Career Guidance in School

Career guidance in 2026 is no longer about choosing “one profession”

The core idea of the original 2020 article still holds: students need more individual, practical and realistic support when thinking about their professional future. Six years later, however, the task is considerably more complex. The labour market is changing not only because new sectors are emerging, but because tasks are being redistributed between people, software, AI systems, robots and automated processes.

The traditional question “What do you want to be?” is therefore no longer enough. More useful questions are: “What kinds of problems do you want to solve?”, “What environment helps you do your best work?”, “Which skills can you already demonstrate?”, “Which tasks are likely to be automated?” and “How could you redirect yourself if the occupation you choose changes?”. Career guidance should teach students how to navigate, not simply how to select.

AI will not simply “replace professions” — it will reorganise tasks within them

Public discussion about artificial intelligence is often too binary: “these jobs will disappear,” “machines will take the work,” or “every student should study technology.” The evidence is more nuanced. The International Labour Organization estimates that roughly one in four workers worldwide is in an occupation with some degree of exposure to generative AI, while stressing that job transformation is more likely than full occupational replacement. Exposure is especially high in clerical and heavily digitalised work.

This changes the questions students should ask. Instead of only asking “Will this profession still exist?”, they should ask: “Which tasks inside it are likely to remain human?”, “Which will be augmented by AI?” and “Which may be automated?”. Doctors, engineers, accountants, designers, lawyers and teachers may continue to exist as professions, while their daily workflows, tools and expected skills change significantly.

How quickly is the labour market changing?

The World Economic Forum estimates in its Future of Jobs Report 2025 that structural labour-market change by 2030 could affect the equivalent of 22% of today’s formal jobs in the scope of its survey. Employers expect around 170 million new roles to be created and around 92 million existing roles to be displaced, producing a net increase of 78 million roles. These are global employer expectations, not guaranteed outcomes.

The same report estimates that around 39% of workers’ key skills may change or become less relevant by 2030. Among the fastest-growing skill areas are AI and big data, cybersecurity, technological literacy, creative thinking, resilience and flexibility, curiosity and lifelong learning. Analytical thinking remains one of the most valued foundational skills. The implication for schools is not “everyone should become a programmer.” It is that students need a combination of technological, cognitive and human capabilities.

Students should not wait until the end of school to start making career decisions

OECD Career Readiness work emphasises that effective career development begins early, reflects the student’s individual circumstances and includes real contact with the world of work. The problem with late guidance is that students are expected to understand themselves, research the labour market, choose a field of study, apply for programmes and make a high-impact decision within a very short period. That is too much to leave until the final years of school.

In primary school, children do not need to choose an occupation. They need to expand their understanding of the kinds of problems people solve in different fields. In lower secondary school, students can connect interests and strengths with activities, complete short projects and meet professionals. Between roughly ages 14 and 16, the focus can move towards portfolios, occupational roles, vocational and academic pathways, AI literacy and real-world cases. By the final years of school, decisions should be based on accumulated evidence rather than a last-minute questionnaire or parental assumption.

Future jobs: teach combinations of capabilities instead of guessing job titles

The popular claim that a fixed large percentage of today’s children will work in jobs that do not yet exist is frequently repeated without a reliable primary evidence base. A more defensible statement is that new roles will emerge, some roles will disappear and — most importantly — new combinations of tasks will develop inside existing professions.

Technology is already combining with healthcare, education, law, finance, agriculture, manufacturing, media, energy and public services. Some future job titles will certainly be new, but the deeper shift is that more roles will require people to combine domain knowledge with data, AI, ethics, communication and professional judgement. Schools therefore need to develop the ability to create professional value, not try to predict an exact list of job titles for 2040.

What does this mean in the Bulgarian context?

Cedefop’s 2025 Skills Forecast expects total employment in Bulgaria to decline towards 2035, largely against a demographic backdrop, while also projecting growth in parts of the service economy. Faster-growing subsectors include research and development, media, computer programming and information services, market research, professional services, real estate, architecture and engineering.

At the same time, many opportunities will come from replacement demand — people retiring, leaving occupations or moving between roles — even in areas where total employment is shrinking. This is an important lesson for students and parents: a “growing sector” and a “good chance of finding work” are not exactly the same thing. Career decisions should consider new jobs, replacement demand, qualification level, region, pay, automation exposure and the practical accessibility of the education pathway.

The role of parents is changing: from “You will become…” to “How can we test this?”

Parents remain important, but the professional world they knew when starting their own careers may already have changed. The most useful support is not to choose instead of the student, but to help test assumptions: speak with people in the field, see a real workplace, compare education pathways, examine labour-market information and consider how AI and automation are changing the work itself.

The same is true for teachers. It is unrealistic to expect one class teacher or school counsellor to understand every industry in depth. Schools need a network: career specialists, employers, professional organisations, universities, vocational schools, alumni and specialists in technology and labour-market change.

Direct contact with the world of work remains one of the strongest forms of guidance

One of the strongest ideas in the original article was the importance of students meeting employers and employees. That is even more valuable today. OECD Career Readiness work links career preparation with activities that allow young people to explore and experience work: conversations with professionals, workplace visits, volunteering, part-time work, placements and other forms of first-hand exposure.

The encounter should not become a promotional lecture. Students should ask questions such as: “What does a normal working day look like?”, “Which tasks are already being automated?”, “Which mistake is most costly?”, “What do people fail to learn at university?”, “Which skills distinguish a strong beginner?” and “How do you know this profession is not right for you?”. Questions like these turn employer contact into genuine career learning.

Schools need to connect subjects with real professional tasks

“When will I ever use this?” is a legitimate student question. Mathematics can connect with data analysis, engineering, finance and logistics; biology with health, biotechnology and ecology; literature with argumentation, communication, law, media and human behaviour; the arts with design, cultural industries and digital content.

In the age of AI, these connections matter even more. A machine may generate text, images, code or analysis, but students still need enough domain knowledge to frame the right problem, check the output and take responsibility for the decision. Domain knowledge does not disappear — it combines with new tools.

What should schools introduce at different stages?