Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
A
If this episode makes you think, please let us know in the comments and support us by subscribing and leaving a review. Thank you. Today we are exploring an article from the Guardian titled Safe from AI which jobs will help you thrive in the future? What struck me immediately was a finding buried within the piece. Less than half only 47% of parents would actually recommend their child pursue AI a career in construction, despite experts saying these hands on trades offer some of the most AI resistant career opportunities. That's a huge disconnect, isn't it? The article delves into how AI is going to reshape the world of work, but crucially it doesn't just focus on the threat, it looks at how people can future proof their careers, asking experts across various industries what impact AI will truly have and which jobs might just be less affected. And what's interesting for us in education is that many of the insights about AI proof teaching career paths align so perfectly with the core principles we've been talking about for months. It's not about finding jobs that AI can't touch, but rather understanding what AI can't be. First, let's look at what makes some jobs inherently resilient to AI. According to these experts. You've got professions like medicine, childcare and hospitality all highlighted as areas where human connection, judgment and bespoke care are simply irreplaceable. Hira Malik, a superintendent, pharmacist and co founder of USHK Pharmacy, points out that while admin heavy healthcare roles think medical secretaries, prescription process and call handling are vulnerable to automation, pharmacists, doctors and nurses, those making clinical decisions and carrying responsibility for patient safety remain far less susceptible. She puts it so simply, AI can help organize information and flag risks, but it cannot decide whether treatment is safe or appropriate. And this is the bit that really got me thinking about teaching. Dr. Ria Zeger, a consultant plastic and reconstructive surgeon, says plastic surgery is too, too bespoke and too individualized. Every patient is different. This echoes a core belief of mine Machines can compute, but they cannot wonder, they cannot care. They lack the nuanced judgment and empathetic connection that defines human interaction. Nowhere is this clearer than in child care. Brett Wigdorts, founder and chief executive of the child care agency Tiny, makes a really strong case that child minding is one of the careers least likely to be replaced by AI. Why? Because, as he says, people want a human being to take care of their children. This isn't just about safety, it's about the innate human need for care, comfort, and relationship. Sharath Jeevan, founder of Oxford University's Generational Success Lab, backs this up, suggesting that in education, students will always need trusted adult relationships to help them learn. Think about your own classroom for a moment. Could an AI grade every single essay? Maybe. Could it deliver every lesson plan? Perhaps. But could it comfort a child who's had a tough morning? Could it spot that subtle shift in a student's body language that signals they're struggling not just with the content but with something far deeper? Could it inspire a reluctant learner to find their passion purely through the power of a genuine connection? Absolutely not. This is why teaching remains a fundamentally human endeavor, and it aligns perfectly with our first pillar. AI is for enhancement, not replacement. It augments human capability. It never replaces the educator or the learner. Next, let's consider how roles will evolve, not disappear. And this is crucial for understanding the atium. AI impact Education MITEC the article highlights how roles in radiology, for instance, are evolving. While AI can interpret scans with extremely high accuracy, as Dr. Agar notes, radiologists won't disappear their role will just change, probably focusing on the more complex case, human oversight, and patient communication. We see a similar evolution in the legal sector. Pierre Pronor, CEO at lawhive, an online legal services company, points out that paralegal and junior lawyer roles, which traditionally involve routine document review and drafting, are highly susceptible to AI automation. But here's the kicker, he argues. The roles won't be eliminated. Instead, junior lawyers will shift their focus earlier on to applying legal judgment and developing client interaction skills. Brett Dixon, vice president of the Law Society of England and Wales, agrees, suggesting that automating routine tasks could create more time and opportunities for junior lawyers to think more deeply about complex legal issues. Doesn't this sound familiar? It's exactly what we advocate for in education outsourcing your doing, not your thinking. I can handle those repetitive administrative tasks that bog teachers down, freeing them up for what truly matters the complex legal issues of individual student needs, the nuanced judgment calls, and the profound relationships that foster learning. We need to be preparing students, and indeed ourselves, to embrace this evolution. Our job is to teach students not to outsmart machines, but to outthink them, using AI as a partner in their learning journey. If you're finding this conversation insightful, please consider following or subscribing to the podcast. It really helps us bring more of these ideas to you. Then there's the surprising connection between AI and the skills we need to cultivate. Think about hospitality Professor Graham Miller, academic director of the Westman Institute of Tourism and Hospitality at Nova School of Business and Economics says, I will shift employment from back office functions to front office customer facing roles. His example of truly warm, human and welcoming hotel staff in Barcelona who sit down and make you a cup of coffee perfectly illustrates that human to human connection that simply cannot be replicated. He argues that ideally, AI should handle routine tasks like answering emails so that humans have the capacity to genuinely connect with guests. This is AI helping us hold the complexity so we have capacity for creativity. And it's not just about soft skills the article points out that law firms are increasingly assessing candidates on their AI literacy. Prona says they're asking potential recruits, how are you using AI? Are you creating vibe coded apps with AI prompts? Are you working with AI agents? This isn't about memorizing tool features or coding. It's about developing a collaborative reasoning ability, understanding AI limitations, managing conversations with precision, and having a reflective awareness of its influence. It's about theory of mind. What does the AI know and what doesn't it know? This is the kind of AI literacy we need to be building in our schools for FOFs, AI for educators and for our students. The idea that AI can also be an equalizer is a really important one, and the article touches on it in the legal sector. Pronor suggests that as AI lowers the cost of delivering legal services, it could make law more accessible to more people, could dart certain AI in childcare choices or education. Similarly lower barriers making differentiated learning or specialist support more accessible for every student, especially for that often invisible middle. 80%. Accessibility, after all, isn't an afterthought, it's a foundation. Professor Miller also touches on creativity and hospitality, suggesting that AI currently struggles to replicate truly innovative cuisine, though it might expose mediocre human work. This is a critical point for assessment in the AI era. If AI can produce competent but uninspired creative work, then our assessments need to demand more. We need to design learning that cannot be faked because it demands depth, care and imagination. This means moving beyond just the product and considering the process when perhaps even including AI interaction logs and performance, a live demonstration of understanding and unique human judgment. We need to focus on cognitive stretch, on tasks that AI simply cannot complete without the student's unique context, perspective or judgment. Finally, let's talk about the practical steps for leaders and educators. Brian Berry, chief executive of the Federation of Master Builders, reminds us that hands on trades like brickling and carpentry are robust against AI. Yet as I mentioned at the start, fewer than half of parents would recommend them. There's a perception challenge here. For us in education, this means we need to think strategically about how we frame AI. It's not just about the technology itself. It's about understanding what our stakeholders value, about building influence. We can't skip stages in that know like trust progression. We need to show, not just tell the value for school leaders. This points to the anchor lesson from our 7 Lessons for AI Adoption framework. Connect AI to existing friction points in teacher workflows, not just novelty. Show how AI can give teachers back time, focus and energy to connect with students, truly aiming high. It's about building from strengths and empowering teachers as change agents, giving them the time and space to explore. Teachers often get labeled as resistant, but usually they just need that time and space and then they become the best drivers of innovation. We need to measure student outcomes and teacher well being, not just tool adoption rates. The future of work isn't about running from AI. It's about leaning into what makes us uniquely human. It's about fostering wonder, care, judgment, relationship and imagination in our students because those are the skills that machines simply cannot replicate. The real value in this AI powered world won't be in what the machine produces, but in how we as humans respond, adapt and create with it. That's all for today. Thanks for listening.