Meet the Chair of the Technology Working Group

1 day ago
6 min read

Catholic education is operating in an increasingly complex digital environment. From cyber security and privacy obligations to AI, social media restrictions, and connected devices, technology leaders are navigating unprecedented change.

In this interview, we speak with Lee Swift, Chair of the Technology Working Group at Catholic Network Australia, about the group’s priorities, the Technology Assessment Platform (TAP), and how collaboration is shaping a safer, more confident approach to technology across Catholic education.

Q: As the new Chair of the Technology Working Group, what are your key priorities?

My priority is helping Catholic education systems navigate technology in a way that is safe, deliberate, and sustainable. Schools are facing increasing pressure — cyber threats are growing, regulatory expectations are tightening, and technology is changing rapidly.

Through the Technology Working Group, our focus is on collaboration and shared assurance. We want to lift maturity collectively so systems and schools aren’t responding to these challenges in isolation. That means sharing knowledge, supporting digital inclusion, and collaborating on approaches to reduce risk without stifling innovation.

Q: One initiative gaining momentum is the Technology Assessment Platform (TAP). What is TAP, and why was it needed?

Every diocese and system of schools faces the same challenge: thousands of digital applications being used across classrooms to achieve different learning outcomes, often hosted in different jurisdictions and governed by varying standards.

Historically, each system had to assess these tools independently — which is time-consuming, costly, and difficult to scale. Some dioceses can afford dedicated resources for this work, while others simply can’t.

TAP was created to benefit every Australian Catholic school. It provides a nationally coordinated process for assessing digital technologies, with a strong focus on privacy, security, and risk. We can reduce the redundant technology assessment efforts. Every assessment can now benefit everyone, demonstrating the strength of Catholic education working together toward a common goal.

Q: How will TAP change what’s being done now?

The biggest change is moving from fragmented, localised assessments to a shared national model. Instead of each system starting from scratch, assessments can be completed once and accessed by every system.

Importantly, TAP doesn’t remove local decision-making. Schools and systems still choose what works best for their context — but they do so with clearer, evidence-based insight into privacy, security, and risk considerations.

Q: Why should educators and school leaders care about TAP?

Educators and school leaders care about TAP because it removes friction while increasing confidence. Teachers want to use tools that genuinely benefit students, and IT teams aren’t trying to slow that down — their role is to make sure technology can be used safely, responsibly, and at scale.

TAP removes the burden from individual schools and leaders of having to interpret privacy policies, assess security risks, or wait extended periods for local reviews. Instead, it provides a trusted, streamlined process that:

Reduces the need for schools to assess applications independently
Ensures applications are reviewed by qualified technical and risk experts
Accelerates assessment and approval timeframes
Frees local IT teams to focus on directly supporting teachers and school staff

If a tool has already been assessed, schools can proceed with confidence. If not, it can be submitted through the diocese, with the option to escalate for broader consideration.

Importantly, TAP supports equity across the sector — ensuring smaller, regional, or resource-constrained schools have access to the same level of assurance as larger systems, without slowing innovation in the classroom.

Q: How have the recent social media age restrictions impacted school IT teams?

The new social media age-based legislation shifts more responsibility back onto platforms themselves, rather than placing the full burden on schools and families. That’s an important step. However, the reality is nuanced. Some platforms captured by the legislation — YouTube being a good example — also deliver genuine educational value, which makes blanket restrictions difficult in practice.

The biggest challenge for school IT teams is implementation clarity. Social media platforms evolve rapidly, definitions can shift, and enforcing age-based restrictions consistently across networks, devices, and year levels is complex — particularly when students are increasingly using personal devices beyond the school network.

For IT teams, the task is less about finding a single technical solution and more about balancing technical controls with policy intent, student wellbeing, and practical limits on what schools can realistically control. There is no one-size-fits-all answer, which is why shared learning, sector collaboration, and adaptive approaches are so critical at this point in time.

Q: As cyber threats become more frequent and sophisticated, and schools remain a high-value target, where does CNA see the greatest opportunities to strengthen cyber resilience at a national level?

Education will continue to be targeted because of the volume and sensitivity of the data it holds. CNA sees a strong opportunity to respond more effectively by being open with one another — sharing insights, experiences, and lessons learned rather than operating in isolation.

There is also a growing emphasis on resilience. Cyber security isn’t only about prevention; it’s about how systems respond, recover, and support one another when incidents occur. CNA provides a trusted forum where education systems can safely share incident learnings, near-misses, and emerging risks, helping others anticipate challenges and strengthen their own preparedness.

Q: How does this connect back to initiatives like TAP?

TAP embeds security and privacy considerations earlier in the technology lifecycle. By asking better questions before tools are adopted, schools reduce exposure and improve resilience.

It’s a practical example of how collaboration can materially improve cyber outcomes across Catholic education.

Q: Internet of Things (IoT) devices are becoming more common in schools. What risks and opportunities do you see?

IoT devices — such as cameras, access control systems, and smart building technologies — offer real benefits in safety and efficiency.

The challenge is that many operate quietly in the background and are often managed outside traditional IT governance. Without clear ownership and visibility, they can expand a school’s attack surface without anyone realising. This is another area where shared guidance and assessment can significantly reduce risk.

Q: How do you see the role of IT leaders in schools evolving?

IT leadership at the school level provides invaluable, on-the-ground insight that directly informs better system-level decisions. There’s no substitute for being close to teachers and school staff— understanding their pressures, constraints, and daily realities — and that local presence builds credibility that can’t be replicated from a central office alone.

It’s also critical for the professional development of IT staff. Many of today’s technology leaders in education started their careers in school-based roles, learning firsthand how to balance customer service with technical expertise within a school context. Those early experiences — working directly with teachers, students, and school leaders — shape how effective IT professionals communicate, prioritise, and problem-solve.

At the same time, technology literacy among senior leaders is no longer optional. The rapid acceleration of AI and digital risk has reinforced the need for executive teams to stay actively engaged in technology, data, and risk governance. We’re seeing a genuine cultural shift where technology is increasingly recognised as a strategic enabler of learning and wellbeing — not simply an operational function.

Q: What are some common technology or security blind spots you see in school environments?

Data resilience is a big one. Data now lives across multiple cloud platforms, and backups alone aren’t enough — they need to be tested and recoverable after an incident.

There’s also a tendency to focus only on email threats, when risks now extend to AI-enabled deepfakes, identity misuse, and long-standing access rights that haven’t evolved with long-standing staff careers. Understanding where data lives, who has access, and how it’s protected is critical.

Q: What advice would you give schools feeling overwhelmed by the pace of change?

You’re not alone. The pace of technology isn’t slowing down, and it can feel overwhelming.

That’s where organisations like CNA matter. Having a safe space to share experiences, learn from peers, and collaborate makes a real difference. We can’t slow the technology evolution — but together, we can approach it thoughtfully and confidently.

Q: Looking ahead, what’s the overarching opportunity for Catholic education in this space?

The opportunity is collaboration. No single school or system can keep pace with every challenge alone.

Through CNA, we can lift standards collectively, share knowledge openly, and adopt technology in a way that’s safe, ethical, and aligned with our educational mission. That collective approach is our greatest strength.

Interested in contributing to the Technology Working Group or learning more about TAP? We’d love to hear from you.