��һ�ǿ�����

Principals and educators say the Ministry of Education’s U-turn on artificial intelligence leaves too much up to them.

The Ministry’s backtracked on last year’s stance - now saying it can be used to help teachers mark work more efficiently.

Its new guidance urges caution and human oversight but discourages AI tools for complex content, internal NCEA assessments, or summative marking.

Last year’s advice warned teachers against using AI to create or mark work, calling it potentially unfair and discriminatory.

It comes as some Universities step away from using AI detection in assessment - like Massey.

Canterbury University Associate Professor of Digital Education, Kathryn MacCallum said the latest guidance assumes too much understanding from teachers.

“My worry is that we are putting a lot of responsibility on the teacher to take responsibility, to have oversight, to understand how to use these tools appropriately,” she said.

MacCallum supports using AI for feedback, but not for final grades.

“We shouldn’t ever give a mark that isn’t human, because that’s the final grade - and we need to be confident in that process.”

She says it’s concerning the Government wants to expand AI use in NCEA assessments.

“I presume it would be for assessments that are very clear when there is a correct or incorrect answer, but if they start to use it more widely into the the assessments that are becoming more judgment based, that’s when there’s a bit of concern.”

Ministry Business Operations’ Manager, Claire Eden, said the change reflects growing public debate around AI in education.

“Digital technologies are rapidly evolving, public discussion on the use of AI tools in education has intensified.”

She said this guidance gives teachers practical direction in what is a fast-moving and uncertain space.

Post Primary Teachers’ Association President Chris Abercrombie said the teacher–student relationship must remain central to marking.

“AI must support - not replace - teachers’ professional judgements. Human oversight is essential.”

He said students should also be told when AI is used.

“PPTA has had feedback that young people do not necessarily want their work to be marked by a machine.”

Abercrombie said the new guidance conflicts with Education Minister Erica Stanford’s recent suggestion that AI could mark all internal and external assessments by 2030.

He said it’s confusing for teachers - especially since AI is discouraged for internal marking but being phased in for external assessments.

The PPTA is now seeking clarification from the Minister, the Ministry and NZQA on how AI could accurately assess non-written work - such as media films or drama performances - and whether restrictions on AI use could limit how teachers design assessments.

MacCallum adds the guidance raises more questions than it answers.

“What specific tools are we talking about? What models sit behind them? How are outcomes validated? Assessment is complex - the policy needs to reflect that complexity.”

Jaime Cunningham is a Christchurch-based reporter with a focus on education, social issues and general news. She joined ��һ�ǿ�����talk ZB in 2023, after working as a sports reporter at the Christchurch Star.