosity, originality and emotional intelligence. The human stuff.
Of course, we are all being asked to do this now, when budgets across the entire education sector have never been tighter and workloads are maxed out.
For journalism students, university is the training ground for the real world of journalism. We want graduates to find and produce authentic work in their own voices here on campus and out in the real world. Through the mass generation of low-quality information and disinformation, copyright infringement and wholesale theft via unauthorised data scraping and algorithmic distortion, AI poses a genuine threat to real journalism.
The arrival and departure of AI-generated online mastheads masquerading as regional news outlets in Western Australia is not the first instance of low-value dross infecting the online space, and it won’t be the last. Of course, we need action to confront the greatest threat to journalism while ensuring the sharing of accurate, timely and entertaining stories.
But while robust regulation is one thing, enforcement is another — and so too is teaching. Right now, what’s of equal concern is the ability of readers to spot a fake or a credible site when they see it. Students today have grown up online, but tests show they are failing new national technology literacy testing.
The rise of AI means digital literacy is more important now than ever before. The university sector’s regulation of AI must keep pace with the technology, but it also must teach students how not to be used by the technology. Thinking for yourself is a human skill and one we don’t want to lose.
This article was originally published in Crikey.
Authored by
Professor of Journalism Practice, Head of Journalism