The Impact of AI on Education and Career Choices

The worries we face daily seem to be increasing. You would think getting admission to study law at a Nigerian university would bring joy. But my friend is worried that law and other professions like medicine, accounting, and pharmacy are facing disruption from the fast growth of artificial intelligence (AI). She is especially concerned about the long years and costs involved in these courses. She believes her nephew, who got admission, is being pushed into law by his parents for their own "bragging rights" rather than because it is his true passion. Interestingly, her nephew has loved to draw since he was a child.

Her worries made me think about bigger questions. How relevant is our education system in this age of rapid tech change? Are we preparing young Nigerians for the world they will actually enter? More importantly, are we producing too many graduates without preparing them for the changing work environment?

For me, the main question is whether we are training young Nigerians for specific jobs or teaching them to adapt to a world where jobs may change. A university education should not just be seen as training for one job. Beyond giving a qualification, education should build skills that can transfer across different areas: reasoning, research, communication, analytical thinking, discipline, and curiosity. These skills stay useful even when specific jobs or industries change. But this raises a tough question: are our universities really helping students develop these skills, or are we still mostly rewarding rote learning and exam success?

AI is also changing what knowledge means. Getting information is becoming easier and faster. What is now valuable is knowing what to ask, judging the quality of an answer, applying context, making good decisions, and spotting when something does not add up. This is very important because AI can confidently be wrong.

We should expect graduates to be able to learn new skills throughout their careers. A degree should lay a foundation for lifelong learning, not just be a narrow qualification that becomes outdated when jobs change. Think about a lawyer who moves to the entertainment industry. He does not become useless because he no longer goes to court. His legal training can help him negotiate contracts, understand intellectual property, and manage risks. Similarly, an engineer who switches to the fitness industry may see the human body differently due to their understanding of systems and how parts work together.

The true value of education may lie less in the job it trains us for and more in how it teaches us to see and solve problems. This is why I believe curiosity might be one of the most important skills in the new work environment. A person’s willingness to learn, unlearn, and relearn could matter more than mastering one specific area of knowledge.

AI is also changing the value of knowledge itself. Access to information is becoming easier and faster. What becomes increasingly valuable is knowing what questions to ask, being able to assess the quality of an answer, applying context, exercising judgment, and recognizing when something does not make sense. This is particularly important because AI can be confidently wrong. Imagine an AI-generated legal opinion that cites a non-existent case or relies on an incorrect law provision. The issue is not just that AI can make mistakes. More importantly, does the person using it have enough knowledge and judgment to spot the mistake?

The future may not favor those with the "right" degree, but those who are curious enough to keep learning, flexible enough to keep changing, and wise enough to know when human judgment is critical. AI will surely take over many routine tasks, especially those that involve repetitive work and predictable results. But this does not mean that entire professions will vanish. It may just change how work is done within those fields. A junior lawyer may spend less time reviewing documents and doing routine research. An accountant may spend less time on repetitive tasks and rely more on automated systems.

This difference matters when we guide young people about their futures. We should be careful not to react to tech changes by pushing them toward whatever career we think is "safe". There may not be any permanently safe profession. Perhaps the better question is: what skills will help this young person stay useful and adaptable as the world evolves?

This brings me back to my friend’s nephew and his passion for drawing. The answer might not be to tell him to drop law or to force him into art. The future may not belong to those with the "right" degree, but to those who are curious enough to keep learning, flexible enough to change, and wise enough to know when human judgment is essential.