How do we prepare students for jobs that don’t even exist yet?
By Jason Swanson
How do we train students for jobs that don’t yet exist? If you are an educator, a parent, or an employer, I am sure you have pondered this question.
To add potentially more stress to it, the future of work feels increasingly complex and uncertain. There is quite a bit of speculation as to what impact factors such as artificial intelligence (AI), automation, globalization, and taskification (the breaking up of large jobs into small tasks) might have on the future of work. For example:
- Might we experience an abundance economy where artificial intelligence and automation drive consumer prices down and eliminate boring and dangerous work?
- Might most people be forced into contingency employment, competing with one another to assemble a mosaic of paid work?
- Might the vast majority of people find themselves out of work as the march of automation accelerates and human workers are replaced faster than new jobs can be created?
- Might work be redefined as artificial intelligence and automation eliminate the majority of jobs, leading people to work on task and projects based on their passions rather than on the need to generate income?
In reality, the future will probably contain shades of all the above, along with other developments that we have not yet considered.
Trends Shaping the Future of Work
What we do know is that work is changing; what we don’t know is to what extent. For example, there is little agreement on the long-term effects of automation and artificial intelligence. A 2013 study by Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael Osborne of Oxford University suggests that 47 percent of current middle-class American jobs could be lost over the next two decades as computers take over cognitive tasks in areas such as management, finance, medicine, science, engineering and the arts. In contrast, James Bessen of Boston University argues that rather than destroying jobs, automation has historically redefined them, helping companies free up financial capacity and then expand or offer new services.
Even if we take drivers of change such AI and automation out of the mix, the world of work is still in flux. The average worker in the US now holds 11.7 jobs in his or her lifetime, an excellent reminder that most of us already experience a fair degree of churn. We can expect that number to rise as the way people organize work changes. One factor that will likely contribute to such an increase is the rise of the contingency-based workforce. McKinsey Global Institute estimates that 54 to 68 million people in the United States already work in the project-based economy (i.e., as contingency-based employees). This number is expected to increase thanks to factors such as the lower coordination costs provided by the Internet and the continued proliferation of digital platforms that help match candidates with organizations seeking to complete a task.
Best if Used by…
Whether AI and automation lead to new job creation or to high levels of job displacement, we can expect the way we define and complete work to change. Technological advances have a long history of altering how people complete work, making jobs safer and less routine. Looking ahead ten years, we can expect increasingly to partner with technology to complete work, even if what constitutes work comes to be radically redefined, with people pursuing things such as social good or passion-based projects rather than working to make a living or people opting in and out of work when they choose. We can also expect the structure of work to change as more and more people enter the contingency-based workforce, possibly working several different kinds of jobs or projects concurrently in a far cry from traditional notions of career. Lastly, we can expect that many people will be working in jobs that do not exist today.
These expected changes point toward a future of work where the shelf life of skills will be shortened dramatically. The changing structure of jobs might mean that one indiviudal could be doing very different things from one project to the next. Bigger picture, the tasks in which we engage and the nature of our contributions to work will likely change quickly as machine partners do more and more for and with us. We will be likely to need just-in-time training to keep up with work’s changing demands, with new skills enduring for far less time than they do today.
A Hardware Upgrade
So how do we prepare today’s students to be tomorrow’s workforce?
One answer might be by helping them cultivate deep self-knowledge and meta-cognitive skills. In other words, focus on upgrading a learner’s hardware (how to think, learn, and unlearn) rather than their software (skill acquisition and knowledge recall), promises to be the best way of ensuring that learners are ready for a future of work, no matter which future of work comes to fruition.
Due to the uncertain nature of future work, skills and practices such as deep self-knowledge, social awareness, emotional regulation, self-determination and proactive learning will become increasingly important. For instance, in a future of work where employment structures are increasingly contingent, a learner will need such skills to manage time if they are working on many different projects, to seek skills to complete those projects and to have the emotional intelligence to partner with both people and machines from across the globe. In a post-work world, such skills might be equally important, helping people create subsistence strategies, pursue community-impact initiatives, and start passion-based projects rooted in their values.
Cultivating core social-emotional skills and foundational cognitive and meta-cognitive practices also promises to assist individuals in creating bold aspirational visions for themselves and in navigating terrain that today can only look uncertain, even uncharted. Focusing on these skills can provide the foundation for both near-term career pathways and future career creation and success.
Author
Further Reading
- USA Today – White House: Workforce development aimed at apprenticeships, future jobs
- VentureBeat – Udacity: Reno pilot shows the future of tech job training
- The Detroit News – Preparing for the jobs of the future
Traditionally, teacher professional development (PD) has been designed to build capacity, focus on ways to improve curriculum expertise, and help teachers keep abreast of new instructional strategies, technology tools, and instructional resources. However, each attending participant focused on improving teacher self-knowledge through the same approach or “one size fits all,” requiring individual teachers to modify information gained to meet the needs of their own content area, grade level, or specific group of students. Instead, personalized professional learning (PPL), encourages teachers and school-based staff to engage in the planning and implementation of professional learning to meet individual teacher needs.
Personalizing professional learning for educators incorporates previous experiences, knowledge and interests, and creates a direct, contextual link between professional learning and student learning. It acknowledges everyone’s needs and strengths and in doing so, teachers feel valued and motivated. Motivating teachers and building upon previous learning not only encourages ongoing professional learning, it builds self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is an individual’s confidence in his or her ability to perform tasks or exercise influence over events that affect their lives. Individuals with high self-efficacy approach difficult tasks as a challenge and not as a threat.
Teacher agency is the action of teachers directing their own professional growth. Giving teachers agency in their professional growth provides them opportunities to make conscious choices, builds capacity, and most importantly, instills a feeling of ownership in the process. As educators have choice in professional learning opportunities, they bring prior learning and experiences and connect them to new learning. Further, it connects new learning to their teaching contexts and provides intrinsic motivation. When educators are not part of the decision-making process in professional learning activities, there is a disconnect from their daily work. Further, agency is fostered when teachers actively participate in professional learning communities.
Are gifted programs elitist? This is a criticism leveled upon gifted and talented programs. Some perceive because children are treated differently, with services designed to their specific learning needs, this means they are receiving special treatment. That is certainly one way to look at it. Another, more logical way to look at it is that special education children are treated differently, with services designed to meet their specific learning needs. No one would accuse special education of being elitist. So why the double standard?

The problem is not the programming itself, but rather the criteria used to place students in that programming. Some programs have criteria that is going to give some students an advantage while excluding others. For instance, if the program requires a parent request, those students whose parents are heavily involved in their child’s life are going to get into the program while a child whose parents are not as involved or do not understand the process, is going to be left out. This is an example of elitism; or if part of the criteria is based on teacher recommendation and/or grades. Grades and teachers’ opinions are both very subjective. And there are teachers who give poor grades to students based on not turning in homework or being a behavior problem, not based on their ability or their mastery of the content. Gifted children are not always compliant children. They might be acting out because they are bored in class.
I would be remiss if I did not scrutinize the nationally normed tests themselves. There are those who point to the fact that these tests are biased in their identification. There is an over-representation of higher socio-economic white children in gifted programming, meaning there is an under-representation of minority and/or lower socio-economic children. Part of the issue is that the tests are written in a language that is more familiar to those who are exposed to it on a regular basis. Not only this, children from a higher socio-economic status tend to have more exposure to experiences which can give them knowledge others were not privy to. This can give some children an advantage on the tests, especially the younger grades.
The truth is, gifted programs are as elitist as we allow them to be. By making sure our gifted programs selection is objective and making efforts to test students with a variety of methods in order to properly identify all students, we create programming that fits an ability, not a social status. This prevents them from being elitist and instead makes them what they were meant to be; a specific service for students with extraordinary ability.
Gamification is about transforming the classroom environment and literacy instruction into a game. It requires creativity, collaboration and play. There are numerous ways to bring games and game playing into the English Language Arts classroom to promote learning and deepen student understanding. Whether teachers are looking to bring in some aspect of gaming into their class or use a game platform across the curriculum, they can bring in elements of gamification to enhance learning and student engagement, tap into Common Core State Standards and meet ISTE Standards.
3.) Create a quest. A quest is a mission with an objective. Every year my students participate in a Current Events Adventure Quest, a trivia game based on the weekly current events reading. Students who answer a specific text-dependent question correctly earn points. The student with the most points after six weeks wins a prize. Additional questions are posted on
One student recently told me that gaming in English was a fun learning alternative which has made her a stronger English student. She went on to say that striving for game points throughout the school year strengthened her work ethic and improved her writing and reading skills, which overall improved her grade. As a teacher, gamification has allowed me to coach students to be successful readers, writers, and critical thinkers. Students learn through play, collaboration, and quest-based adventures. Gamification is an approach to learning that connects meaningful gaming with content objectives to re-engage students and boost learning.
Trainers from high performing industries know that training drives potential, not ultimate competency. The process begins with training, but competency in complex tasks results from self-directed performance continuously augmented by job experience, peer support, and additional training targeted to the specific needs of the job or individual. When those conditions are in place, skillfulness becomes embedded in the culture of the workplace and organizations turn the corner on sustained capability.
Approaching PBL training with a comprehensive strategic mindset suffers from two limitations. Money and time for PD are always at a premium. But even more limiting is the self-imposed mentality of the one-off workshop, in which an expert roams the front of the room and explains the bullets on a PowerPoint — and then leaves.
Train coaches. The road to competency requires constant conversation, testing of ideas, and debriefs. Coaches who have deep training in PBL are immensely helpful. This is a middle management, teacher leader position that many districts do not have. But they play a critical role in supporting progress, monitoring, and setting milestones for course completion.
Train a new cadre. Sustainability requires emerging leaders. Look for teachers who do PBL very well and create opportunities for them to share and support. Add them to the coaching mix with informal coaching opportunities. Use the new cadre to build out teams that know how to use protocols and analyze projects.
If we could just fix our kids by plugging every hole from the past… they’d be just fine.
Plus, academically vulnerable students have likely been grouped together now so that not one learner in the entire class appears to be proficient in the subject. This certainly sets up challenges for differentiated instruction and student self-efficacy. How do we group a classroom full of students with similar deficiencies with stronger students when there are none available? Whatever shiny name we attach to this remedial class, every student in there knows they are now in the “dumb” class.
Acceleration is a process in which we jumpstart academically vulnerable students on new content just in time for new learning. These learners are going to be moved a day or so ahead of the class. Remediation is present, but with a laser-like focus on just the skills required for the new content. Scaffolding devices, such as bookmarks and cheat sheets will be pushed in, so that students are armed for success. The best part is that learners explore the new content and upcoming vocabulary. This might include a video on crustaceans, a scavenger hunt exploring perimeter, or a sort on integers. When the core teacher announces, “Today, we’re going to talk about something called perimeter,” acceleration class students have just enough prior knowledge to spark hands in the air. “Hey, I know something about that!”
Active, hands-on, scaffolded, engaging, and focused on learning targets – these are descriptors of an accelerated approach. And while some practice is warranted during acceleration, sessions are largely sans worksheets or computer screens. From my own experiences and in working with districts to implement acceleration, here is the process that I share:
A few months ago, a principal from an urban school with a large number of economically disadvantaged students called me. Her words: “I’m tired of pouring money into remedial programs and not seeing results.” Her staff was ready to try an accelerated model. Just a couple of months into implementation, she couldn’t wait to share her benchmark gains. More important to her, however, were the changes observed in her students’ self-efficacy. They were more engaged and working harder.
Rather than pounding away at a students’ not-so-great-academic past, acceleration can provide a fresh start for students. This approach is about what a learner can accomplish today on this lesson. Remediation is still being provided, but it’s in the context of what learners need right now. And yes, there may be some isolated skills they missed that won’t be revisited again and again and again. Guess what? They’ll survive. (They may not survive hating school.)
