By Professor Michelle Lazarus, Professor Danny Liu, Associate Professor Tim Fawns
Posted Wednesday 22 April, 2026

At Monash, we recognise that the most significant questions in higher education rarely have simple solutions. Challenge Conversations are a dialogue designed to help our teaching community explore complex educational problems.

Inspired by the PAAIR project, these conversations bring together panels of specialists, students, and practitioners with different perspectives on an issue. Their task is not to solve the challenge, but to think it through out loud, grappling with messy intersections of technology, pedagogy, inclusivity, and leadership, and more.

In this sixth conversation, Professor Michelle Lazarus (Monash University), Professor Danny Liu (University of Sydney) and Associate Professor Tim Fawns (Monash University) explored whether universities are brave enough to rethink what they are trying to achieve for students and society.

This conversation was held 14th April, 2026. The recording and key takeaways from the conversation are below. 

The captions in this recording are auto-generated. Please excuse any minor inaccuracies or phonetic errors. You can also explore our previous Challenge Conversations.

Panellists

• Professor Michelle Lazarus, Director of the Monash Centre for Human Anatomy Education, Monash University
• Professor Danny Liu, Division of Teaching and Learning, University of Sydney
• Associate Professor Tim Fawns, Monash Education Academy, Monash University

Key takeaways

A Higher Education identity crisis

Is the purpose of higher education to prepare students for existing jobs, future jobs, critical thinking, community contribution, or all of these – and more – all at once? Perhaps bravery means being willing to hold multiple purposes and values in tension and to navigate the entangled values of students, staff, industries and communities.

“The students, the staff, the community… individuals within those groups all have different values and we don’t seem to consider those. It is nearly impossible to sit with complexity without discussing those values.” — Michelle Lazarus

We also need to recognise the deep assumptions of higher education’s Western structures and values. Are those of us entrenched in Western structures brave enough to question the value of these while also considering cosmologies that have existed long-before these contemporary societies?

GenAI is a mirror

Generative AI is amplifying tensions that were already there. It brings into sharper focus long-standing questions about what counts as learning, what kinds of knowledge and capabilities universities value, and whether we need to be braver in reorienting curriculum, assessment and reward systems.

“It’s really just the mirror on the wall showing us our greatest challenges that already existed.” — Michelle Lazarus

Making meaningful change to address these challenges is complicated by existing structures that continue to reward older ways of working.

“Structures in higher education are… cementing the status quo… serving a more dated form of higher education than the world may need right now.” — Danny Liu

The discussion also touched on environmental concerns, the reproduction of colonising discourses, and the broader ways AI is becoming embedded in institutional systems and social life. Conversations about AI in higher education need to go beyond simple questions about whether students use AI tools. They also need to consider the assumptions built into those tools, the priorities they reflect, the futures they may shape, and the responsibilities universities have in helping students navigate that complexity.

Change starts with brave communities

Complexity does not respond well to rigid, one-size-fits-all solutions. Different institutions, disciplines and communities face different needs, so a more nimble sector must respond to context while still holding on to broad educational purposes such as inquiry, belonging, and critical engagement.

“We know that we cannot come up with a blanket solution to education that will fit everyone” — Tim Fawns

Change cannot be achieved by individuals or done in silos. Communities of practice, grassroots efforts, and collective action all matter. The Castlereagh Statement is one example of collective vision-setting across sectors.

“We are the system and the system changes because people like us change it from the ground up.” — Danny Liu

For educators and leaders, that may begin with sitting with discomfort, questioning established norms, and taking the next step, even when the destination or even the direction is not yet clear.

“Take the next step and be open to that not being the last step.” — Michelle Lazarus

_{Note: Extraction of quotes and paraphrasing for this blog was supported by ChatGPT.}