And while Australia and New Zealand implemented strict international border closures since COVID-19 hit in early 2020 to help keep Australians safe, the attendant loss of international student revenue is forecast to cost Australia’s fourth largest export sector nearly A$20 billion (US$14 billion) a year.

Australia was the world’s second largest international student destination market before COVID-19 wreaked havoc across the globe, resulting in 320,000 fewer international students living in the country in November 2021 compared to November 2019.  

The institute’s report, titled 'Student, Interrupted: International education and the pandemic', has been released a day before Australia’s borders reopen. It focuses on five major destinations for international students - Australia, the United Kingdom, United States, Canada and New Zealand - and the ways in which the pandemic has affected (either positively or negatively) each country’s market.

Key points

One of the key findings of the Mitchell Institute report is the extent to which some international markets have rebounded to record levels while others have gone backwards. In the UK, for instance, visa applications for new international students are “at record levels” and close to 40 per cent higher than before the pandemic. 

Similarly, the report found that Canada and the US are experiencing something of a renaissance in their international student market, highlighting that in the September quarter of this year both countries recorded “their highest levels of new student visas for at least five years”.

In stark contrast, new student visa applications for Australia and New Zealand have dropped substantially from pre-pandemic levels in the 12 months to September 2021, plummeting 70 and 90 per cent respectively. And while all five countries witnessed a plunge in new international students in early to mid-2020, the UK, US and Canada have experienced a huge rebound in their markets, while Australia and New Zealand’s have continued to decline. 

The report also found that China is no longer the largest source country for new international students after being overtaken by India. The recent trend of Chinese students remaining in their country to study was also evident, with new student visas from Chinese students still 25 per cent below pre-pandemic levels.  

And while geo-political tensions between Australia and China have continued to escalate over the period of the pandemic, the evidence suggests that the decline in the number of Chinese international students wanting to study in Australia can be attributed more to “administrative obstacles and travel restrictions”. 

"There has been a reduction in the number of Indian international students going to Australia," the report says, "down by 62 per cent in the twelve months to September 2021 compared to 2019.

"In contrast, the number of new Indian international students to the UK has more than doubled, up by 174 per cent."

The above shift highlights another interesting note in the report. Both the US and the UK governments have developed ambitious policies that will foster their international student markets in a post-pandemic world, with the Biden administration announcing a “renewed commitment to international education” in July 2021. Similarly, the UK aims to increase “the value of international education by 75 per cent by 2030”.

Short and long-term forecasts

While the report highlights significant renewal in some international student markets and continued decline in others, it also warns that “significant uncertainty” remains. Such uncertainty is tied to the emergence of new variants of COVID-19 in the future (eg Omicron) and the unpredictable effects this might have on students commencing their studies in 2022. 

The report also notes there is “pent-up demand following border closures”. However, while most up-to-date data indicates new student visa approvals are above pre-pandemic levels in countries such as the UK and the US, uncertainty remains as to whether they are at “levels sufficient to compensate fully for reductions  experienced in 2020”.  

Similarly, the institute's report concludes that the long-term impact of the pandemic on the international education market is uncertain. The authors note that "disruptions to the international market have widespread impacts" as international students are a critical part of how countries invest in their broader tertiary education systems.

One of the three authors of the report, Dr Peter Hurley, said it was highly probable that many students who planned to study in Australia had chosen another destination. This was particularly true for Indian students who decided to study in the UK. 

“Part of the reason international students pay high fees is to experience a different culture and, for many, to immerse themselves in a country with a different language,” Hurley said.

“They can’t do that when they are studying online.

“This data shows that international students are looking to the countries that are open, and where they can travel and gain the whole international student experience.”

The federal opposition’s “Future Made in Australia” policy, released as a pre-election announcement on December 5,  promises some 465,000 free TAFE spots, 45,000 “new places”, as well as a commitment to fund TAFE infrastructure such as IT, new workshops and laboratories.

The Labor plan also includes 20,000 university spots, allocated across 2022-2023. Funding has also been promised for universities to provide additional spots for priority occupations with skills shortages, first in family students and underrepresented groups. The TAFE initiative will cost roughly $620 million over forward estimates, while just over $480 million has been flagged for universities. 

However, the Independent Tertiary Council Australia (ITECA) is concerned that Labor’s election announcement contains a “guarantee that TAFE gets at least 70 per cent of commonwealth vocational training funding”. ITECA, a strong proponent of student voice, says government should support students’ choices, regardless of whether they want to study with an independent registered training organisation (RTO) or a public TAFE college. 

The independent peak body has called the opposition’s education announcement “TAFE-centric”, stating it ignores the fact that independent RTOs deliver training to the vast majority of the 3.9 million students enrolled in vocational education in Australia. 

ITECA’s chief executive Troy Williams said that, while any additional investment in skills is welcome, Labor’s announcement is of little value when it comes to supporting student choice. 

ITECA wants government to empower students with the ability to select the training provider of their choice, one that’s best able to assist them in achieving their study and career goals, whether this be a quality independent RTO or a public TAFE college, Williams told Campus Review. 

“In this context, we can imagine many students will be disappointed with the announcement,” he said.

Williams cited ITECA's blueprint for the next Australian parliament, titled ‘Seven Priorities for a Skilled and Educated Workforce’, which recommends that investment in skills should be limited to states and territories that provide funding based on “empowering student voice, allowing students to study with a provider (whether independent or public) that has a demonstrated ability to help them achieve their life and career goals”.  

And while the opposition’s announcement includes 20,000 new university spots in priority areas and industries with skill shortages, Williams says it’s unclear how much funding has been flagged for independent higher education providers - if any at all.

The peak body is working with the opposition to ensure that “tertiary education funding is student-centric”, empowering students to pick the provider of their choice. The blueprint for the next Australian parliament also recommends expanding on the “highly successful” investment in skills it has already made by “enabling students to study in a Commonwealth-subsidised place with a quality independent higher education provider and engage in the critical thinking and learning needs they choose”.

Williams also commented on the fact that independent registered training organisations (RTOs) support roughly 85 per cent of the 3.9 million students enrolled in skills training, and that student satisfaction and employment data reflects why this is the case.  

“When students or their employers invest their own money, the National Centre for Vocational Education and Research (NCVER) data demonstrates that independent RTOs are students’ go-to option,” he said. 

“This is hardly surprising as independent providers enjoy some of the highest levels of student and employer satisfaction plus the highest post-study employment outcomes.  

“A government funding model that forces a student to study with one particular training provider is just wrong. We want students to have the freedom to study with the provider of their choice, which may be a public TAFE college or an independent RTO.”

Another issue Williams highlights is that the opposition’s announcement fails to recognise that many students are not serviced by a TAFE college in their area. 

“For example, independent RTOs support 74 per cent of the 1,225,300 vocational training students across regional, rural and remote Australia according to NCVER data. The public TAFE sector simply lacks the reach and staff expertise to support these students, thus a funding model that preferences TAFE over independent RTOs will severely disadvantage students in remote areas.”

Universities Australia (UA), the peak body for Australia’s public university sector, has welcomed Labor’s announcement with its focus on skills and participation.

“Universities play a central role in national prosperity and can power the post-COVID economic recovery by equipping graduates with the skills they need to drive that recovery,” UA’s chair Professor John Dewar said. 

“A strong and vibrant tertiary sector – university and vocational education – is fundamental to Australia’s recovery. 

“When government invests in our universities, it invests in the future prosperity of us all.

“We look forward to when further details on this policy are made available.” 

UA’s chief executive Catriona Jackson also commented on Labor’s pre-election announcement, saying a well-resourced university sector will support the demand for skilled graduates. 

“By 2024-25, the young adults of the mid-2000s baby boom will be ready to begin their studies, and more places will be needed to ensure they have that life changing opportunity,” she said.

“Over the next five years, the National Skills Commission predicts more than 500,000 new jobs will be created that require a Bachelor’s degree or higher.

“Skilled graduates bring bright ideas, critical thinking and the latest knowledge to solve our nation’s challenges, improve business productivity and change lives.

“It is also critical to make the best of the talent we have, and universities support the focus in the ALP package on ensuring that all Australians, regardless of background or barriers, have access to the opportunity that a university education provides.” 

Williams added that, in the priority skills areas the opposition references, including aged carers, nurses, child care and disability workers, it is “independent RTOs that do the heavy lifting in supporting the greatest number of students”.  In the critical defence sector, too, the ITECA chief says independent RTOs support the majority of students.

“Since the opposition’s announcement, ITECA has been engaged with them to clarify aspects of their policy and to guide their future thinking,” he said.

“ITECA has also highlighted that although the public TAFE sector does great work, it is independent RTOs that will play the lead role in giving Australia the skilled and educated workforce which will drive future economic prosperity.  

“More than ever, Australia needs to be the clever nation to take advantage of the many future economic opportunities ahead of it, and in this, independent RTOs will be critical.”

It’s natural for educators to be cautious when it comes to using artificial intelligence (AI) in practice, particularly given the fact they are taught to be critical and evidence-driven. But while that may be the case, James Thorley, vice-president for APAC at Turnitin, says AI “is not going away” and can benefit both educators and students in a multitude of ways.

What’s key, he says, is that AI is seen as a complementary measure to unburden individuals from time-consuming, often menial tasks — not a replacement or “silver bullet”. 

In this podcast, Thorley highlights several benefits of AI, including some marking (e.g. short answer questions), ensuring academic integrity and eliminating what he calls “low-impact activities”. For Thorley, the goal of AI is to free up educators to spend more of their time on providing more meaningful feedback and instruction.

The vice president for APAC adds that AI can be highly beneficial for students too, with some automated feedback already available. He also says that AI is “not too far away from prompting students to review their citations” if there's a mismatch between in-text references and bibliographic entries.

Of course, data gleaned from AI can also provide insights educators would never have been able to access before. 

This episode sees a student join us in orientation week, and then again in week 12 of her first semester. She shares her expectations coming into the course and how these are impacted by her understanding of brand and reputation.

We join her again at the end of her first semester to learn of her positive experiences that differ across parts of the university, and align with some of the expectations of the brand.

What does this all mean for student evaluation, authenticity in brand and reputation, and culture in universities? And how do we create what students most want next year, which is a sense of community?

Vice-chancellor and president of Victoria University, Professor Adam Shoemaker, is on the cusp of marking his first year at the helm of the university. 

And as he approached this milestone, he spoke to Campus Review about the university’s vertical campus, which is the biggest in Australia and aims to keep clusters of disciplines together. A key feature of the campus is that the top two floors are sub-let to a law firm, fostering greater industry exposure to law students studying at the campus. 

Construction has also begun on the $1.5 billion Footscray Hospital adjacent to VU’s Footscray Park campus, which Shoemaker added would become a world-class health and education precinct, and also home to the National Centre for Preventative Care. 

What the above projects highlight is the university’s commitment to “having industry at the core” of everything it does – a strategy that incorporates the “flipped campus” model. Another example is the Victoria University Whitten Oval, which was the Western Bulldogs' VFL/AFL home for generations and remains the squad's training base and administrative headquarters. Here, VU PhD students and others studying sports science, mechanics, sports tracking and even remedial massage receive all-important authentic experiences. 

While Shoemaker said the sector is still “really challenging”, especially given the recent delay in opening up the borders fully to international students, he added it has forced the sector to “reinvent itself”. He also talks about how proud he is that VU has been able to maintain high satisfaction and employability levels throughout the pandemic, attributing much of this to the university's block model that he explains in the podcast.

Up until now, reproduction centred on the notion that DNA is “solely responsible” for influencing the traits of offspring. However, new research conducted at the university has strengthened the idea that other biomolecules, such as RNA or epigenetic factors, play key roles in governing both male fertility and embryo quality. 

The research team uncovered that environmental stressors, such as pollutants that enter our bodies, “disrupt sperm RNA which could then have a detrimental effect on or be lethal to the embryo”. 

Dr Geoffry De Iuliis, Dr Shaun Roman, Professor Brett Nixon and PhD candidate Natalie Trigg comprise the research team. Trigg is the lead author of the paper outlining their research, which has been published in Cell Reports.

Their research highlights “that common environmental factors” that have hitherto been shown to not affect DNA may still have an influence on reproduction due to the influence they have on RNA.

To illustrate this point, De Iuliis cites the example of exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic energy, which is an environmental stressor emitted by mobile phones and WiFi. 

“Radio frequency energy is defined as being non-ionising, which means it can’t immediately alter biomolecules, so can’t directly create DNA damage. Some conclude that it is therefore safe,” De Iuliis says.

“This study opens up the concept that DNA damage is not the be-all and end-all. Perhaps the more subtle RNA changes are important to take note of also.

“Over the last 50 years, some have suggested male fertility has been falling off a cliff. The quality of sperm is certainly going down and the fertility of humans is decreasing.

“Perhaps what we’re seeing is that new environmental stressors that have come about over the past five decades are combining to compromise fertility, but their individual effects are so subtle that we may not see them in isolated research experiments.”

The study

The research team used a chemical - acrylamide - found in small quantities in everyday foods such as chips, toast and particular countries’ drinking water “as a stressor on sperm”. They were then able to conclude that an environmental factor can have an effect on “sperm quality and embryo viability after it has left the testis”. 

“We’re exploring what acrylamide does in terms of damaging the gametes and what that means for future offspring. And this study has shown that it’s not just sperm DNA, it’s also their RNA that are vulnerable to environmental stressors,” Roman explains.

“As the sperm progress from the testis towards the point of ejaculation – a process that takes about one week – they take on some of these epigenetic factors from the male reproductive tract.”

The experiments involved sperm being exposed to the acrylamide both while in the testis and after it had left the testis, maturing in the epididymis. Only the sperm exposed after it had left the testis had a deleterious effect on the embryo, and in many cases it was lethal. 

“These exposures change the RNA species that are delivered to the sperm and that alters the genes that are ‘turned on’ in the resultant embryo,” De Iuliis explains.

“It points us away from the dogma that sperm DNA is the only thing we should be concerned about.

“In our field it’s common to say, ‘sperm are just carriers of DNA, the egg has all the important ingredients that determine the fate of the embryo’, but we are now understanding that sperm carry much more than just DNA, including an epigenetic payload, and changes to either after the sperm have left the protective environment of the testis have important consequences.”

The researchers importantly note that the levels of acrylamide used in experiments were far more than an individual could consume through their diet, and therefore don’t suggest that men change their diet for the time being to avoid the chemical. 

Another key point that Nixon highlights is that “sperm RNA returns to normal” following a relatively short period of ceasing the acrylamide treatment. 

“This finding identifies the critical importance of a male’s health immediately prior to conception and adds to a growing body of data that simple lifestyle changes enacted during this window could have major implications for an individual’s fertility,” he said. 

Improving the future of fertility treatments

“It provides us with a powerful model to identify the mechanisms of how these epigenetic changes take place and the changes we identify have the potential to be used as diagnostic biomarkers of stress exposure,” Roman adds.

“Extrapolating from this, the potential exists for screening sperm from any particular male to see if they have these markers of toxicant exposure. 

“When you understand the molecular biology, then you can go ahead and design your information strategies, your targeting strategies and your therapeutic strategies. We now have the tools to work out how to target pathways, which we’ve only just identified in this paper, that lead to these epigenetic or RNA changes. Now we can target the root components of these pathways, which could lead to a therapeutic intervention.

“It opens the door wide.” 

Siemens Australia Chairman and CEO Jeff Connolly signed off on the MoU and highlighted the needs for education institutions and industries to work more closely than ever. 

“Gone are the days of siloed approaches between universities and industries,” he said. 

“It’s only together that we can truly drive a future workforce with hi-tech skills and job-ready outcomes that will meet the needs of business and society.” 

South Australia’s Flinders University is a founding partner with the South Australian Government of the Tonsley Innovation District, while Siemens has been “an anchor tenant at the site since the early days of the redevelopment”. 

“Flinders University is one of South Australia’s great educational institutions and we’ve had a long-standing relationship with them, especially having experienced the success and growth of the Tonsley redevelopment together,” Connelly added.  

“This MoU is about formalising that relationship and setting us on a path that will support South Australia in vital areas such as defence, food and beverage and energy efficiency.

“I particularly like the Flinders University mission, which is to …change lives and change the world. This very much aligns with our view of the world and the role of technology in transforming the world and creating a sustainable future – environmentally, economically and socially.”

Both Flinders and Siemens see this an opportune, “pivotal time” for the state to secure its future into the long term. In engaging in partnerships such as these, SA can take advantage of “its many strengths and natural assets and opportunities by embracing areas such as digital skills development”.

Professor Colin Stirling, president and vice-chancellor of Flinders University, outlined the necessity of industry and academic collaboration, as well as the importance of the MoU with Siemens. 

“Partnering with Siemens means that we collaborate directly with one of the world’s largest and most technologically advanced companies whose hi-tech software, automation and electrification are behind everything from NASA’s Mars Rover program to major navy and airforce programs in the US and UK, and much of the food and beverage industry including locally famous Coopers Brewery and even Haigh’s Chocolates,” Stirling said. 

“Over the years I’ve been fortunate enough to experience first-hand the power of the German engineering and technology approach and have visited a number of Siemens facilities and reference sites in Germany. Siemens is a very impressive organisation and I look forward to the outcomes this MoU will lead to for our students as well as South Australia in general.

“I want our university to be the source of Australia’s most enterprising graduates.

“And to achieve this we need to be working closely with the most enterprising companies who have passed the test of time. Not only are Siemens the largest industrial software company, the largest automation company and behind much of the world’s electrification but they’re also part of the fabric of South Australia having founded the Australian business right here in 1872 with the commissioning of the Darwin- Adelaide overland telegraph.” 

“In establishing this relationship with Flinders, Siemens is teaming up with an education institution committed to change and to making a difference at a pivotal moment in global manufacturing; a generational step change that is ushering in new waves of automated technologies, and new ways of creating," Stirling stated.

This MoU is geared towards world-changing ambitions such as net zero targets, the transition to the fourth industrial revolution (a German-born concept known as Industry 4.0), the development of more intelligent cities and infrastructure, and bolstering the nation’s sovereign defence capability, in which South Australia plays a key role. 

“By embracing digitalisation including hi-tech software, digital twin technologies and data platforms, our local industries can improve quality, reduce costs and operational downtime, increase speed, achieve higher safety standards, be more efficient with scarce resources, gain flexibility to pivot during times like COVID - and ultimately be more competitive and have a greater positive impact,” Stirling concluded.

 “This MoU is an important signal in the future of the university and in having a far more integrated and collaborative approach to building the workforce of the future.”  

Formerly the Australian College of Applied Psychology, ACAP is a higher education institute and registered training organisation that specialises in delivering accredited courses in psychology, counselling, coaching, criminology, social work and business management and leadership (MBA). 

What the survey found was disturbing, to say the least. Here is some of the participant’s feedback:

• Slightly more than half of workers (53 per cent) reported hiding a mental or physical health condition to avoid judgement at work or discrimination.
• Nearly half of participants (47 per cent) – approximately 5.6 million workers – didn’t “feel comfortable enough to be open about their personal interests, values, culture and/or lifestyle at work”. 
• Just shy of half (49 per cent) of survey respondents said their workplace “has introduced mental health and wellbeing initiatives to 'tick boxes',”. 

The survey and its resulting report also highlighted poor soft skills among managers and workers drive worker concerns, and significant differences in perceptions among generational groups, particularly between Gen Z/Millennials and Baby Boomers. 

The research revealed that a lack of soft skills, or "people skills'' among leaders and managers was “a key driver behind worker concerns”. For example, 65 per cent of respondents reported “their manager/boss struggled with soft skills, particularly empathy (27 per cent), effective communication (25 per cent), active listening (21 per cent), flexibility (21 per cent), and emotional intelligence (20 per cent)”. 

The survey also illuminated stark gaps in perceptions, particularly between the Gen Z/Millennials and Baby Boomers. For example, survey results show that Millennials are 20 per cent more likely to not be “comfortable enough to be open about their personal interests, values, culture and/or lifestyle at work”. 

Furthermore, 54 per cent of Millennials articulate that they don’t feel at ease enough to talk about their personal values, interests, culture and/or lifestyle in the workplace. 

Tokenistic acts?

“Meanwhile, Millennials (55 per) and Gen Xers (53 per cent) were significantly more likely than Baby Boomers (35 per cent) to say they feel like their workplace has introduced mental health and wellbeing initiatives to ‘tick boxes’ while, day to day, their manager shows little if any genuine concern or empathy for their wellbeing,” the report said. 

The report also highlights that, since the COVID pandemic, employees “have increasingly weighed up their experiences at work, including whether to return to the office at all or change jobs”. The report refers to a recent survey, finding that despite this emphasis on workplace wellbeing and inclusion, “one in two Australian workers still lack confidence to bring their whole selves to work and feel lip service is being paid to their mental health”. 

This latest report comes on the back of other organisations struggling to ameliorate staff turnover and replace critical skills gaps.  

A 2020 Federal Productivity Commission report put the figure of mental-health related absenteeism and presenteeism at $17 million annually in Australia. 

“In an age where we are repeatedly told ‘to be ourselves’ and that ‘it’s OK not to be OK’ at work, these latest findings suggest that many Australians still feel very guarded in the workplace,” said ACAP CEO, George Garrop. 

“While over the past two years, many organisations have boosted their mental health, wellbeing, diversity and inclusion initiatives, our research indicates that these initiatives are not always leading to meaningful outcomes or positive sentiment for workers.

“The data also tells us that many Australian workplaces could be doing more to acknowledge the unique values, needs, personalities and circumstances of their people – and that managers and leaders could deliver a wealth of collective benefits through operating with key soft skills like empathy, emotional intelligence and active listening. 

“At the Australian College of Applied Professions, we have a particular interest in the people skills required to make workplaces better environments to thrive in. Through programs such as ACAP’s recently launched MBA, managers and leaders can develop the critical soft skills they need to ensure their workforce feels valued, accepted and empowered to do their best,” Garrop said. 

The pandemic has forced upon us all a re-evaluation of what ‘is’ the workplace and what ‘is’ home. It has changed the relationship between an employer and employee in this changed university context. It has also caused us to revisit what roles we play and how we deliver a multi-dimensional student experience, which for many decades has assumed close physical in-person interaction. There is no doubt that COVID has metaphorically shaken our kaleidoscope hard and the full picture is not yet clear. 

What we do know is that the pandemic has already been a watershed moment, accelerating the availability and use by universities of online technologies such as virtual learning environments and learning analytics. In general, it has already increased their level of acceptance by students and staff alike. It has also posed challenges, for example around the balance between old and new pedagogies and the issue of intellectual property. 

This has brought into sharp contrast a wide range of issues. For example our staff are seeking more control of content and delivery, at the same time as valuing co-creation more than ever before. Our students are wanting more personalised learning at the same time as expecting consistency of experience. In the British context, Brexit has added yet another tier of complexity and uncertainty in which UK universities have to operate. But across the globe, the geo-political and global context has changed more quickly in the last two years than in any similar period before. 

In this extraordinary context, what are the implications for universities in their quest to recruit international staff and students, and in the global race not just to attract, but to retain talent? What does appear clear is that our personal values are coming to the fore and shaping decisions about our futures. Almost everyone is navigating personal loss and grief, at the same time as taking a hard look at our professional lives, the place we work, the satisfaction we feel, and importance we place on these issues. We are also revisiting where we live, where we travel to, and how much work or study we want to do.

In this context, organisational culture and values have been a strong touch-point for many of these reflections, framed by how universities are acting in the pandemic. As Robert Ordever describes, danger values are seen as ‘nice to have’ in the good times rather than as a necessity at all times – especially in a crisis. Where the values were already weak, or poorly articulated and understood (by staff and students in universities), the COVID pandemic has brutally exposed this, as you can read about here.  

Articulating and living values and culture have been key issues at the University of Essex (recognised by the award of Times Higher Education University of the Year in 2018). The university’s values framed the university’s approach to decision-making at the outbreak and during the COVID pandemic – and it provided a prism to focus on what the university could control and where we could focus our energy to best effect. This meant regularly revisiting the founding mission, being daring and taking calculated risks. Of course, mistakes were made along the way and Essex is self-critical about whether it was brave enough and imaginative enough in decision making. But tremendous effort was invested in trying to get the basis of decisions right and explaining their rationale. 

Of course, the current vantage point is one in which the pandemic is not yet over. All earthquakes are destructive, but aftershocks often cause more damage. So we should be cautious about long term conclusions. It is too early to say whether the pandemic will loosen or re-orientate bonds of loyalty. It may lead to a flight of staff and students to universities that have both talked the talk and walked the walk over the last 18 months. We may yet have an even greater individual and collective readjustment ahead of us.

Universities in the UK and Australia will be further exposed to the outcomes of these many individual readjustments, as we have seen in the career decisions of a number of Australian vice-chancellors this year. But how universities articulate their values and culture, and how this manifests itself for the ‘lived experience’ of staff and students, will be a key part of whether universities just survive or thrive. Perhaps longer term, we may see the extent to which it shakes up existing hierarchies in how universities are compared and valued.

This was the topic of a conversation in our HEDx podcast conversation last week that you can listen to here. What matters for all universities in the period ahead will be ensuring they appeal to the changed needs of their staff and students by having well-articulated values driving their decisions. It will call for optimised organisational culture, brand propositions and student recruitment approaches that align with those values. University leaders will also need to be leading differently to reflect the picture in the kaleidoscope when the picture clears. These new opportunities for organisational culture, brand, recruitment and leadership are a focus for some of the hack-a-thons HEDx will be delivering with the sector in 2022.

Emeritus Professor Martin Betts, Co-Founder of HEDx

Professor Anthony Forster, Vice-Chancellor of University of Essex

In the first quarter of 2021, D2L conducted a global survey aimed at understanding some of the key themes that have emerged since the rapid shift to online learning in the higher education sector. Based on nearly 5,000 survey responses, including roughly 500 from Australia, the survey's finding informed the report 'Digital transformation in education'.

Campus Review spoke ro regional director of the A/NZ branch of D2L, Tony Maguire, about the report's main findings, as well as recommendations for the use of digital skills in the future. 

One of the most salient points of the report was that "a digital skills gap" existed, and teachers and academics cited this as the biggest hurdle they faced – trumping both resources and infrastructure. Indeed, many felt unsupported in developing their digital fluency. Improving the student experience was another key priority for respondents, with Maguire adding that "student experience is king". 

The D2L regional director also provides some useful advice about integrating and using digital technology in the higher education sector in the future, including ensuring the opinions of both students and academics are heard when new tech or platforms are introduced. Maguire concludes with some sage advice he paraphrases from Professor Liz Johnson, DVC of education at Deakin University:

"Choose your tools carefully. Choose the ones that teachers are most familiar with and those that they and their students will use in their future jobs. And then embed them throughout your teaching."