AI Isn’t Failing Education. Avoiding Humanity Is.

There was a big article in The Australian over the weekend about AI—particularly ChatGPT—and how it’s supposedly failing the university system.

Let me be clear: ChatGPT is not failing education.Government policy and outdated university systems are.

I completed a face-to-face master’s degree at RMIT a couple of years ago. And I can say with absolute confidence that a large majority—if not all—students used ChatGPT. Universities complain loudly about it.

But here’s the truth they don’t want to face:

AI didn’t break the system. It exposed how weak the system already was.

Universities are meant to be cutting-edge. Instead, many are years behind reality. And that’s a joke—especially when there are many lecturers inside those institutions who are brilliant, committed, and genuinely want to teach. The issue isn’t the people. It’s the structure.

The Solution Is Simple: Humanity

It is remarkably easy to tell if someone understands a subject.

It’s called face-to-face testing.

Do you understand the language?
Do you understand the concepts?
Can you explain them without hiding?

When we were tested face-to-face, you had no choice but to work hard and genuinely understand the coursework. You couldn’t outsource comprehension. You couldn’t bluff humanity.

AI hasn’t removed learning. It has removed excuses.

What we’re seeing now—in universities, in business, and in real estate—is people using AI to hide. Hiding from responsibility. Hiding from real interaction. Hiding from being challenged.

And that’s not an AI problem. That’s a courage problem.

Real Estate Has Been Doing This for Years

Let’s not pretend this is new.

Real estate has had its own version of ChatGPT for decades. It’s called Microsoft Word + cut and paste.

Copy the last campaign.
Copy the last script.
Copy the last promise.

And the question is always asked: Is that the agent’s fault?

If nobody challenges them—
If buyers don’t challenge,
If sellers don’t challenge,
If the system rewards repetition over responsibility—

Then no, it’s not entirely the agent’s fault. They’re businesspeople. If the system allows them to take the money without accountability, many will.

Which leads to a question I’ve asked for years.

Why Do Sellers Pay for Advertising?

I’ll say it again.

I have no idea why sellers pay for advertising.

If an agent believes your home is worth $4 million, and they want $30,000 in advertising to sell it—why isn’t that coming out of their commission?

I have no issue with agents charging strong commissions if they deliver results. In fact, I support it.

But in most selling advocacy work we do, advertising spend is negligible or unnecessary. Why? Because we use agents, not billboards, to create outcomes.

Here’s a simple principle:

• If an agent says they can achieve a price, they should share the risk.

• If they don’t achieve it, they should reimburse the costs.

I would feel comfortable doing that.

The only time sellers should fund advertising is when they want a number well above market reality—say $6 million when the market says $4 million. That’s a different game. You’re asking for hope, not probability.

No One Is Being Failed Anymore—And That’s the Problem

Universities are now too scared to fail students.

Too scared of funding loss.
Too scared of legal consequences.

Everyone gets a gold medal.

That’s not progress. That’s cowardice.

And real estate is no different. Results fail, campaigns fail, pricing fails—and nobody takes responsibility. It’s always “the market.”

It’s never shared accountability.

Buyers complain endlessly about agents—yet refuse to engage representation, even when they know the agent doesn’t work for them.

That’s not bad luck. That’s insanity.

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

AI, Used Properly, Is a Gift

Let me be clear: I am absolutely pro-AI.

I’ve been writing about AI in real estate for at least four years. Used well, it improves life.

Just this weekend, I published 15 new property ratings.

• You can see I physically attended the homes—there’s video.

• There are handwritten rating sheets—my thoughts.

• Those thoughts were then structured through a GPT trained on how I think.

The concepts are mine.
AI simply helped express them better.

That’s the upside: AI improves communication, not replaces thinking.

The same applies to charity work we’re involved in across Africa—particularly in child surgery programs.

AI is helping:

• Doctors communicate better

• Community workers coordinate better

• Donors understand impact better

• Data be tracked more transparently

Used correctly, AI reduces corruption, mistakes, and inertia.

Education, Real Estate, Life

AI is not something to fear.

Calculators didn’t destroy mathematics. They freed humans to focus on reasoning instead of arithmetic.

AI should do the same.

When used well, AI gives you more time:

• More time with lecturers and students

• More time with clients

• More time with buyers and sellers

• More time with your children

• More time with the people who matter

That’s the real opportunity.

Not less humanity.

More of it.

The future isn’t about banning AI.

It’s about designing systems that reward understanding, accountability, and human presence.

Those who avoid that will keep complaining.

Those who embrace it will lead.

— Mal James

AI, Education, and Real Estate: Why Humanity Still Matters

Sunday, 8th February 2026

There was a big article in The Australian on the weekend about AI and ChatGPT, particularly how it’s supposedly “failing” the university system. Having completed a face-to-face master’s course at RMIT a couple of years ago, I can confirm it’s 100% true that a large proportion—if not all—students use ChatGPT. And yes, universities complain about it.

But here’s the thing: it’s not ChatGPT that’s failing education. It’s the government and university systems that are failing to introduce new approaches to deal with it.

Universities Need to Catch Up

Universities are meant to be cutting edge. I had lecturers there that I absolutely loved and respected, people who genuinely wanted to teach. But the system itself is so far behind, it’s frankly a joke.

The solution is actually very simple: humanity.

What universities—and businesses, and many other situations—are doing is hiding from humanity. They’re using ChatGPT (or similar tools) to avoid real human interaction and assessment. But humanity will solve this problem.

Face-to-face testing will solve all the issues. Do you understand the language? Do you understand the subject? Do you understand the concepts? Face-to-face testing will answer those questions definitively. When we had to do face-to-face testing in my course, you really had to work hard to understand the coursework you were doing.

Real Estate’s Version of ChatGPT

Real estate is no different. For years, there’s been a version of ChatGPT in our industry—it’s just called Microsoft Word cut and paste. Cut and paste, cut and paste, cut and paste. That’s all some agents do.

But is it the agent’s fault if they can continually get away with it? If no buyer is challenging them, no seller is challenging them, then they’re just businessmen taking the path of least resistance. If they don’t have to work hard and they just take the money—well, is that really their fault?

The Advertising Question

This brings me to something I’ve never understood: why do sellers pay for advertising?

Let me repeat that: I have no idea why sellers pay for advertising in most cases. Why is the selling agent not paying for advertising?

Think about it this way: if you think your property is worth $4 million, and the agents think it’s worth $4 million, and they say they’re going to sell it for that price but you need to spend $30,000 on advertising—why aren’t they spending the $30,000 out of their commission?

I have no issue with agents charging a higher commission if they deliver results. I’ve always believed in charging a solid commission when you deliver. In our selling advocacy work, we have almost no expenditure anyway because we don’t use advertising—we use agents.

Here’s a simple solution: if you’ve got an EOI and you think you want $4 million and the agent says you’ll get it, why is the agent not reimbursing you for all the costs if it doesn’t happen? It’s really simple. I would feel comfortable doing that if I was guaranteeing a certain price.

Now, if you want $6 million and everybody thinks your property is worth $4 million, that’s different. That’s when you should perhaps look to spend the advertising money yourself. You’re well above where everybody thinks is fair and reasonable, and more than likely, you won’t get it.

The Accountability Problem

The world is changing. In universities, there are no penalties anymore for not being good at something. People are too scared. Universities are too scared to fail students—they’re worried about lost revenue or lawsuits. Everybody has to get a gold medal. That’s rubbish.

Real estate’s the same, and it’s been getting worse for many years. Just look at recent results. Nobody is taking responsibility for results that don’t work. I’m not saying it’s all the agent’s fault, but it’s a shared responsibility. Agents should be sharing that responsibility as much as sellers.

And buyers—you can get representation. If you’re constantly complaining about this and that, about how such and such didn’t happen, but you understand (or have been told many times) that the agent is not working for you, they’re working for the other side… why would you expect any help? Is that not the definition of insanity? Constantly being let down and disappointed by behavior that keeps repeating itself?

The Right Way to Use AI

I am all for AI, by the way. I think AI is the future. If you handle it well, I can see it really improving life. I can also see various technologies hurting lives if they’re not handled in the right way.

I use AI a lot. I’ve been writing about AI in real estate for at least four years. It’s a fantastic thing.

Just this morning, Sunday the 8th of February, I put up 15 new property ratings. These are houses you can see I’ve been to—there’s video showing you that I have been there. There’s a handwritten rating sheet showing you my thoughts. Then I’ve had those thoughts combined into a GPT that basically understands the way I think, and out come the words in the rating.

Those are my concepts, but AI is brilliant in that it can help express my thoughts a lot better than I’ve been able to in the past. That’s the big plus: AI can help you communicate a lot better.

AI for Good

AI is brilliant for the overseas charity we’re involved in—our child surgery program in Africa. Many people in Africa are using AI. Some inappropriately, sure, but many we’re involved with are using it appropriately to communicate better with doctors, community workers, and donors. Not perfect, but certainly getting there.

Using AI to analyse individual surgeries and charity donations to make sure they’re going to the right spot will, in my opinion, help reduce corruption, reduce inertia, and reduce mistakes.

From a buyer agency point of view, we can communicate far better to individual clients about many more properties, giving people more choices because we’re out there communicating in a far better way than we did four or five years ago.

The Bottom Line

In education, AI can really improve the learning process if people are smart about it. Should we get rid of calculators because they don’t make mistakes when the input is correct? Of course not. Similarly, don’t get rid of AI—deal with AI. Work out how it can be used in the correct way.

When AI is working really well, it gives you more time to talk personally to the people that count: your lecturer, your students, your agent, your buyers, your children, your customers.

If you use AI correctly, you can use your time better to help and communicate with those you care about and that are important to you.

That’s what it’s really all about—using technology to enhance humanity, not replace it.

Big article in The Australian on the weekend on AI, and in particular ChatGPT, and how it’s failing the university system. I completed a face-to-face master’s course the year before last, a couple of years, at RMIT, and can I say that it’s 100% true that there are the large, large, if not all, students use ChatGPT, and the universities complain. However, it’s not the universities that, it’s not ChatGPT, sorry, that is failing education. It’s the government and the university systems that are not introducing new systems to be able to deal with it. I mean, they’re meant to be cutting edge, and there’s many lecturers there that I absolutely loved and respected and want to teach you. But there’s not a system, it’s not, there’s the system, universities are meant to be cutting edge, but they are so far behind, it’s a joke. So, it’s very, very simple how to tell if somebody knows something or not. It’s called humanity, and it’s what universities and many other situations, what businesses all that are using ChatGPT to hide everything in these days. What they’re doing is they’re hiding from humanity. Humanity will solve this. Face-to-face testing will solve all the issues with, do you understand the language? Do you understand the subject? Do you understand the concepts? Face-to-face testing will do that. And when we had to do face-to-face testing as we did some of the time, you really had to work hard to understand. The coursework that you were doing. Real estate is no different. For years, there’s been a version of ChatGPT. It’s just called Microsoft Word cut and paste. And that’s all people do. Cut and paste, cut and paste, cut and paste. But is it the agent’s fault? If they can continually get away with cut and paste and cut and paste because nobody is actually challenging and no buyer is challenging, no seller is challenging them, well then, is that the agent’s fault? They’re, after all, they’re businessmen. If they don’t have to work hard and they just take the money, fine. So what should be happening there? Well, I have no idea why sellers pay for advertising. Can I repeat that? I have no idea why sellers pay for advertising. Why is not the selling agent paying for advertising? Not in all cases, but in the majority of cases. Now, if you think a property is worth $4 million and the other, the agents think your property is worth $4 million and they say they’re gonna go and sell your property and you need to spend $30,000, well, why are they not spending the $30,000 coming out of their commission? Now, I have no issue that they should be charging a higher commission. I’ve always believed in charging a solid commission if you deliver the results. A lot of the results for selling advocacy that we’re involved in have almost no expenditure anyway, or very negligible, because we don’t use advertising, because we use agents. So that is one simple solution. If you’ve got an EOI and you think you want $4 million and the agent says you’ll get it, well, why is the agent not reimbursing you for all the costs if it doesn’t happen? It’s really simple. Certainly, I would feel comfortable to do that. I would feel comfortable that if I was saying that a certain price was being got now, that I would… Now, of course, if you think, if you want $6 million and everybody thinks you’re $4 million, that’s the time when you should be perhaps looking to spend the advertising money yourself. You’re well above where everybody thinks fair and reasonable, and more than likely, it won’t happen. So yeah, that’s a situation where I totally agree that you should, you as a seller, should be paying. The world is changing. In universities, there are no penalties anymore for not being good at something. People are too scared. The universities are too scared to fail people. They’re too scared to fail people because, well, they either won’t receive the money or they’re worried about lawsuits. Everybody has to get a gold medal. That’s a load of rubbish. Real estate’s the same, and it’s been getting worse and worse and worse for many years. Just look at the results recently. Nobody is taking responsibility for a result that’s not working. Now, I’m certainly not saying it’s all the agent’s fault in any way, shape or form, but it’s a shared responsibility. And agents should be sharing it in as much as the sellers. And buyers, buyers, you can get representation. And if you’re constantly going to be whinging about this and that because such and such didn’t happen, when you understand or it’s been told to you many times that the agent is not working for you, the agent is working for the other side, so why would you expect anything, any help? Is that not the definition of insanity? Constantly being let down and disappointed by behavior that… takes recreating itself. So, I am all for AI, by the way. I think AI is the future. If you handle it well, I can see it really, really improving life. That’s my opinion. I can see various other technologies improving lives, and I can also see those other technologies hurting lives if they’re not handled in the right way.So, I use AI a lot. I’ve been writing about AI in real estate for, I think at least, at least four years. And it’s a fantastic thing. I’ve just put up 15 new ratings this morning, Sunday, the 8th of February. Now, they’re houses that you can see I’ve been to because there’s a video there showing you that I have been to. There’s a handwritten rating sheet showing you that they are my thoughts. And then I’ve had those thoughts combined into a GPT that basically has the way I think and out has come the words in the rating. Now, they are my concepts, but AI is brilliant in that it can help express my thoughts a lot better than what I’ve been able to in the past. So, there’s a big plus.The big plus is that AI can make you or can help you communicate a lot better. AI is brilliant for the overseas charity that we’re involved in, or the overseas surgery, child surgery program in Africa. Many people in Africa are using AI. I’m sure some are using it inappropriately, but a number that we’re involved with are using it appropriately to be able to communicate better to doctors, to be able to communicate better to community workers, to be able to communicate better to donors. Not perfect, but certainly getting there. And using AI to be able to analyse a lot of little individual surgeries, a lot of little individual charity donations to make sure they’re going in the right spot, actually, in my opinion, will help reduce corruption, will help reduce inertia, will help reduce mistakes. So for me, I can see AI working in that area really well. I can also see AI, it does work well in real estate when used. As from a buyer agency point of view, we can seriously communicate a lot better to individual clients about a lot more properties and giving people more choices because we are out there and communicating in a far better way than we did four or five years ago. Similarly, finally, education, AI, in my opinion, can really improve the education process if people are smart. I mean, don’t get, should we get rid of calculators because they actually don’t make mistakes if the input is correct when you’re working through maths? Well, get rid of AI because there are some areas. Well, no, deal with AI. Work out how it can actually be used in the correct way and simply, AI should, when it’s working really well, give you a lot more time to be able to talk personally to the people that count, be them your lecturer, be them your student, be it in real estate, be it your agent, be it the buyer, in life, be it your children, in work, be it your customers. If you use AI correctly, you can use more time or the time better to help and communicate with those that you care about and that are important to you. Write a blog for marketnews based only on my input here