u/AromaticStrength6840

This isn’t just a hypothetical concern. A recent survey reported by Axios found that **69% of US college students are worried that AI could negatively affect their job prospects**. Another survey from Lumina Foundation and Gallup found that **nearly half of college students had considered changing their major because of AI’s potential impact on their future careers**.
What I find interesting is that the usual response to this uncertainty seems to be something along the lines of: *“Learn the things AI can’t do.”* But I’m not sure that’s enough. The boundary of what AI can do is moving too quickly, and it also assumes that the value of learning a human ability depends on us remaining better at it than a machine.
If AI eventually becomes better at writing than we are, for example, is learning to write still important because writing helps us structure our own thinking? If an AI system outperforms a professional at certain decisions, how much knowledge does that professional still need in order to question or effectively supervise the system when it fails? And if AI can increasingly meet certain social or emotional needs, which interpersonal skills do we still want to cultivate between humans?
Maybe the question isn’t only **which abilities will continue to have value in the job market**, but which ones we want to preserve even when they’re no longer necessary to compete with a machine.
**Should we educate future generations for what AI still can’t do, or for what we believe humans should never stop knowing how to do?**

This isn’t just a hypothetical concern. A recent survey reported by Axios found that 69% of US college students are worried that AI could negatively affect their job prospects. Another survey from Lumina Foundation and Gallup found that nearly half of college students had considered changing their major because of AI’s potential impact on their future careers.
What I find interesting is that the usual response to this uncertainty seems to be something along the lines of: “Learn the things AI can’t do.” But I’m not sure that’s enough. The boundary of what AI can do is moving too quickly, and it also assumes that the value of learning a human ability depends on us remaining better at it than a machine.
If AI eventually becomes better at writing than we are, for example, is learning to write still important because writing helps us structure our own thinking? If an AI system outperforms a professional at certain decisions, how much knowledge does that professional still need in order to question or effectively supervise the system when it fails? And if AI can increasingly meet certain social or emotional needs, which interpersonal skills do we still want to cultivate between humans?
Maybe the question isn’t only which abilities will continue to have value in the job market, but which ones we want to preserve even when they’re no longer necessary to compete with a machine.
Should we educate future generations for what AI still can’t do, or for what we believe humans should never stop knowing how to do?

No es solo una preocupación hipotética. Una encuesta reciente recogida por Axios encontró que el 69 % de los universitarios estadounidenses está preocupado por que la IA perjudique sus perspectivas laborales.
Y otra encuesta de Lumina Foundation y Gallup encontró que casi la mitad había pensado al menos seriamente en cambiar de carrera o de estudios por el posible impacto de la IA.
Me parece interesante porque la respuesta habitual a esta incertidumbre suele ser algo parecido a: “aprende aquello que la IA no pueda hacer”. Pero no estoy segura de que ese sea un criterio suficiente. La frontera de lo que una IA puede hacer cambia demasiado rápido y, además, presupone que el valor de aprender una capacidad depende de que sigamos siendo mejores que una máquina haciéndola.
Por ejemplo, si una IA llega a escribir mejor que nosotros, ¿sigue siendo importante aprender a escribir para estructurar nuestro propio pensamiento? Si un sistema supera a un profesional en determinadas decisiones, ¿qué conocimientos necesita conservar ese profesional para poder cuestionarlo o supervisarlo cuando falle? Y si una IA puede satisfacer cada vez mejor determinadas necesidades sociales o emocionales, ¿qué habilidades relacionales queremos seguir cultivando entre humanos?
Quizá la cuestión no sea únicamente qué capacidades seguirán teniendo valor en el mercado laboral, sino cuáles queremos conservar aunque dejen de ser necesarias para competir con una máquina.
¿Deberíamos educar para aquello que la IA todavía no sabe hacer o para aquello que creemos que los humanos no deberíamos dejar de saber hacer?