{"id":4679,"date":"2026-11-13T15:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-11-13T12:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/zeya888.me\/?p=4679"},"modified":"2026-11-14T11:51:23","modified_gmt":"2026-11-14T08:51:23","slug":"na-kogo-uchitsya-v-epohu-ai","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zeya888.me\/en\/2026\/11\/13\/na-kogo-uchitsya-v-epohu-ai\/","title":{"rendered":"What should you study if professions change faster than curricula?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Picture a conversation at the kitchen table.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 You need to get a good profession.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Which one?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Well\u2026 one that's in demand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At this point the adult wants to pull out a list. Preferably an official one, stamped and guaranteed until retirement. Meanwhile the teenager has already seen AI write code, put together a presentation and draw a picture. And asks a perfectly reasonable question: \u201cWhile I'm studying, what will be left of this profession?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Only yesterday the family was choosing between a few clear roads. Now it's discussing whether the road will still exist by the time university is over. And the adult being asked for an answer doesn't know either.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I take this question seriously. In Capybara, I'm interested in how to help a person develop their own thinking, learn and see the results of their actions. Now another task is added: building a working life when the very conditions of work are changing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That's why I've prepared an open instruction for talking with AI about your professional path. Below I explain why it's built this way and give it in full. First, let's look at what's happening with this question in Europe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This conversation is already happening in many European families<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

I looked at publications and research from ten countries: the UK, Ireland, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania and Estonia. They cover different parts of Europe but don't represent every country or every family. You can't derive a single \u201clevel of European panic\u201d from this selection. But you can see recurring questions and different ways of answering them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In France,<\/strong> Le Monde in March 2026 examined creative career choices through conversations with parents and young people. Some families try to steer children away from illustration, games and film; others support creativity despite the uncertainty. This is reporting on specific families, not a measure of the whole country's mood.1<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Germany,<\/strong> a June piece by tagesschau asks the question directly: should newcomers to the job market fear AI? It also shows the difference between expecting big market changes and fearing for one's own job. These states don't automatically coincide.2<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the UK,<\/strong> the family magazine MadeForMums wrote on 10 November about parents who find it hard to advise children on modern work and qualifications. The survey cited is linked to a Samsung campaign: a reason to look closely at the problem, not an independent census of parental opinion.3<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In other countries the same uncertainty shows up in its own way:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Where<\/th>What's being discussed<\/th>What it lets us see<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Poland<\/td>Radio PiK reports on a forum where young people discuss which studies and jobs to choose as AI develops.4<\/a><\/sup><\/td>Young people ask the question themselves; alongside fears there's interest in the opportunities.<\/td><\/tr>
Romania<\/td>\u0218tirile ProTV reports unfilled places in some IT programmes and young people choosing other engineering fields.5<\/a><\/sup><\/td>Expectations may already be influencing decisions; the report doesn't prove a single cause of the change in enrolment.<\/td><\/tr>
Estonia<\/td>ERR discusses IT students' difficulties entering work and the change in entry-level tasks.6<\/a><\/sup><\/td>Access to first experience is becoming a question in its own right.<\/td><\/tr>
Czech Republic<\/td>In an interview with Novinky, an Alma Career analyst talks about limiting part of junior hiring without mass replacement of workers.7<\/a><\/sup><\/td>The market can change through jobs that are never created, not only through layoffs.<\/td><\/tr>
Spain<\/td>La Vanguardia writes about the difficulty of choosing further education, based on Stuveo data.8<\/a><\/sup><\/td>The uncertainty is wider than AI: working out education and one's own choice was hard even without it.<\/td><\/tr>
Italy<\/td>Sky TG24 discusses how to choose a university when professions are changing.9<\/a><\/sup><\/td>The question of speciality is joined by the question of how exactly a person will learn.<\/td><\/tr>
Ireland<\/td>Reuters reports early signs of worsening opportunities for young people in parts of the tech economy. The causal conclusion about AI remains limited.10<\/a><\/sup><\/td>Even noticeable changes need their explanations checked.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I think an important shift is happening here. Parents have to rethink the very way they give advice. Past experience remains valuable but no longer lets them confidently describe a child's whole path twenty years ahead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The anxiety is real. Its explanation is more complex than the headline<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

This confusion has a measurable background. In an OECD report published in 2025 based on PISA 2022 data, 39% of 15-year-olds on average across OECD countries<\/strong> are placed in the group with uncertain career expectations. In the same data, fewer than half of students had had contact with employers through a careers fair, a workplace visit or work experience.11<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The dates matter here: the data refer to 2022. They can't be used to prove that mass use of generative AI caused this uncertainty. Career guidance already had problems with access to experience, information and breadth of choice. AI adds one more fast-changing layer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a King's College London study in spring 2026, only 31% of surveyed parents of children aged 11\u201329<\/strong> said they had discussed with their child how AI might affect their future career. The base for this part of the survey is 729 people.12<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For me, that's a reason to start the conversation. A parent doesn't first need a degree in labour-market expertise. You can admit what's unknown and work out together where information is needed, where a trial is needed, and where help from someone in the profession is needed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But it would be wrong to say young people everywhere are gripped by fear. In the German BARMER study 2025\/26, a minority expresses strong concern about AI; other worries are more prominent.13<\/a><\/sup> In a study by the Polish THINK! foundation, the share of young people oriented exclusively towards employment is growing: from 28% in 2022 to 35% in 2026. This is a study of preferences, not a forecast of the number of jobs.14<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

People can use AI, see opportunities in it and still want predictable work at the same time. That's an understandable position, and you also need to be able to build a route from it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The most awkward question: where does a newcomer become a specialist?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Part of professional learning has traditionally happened on simple tasks. A newcomer gathered information, prepared a draft, fixed a spreadsheet, wrote a small piece of code. Gradually they understood the context and got more complex work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When such tasks can be delegated to AI, the question arises: what will the path to experience look like?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A French study presented by HEC Paris in October 2026 and carried out with the Banque de France shows that between November 2022 and March 2026 the monthly hiring trend for 21\u201329-year-olds on permanent contracts fell by 28.3% in the occupations most exposed to AI<\/strong>, compared with 7.5% in the least exposed<\/strong>. This concerns hiring flows in the private sector studied, not an equal reduction of everyone employed. The authors note separately that AI causality is not established by this comparison.15<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the same time, a Eurofound analysis of the 27 EU countries, published in September 2026 on data up to 2025, does not confirm a separate youth employment shock caused by generative AI<\/strong>. It looks at the wider market picture and actual use of the technology.16<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

These results can't be mechanically added to or subtracted from each other. They study different groups, periods and indicators. But together they keep us from two hasty conclusions: both from the certainty that nothing significant is happening and from declaring the end of the professional future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even the Irish story changes on closer reading. In a November speech, the Governor of the Central Bank of Ireland stresses that the fall in young people's ICT employment coincided with a general correction in tech hiring, and the data don't yet clearly confirm the story of AI destroying junior work in particular.17<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So I would check each direction closer to the ground: how people get into it now, who trains newcomers, which tasks they're trusted with and how readiness for work is demonstrated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What future I suggest taking into account<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

My working scenario is a deep restructuring of the professional world. I think a significant share of familiar expensive services will become cheaper, small teams will gain the capabilities of large organisations, and more people will start creating their own products and services. In some segments people will especially value an author's view, beauty, trust and a recognisable attitude to the work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I want to prepare myself and my children for such a future. But this is my perspective, and it needs checking and refining. The material I found doesn't show that employment is disappearing everywhere or that running your own business will be the right solution for everyone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ILO\u2013NASK 2025 study estimates potential exposure to generative AI at roughly a quarter of global employment. The authors consider transformation of work a more likely overall outcome than full replacement and warn that exposure does not equal actual job losses.18<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What matters to me is preparing for several scenarios. If automation speeds up, a person knows how to use the tools and create useful results. If change is uneven, they know how to find their place in a specific environment. If employment remains a large part of life, they can work in a team, learn from colleagues and show quality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Entrepreneurship also has an everyday side: finding clients, agreements, deadlines, bookkeeping, rejections. It suits some people. Others prefer a partnership or a team. This choice should be explored without romanticising it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So how should you learn \u2014 and what for?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

I would start with a more detailed look at what lies behind a profession's name.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Say someone wants to work in design. This wish may combine love of visual form, interest in space, a desire to tell stories, pleasure in working with materials or a wish to help people find their way. These are different foundations for development. They're worth seeing before buying a course.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then come specific questions: which actions you really enjoy, what result others need, where serious subject knowledge is required, what AI changes and what it costs to enter the field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When choosing a study programme, I suggest looking at the following:<\/p>\n\n\n\n