Deborah Daniels: We must draw more students to higher ed, not fewer

Artificial intelligence is a powerful phenomenon that will make companies vastly more efficient. But it will have a devastating effect on workers.

We are already seeing the effects in areas such as data entry, administrative support and customer service. Any job that involves repetitive tasks or those that can be governed by automated rules will no longer be filled by humans. And with the onset of self-driving vehicles, even truck, taxi and ride-share drivers’ jobs will no longer require human operators.

Predictions are that as many as 300 million full-time jobs worldwide might be replaced by automation, almost 50 million of those in the United States. Management consulting company McKinsey estimates that by 2030 the percentage of hours worked in the U.S. that will be automated will increase from 21.5% to 30%. Fortune Magazine predicts that 50% of U.S. jobs will be displaced by AI within three years.

What can workers do to protect themselves from this onslaught? It does no good to try to stop it: Though the powerful Longshoremen’s Union recently succeeded in forcing a new contract limiting automation to protect their jobs, they probably represent the last bastion of success in that area.

The good news: While many rote-type jobs will be displaced by automation, the skills AI cannot (yet) master are critical thinking, problem-solving, collaboration, working across disciplines, and other “soft” skills that can be learned only in higher education institutions. My own college education was invaluable in teaching me to think critically, problem-solve and collaborate—skills I have used every day in my adult life.

It is predicted that by 2030, over 70% of good jobs will require at least a bachelor’s degree. As soon as next year, as many as 2 million people in the United States are likely to need reskilling or upskilling in order to get any decent job.

So you would think state and federal policymakers would be focusing on how to educate our current and future workforce for the jobs humans will qualify for tomorrow. Strangely, the opposite seems to be occurring.

Pell grants, on which low-income students have relied for decades, are targeted for significant cuts by Congress. It is estimated that, based on the planned changes, over half of current Pell grantees will receive less funding than they do now, and 10% will no longer qualify at all. The domestic policy bill passed by the House would also end federally subsidized loans for undergraduates and terminate a loan program for graduate students. Congress further plans to tax university endowments, thus adding a tax on already-struggling institutions (don’t think Harvard, think of Indiana’s small liberal arts colleges) while also placing more of the onus on them to fund first-generation students. Ironically, by handicapping the needy, they might make the so-called elite institutions more elite and banish those without means to dead-end jobs.

At home, our General Assembly has cut funds to state-run institutions, causing Ivy Tech Community College, a critical provider of career-readiness training, to cut over 200 positions based on $54 million in cuts over the two-year budget period. On top of that, the state has cut its O’Bannon grants to students in need, not even grandfathering those who were already awarded a grant.

While I understand budget constraints, and applaud the state for focusing some attention on work readiness beginning in high school, we need to be cautious about apprenticeship programs that might lead to soon-to-be automated jobs. And we simply must draw more students to higher education, or risk increased joblessness and a depleted workforce.•

__________

Daniels is a retired partner of Krieg DeVault LLP, a former U.S. Attorney and assistant U.S. attorney general and former president of the Sagamore Institute. Send comments to [email protected].

Click here for more Forefront columns.