Post by Janene Harman and Emily Rutherford
How are global Big Tech corporations manifest in local education systems?
Today in Day 3 of CSET, we consider the political economy of EdTech.
With the recent release of DeepSeek and the Australian government’s response, it is an interesting time to explore the political economy of the educational technology landscape. The rapid change brought about through AI developments, technological change and the COVID pandemic has thrust educational institutions and their use of technologies into the political discussion spotlight. What was once left to educational institutions to navigate on their own has become more of a political concern and has seen government bodies and policies needing attention to keep up with the rapid changes that are occurring. Many educational institutions allocate substantial budgets to technology, often favouring cost-effective, scalable solutions from global providers. This financial dependency on dominant private companies raises critical questions about long-term sustainability, local innovation, and the alignment of EdTech solutions with Australia’s unique educational needs.
What does EdTech policy look like, and which actors are driving policymaking?
Australia is influenced by the interplay between government policies, private sector, and institutional priorities. The market places a strong focus on digital transformation in education. Universities are being impacted by government decisions, such as banning DeepSeek due to data security risks (Panagopoulos, 2025). In a relatively small educational environment, how do we as local educators influence the broader political and economic environment?
These changes have seen universities scrambling to update policies and information about AI use and abuse. Academic integrity and the impact of AI on assessment have become a core concern for Australian universities as these technologies impact students and academics. AI detection companies and their developers are becoming key in the race to prevent or deter student use of these technologies in assessment tasks. These corporations influence not just technological infrastructure but also pedagogical practices, as educators increasingly rely on their ecosystems. The integration of Big Tech raises concerns about data sovereignty, privacy, equity and the potential erosion of local educational values in favour of global corporate priorities. However, some local innovations are meeting the needs of educators. One example is the University of Sydney’s Cogniti AI having had success in providing educational AI solutions and opportunities (ACODE, 2024).
Universities and schools are moving to redesign assessment tasks to be more resilient to the impacts of AI use and are moving to more authentic tasks. The governing body for Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency (TESQA) provides guidance on this in the ‘Assessment reform for the age of artificial intelligence’ which includes guiding principles for institutions, including the value of providing a variety of assessment tasks and learning experiences that preserves academic integrity as well as equipping students with knowledge and skills in the limitations of AI use (Lodge et al. 2023)
How have these emerging technologies impacted your institution? What AI technologies has your institution adopted?
What changes and actions have you seen in your institution to assessment policy due to AI’s impact?
Your insights and experiences are vital to this conversation as we navigate the intersections of technology, education, and power. Join us and share your insights and experiences with other Edtech colleagues in the comments section below.
Further reading
ACODE (2024). “2024 Winner – Cogniti.ai, University of Sydney.” 2025. https://acode.edu.au/activities/2024/2024-innovation-in-tel-awards-showcase/
Chan, C.K.Y. A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 20, 38 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3
Kathe Pelletier, Mark McCormack, Nicole Muscanell, Jamie Reeves, Jenay Robert, and Nichole Arbino, 2024 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report, Teaching and Learning Edition (Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE, 2024). https://library.educause.edu/resources/2024/5/2024-educause-horizon-report-teaching-and-learning-edition
Lodge, J. M., Howard, S., Bearman, M., Dawson, P, & Associates (2023). Assessment reform for the age of Artificial Intelligence. Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. https://www.teqsa.gov.au/guides-resources/resources/corporate-publications/assessment-reform-age-artificial-intelligence
National Artificial Intelligence Taskforce (2023). Australian Framework for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Schools. New South Wales Department of Education. https://www.education.gov.au/schooling/resources/australian-framework-generative-artificial-intelligence-ai-schools
Panagopoulos, J. (2025, 12 February). Go8 unis ban Chinese AI app DeepSeek. The Australian. Access via the ANU Library (for ANU staff).
5 thoughts on “CSET2025 – Topic 3: What does the political economy of EdTech look like in our region?”
AI has prompted ANU to issue some policy and provide staff training. ANU has a corporate license for Microsoft Copilot and I have helped teach how to use it to students. https://blog.highereducationwhisperer.com/2024/02/learning-to-reflect-in-age-of-ai.html
AI hasn’t required a major change to ANU assessment policy, except for course convenors having to say if its use is permitted or not in each course. Fortunately this has not resulted in the knee jerk reaction of some instutions, to revert to face to face paper based examinations. What I would like to see is assessment design where students are required to provide evidence of preparing their work, along with the finished product. That is, rather than trying to prove the student did not do the work, every student has to prove for every assessment task that they did do it. https://blog.highereducationwhisperer.com/search/label/Show-Your-Work
Educational institutions and their use of technologies has been of political concern for at least 50 years. The UK government set up the Open University UK (OUUK) in 1969. OUUK worked with the government owned BBC to deliver lessons by broadcast TV. The equivalents in India, China and other developing nations are even more closely linked to government technology (India using government owned satellites for educational TV). More recently, after SARS-COVID-1 struck, Singapore educational institutions prepared for future epidemics with online learning drills, as part of government preparations. https://web.archive.org/web/20150329201119/https://wiki.nus.edu.sg/download/attachments/81009836/elearning-week-2015.mp4
One exception to Australian educational institutions favoring foreign providers is the popularity of Moodle. That has not always been to the benefit of the company, with Australian governments not supporting the local product. In one case I recommended using Moodle to an Australian educator, but when I explained it was an Australian product, they did not want to use it, assuming it would be inferior.
No Australian university should be impacted by a ban on DeepSeek, as no competent administrator would consider using it, due to the security risk. Educators can influence the political and economic environment in the same way other professionals do: via their associations, through media appearances and direct to politicians, formally and informally. In the 1990s I was a member of what was called a “cabal” by the media, which sought to change Australian government policy in favor of the use of the Internet. Other members included educators and technologists from the ANU, industry and government agency staff & some politicians. https://www6.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/CLCCommsUpd/1995/56.pdf
As a member of the Australian Computer Society, I am consulted on submissions to government recommending policy on technology and education. As a member of the accreditation board of my profession I help set standards which universities are required to follow. As a member of the ANU media expert list, I am contacted by the media for my views on technology and education. Occasionally I make my own individual submissions to parliamentary inquiries, appear before committees. https://blog.highereducationwhisperer.com/2022/12/some-thoughts-on-australian-higher.html
Thank you Tom for your great discussion points and for sharing what is happening at your institution, particularly in the assessment space and your experience in relation to the use of Moodle.
I hope you can join us on Friday to continue the discussion.
At my university, a whole new division has been set up dedicated to reviewing and updating assessments to better align with AI. This has led to some great changes, like incorporating more peer review tasks, group projects, presentations, debates, etc. Honestly, I think this is a really positive shift, these kinds of assessments should have been a bigger focus even before AI came into the picture. Instead of just being about grading, assessments are now becoming a real part of the learning experience, which is great to see.
That being said, like many Australian universities right now, we’re facing financial challenges, so adopting new technologies and applications is something we have to be careful about. Still, platforms like Moodle and Padlet have introduced new AI features, which is a step in the right direction.
We are also exploring the use of secure and insecure screens and how best to support fully online students.
Hi Sara, I’d love to hear more about the secure and insecure screens issue you are dealing with if you would like to share? 🙂
Thanks Sara for your great comments and sharing what is happening at your institution in relation to AI and assessment. Moving to more authentic assessment practices is definitely a positive step in overcoming some of the issues of AI in assessment and in providing a more comprehensive learning experience for students.
We hope you can join us Friday to discuss further.