US dataswitch to UK
Education Administrators, Kindergarten through Secondary
counseling and providing guidance to students regarding, evaluating curricula and creating school improvement plans, using student performance data. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: determining the scope of educational program offerings. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.
That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, directing and coordinating activities of teachers, stays yours. The tools change, the responsibility doesn't.
Your week, as this page understands it
Plan, direct, or coordinate the academic, administrative, or auxiliary activities of kindergarten, elementary, or secondary schools. The job title says “education administrators” or “kindergarten through secondary”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: directing and coordinating activities of teachers. That is the thing someone has to be right about.
The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But education administrators, kindergarten through secondary is not one task. It is 32 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is directing and coordinating activities of teachers, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 27%
- changing shape
- 19%
- staying human
- 54%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 41 out of 100 (35–46 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 32 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.
How we know this
What is measured: Every published task statement for education administrators, kindergarten through secondary is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.
How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.
Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.
Your job, task by task
These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.
- 2 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Shifting to AI
8 tasksTasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.
Determining the scope of educational program offerings
This is reading one thing and writing another: the scope of educational program offerings in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Determine the scope of educational program offerings, and prepare drafts of course schedules and descriptions to estimate staffing and facility requirements.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Drafting course schedules and descriptions from staffing and room constraints is planning work software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Evaluating curricula, teaching methods and programs to determine their effectiveness, efficiency and use and to ensure compliance with federal, state and local regulations
This is reading one thing and writing another: curricula, teaching methods and programs in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Evaluate curricula, teaching methods, and programs to determine their effectiveness, efficiency, and use, and to ensure compliance with federal, state, and local regulations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Comparing programmes against results and against published regulations is document analysis software does well, with a leader still signing off.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning and developing instructional methods and content
This is reading one thing and writing another: instructional methods in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Plan and develop instructional methods and content for educational, vocational, or student activity programs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Producing lesson methods and programme content is writing and design work that software now does to a usable standard.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Creating school improvement plans, using student performance data
This is reading one thing and writing another: school improvement plans in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Create school improvement plans, using student performance data.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Turning student performance figures into a written improvement plan is exactly the sort of analysis and drafting software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Changing shape
6 tasksTasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.
Setting educational standards and goals
The software now makes the first pass at educational standards, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Set educational standards and goals, and help establish policies and procedures to carry them out.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Standards and policy documents are readily drafted, but agreement from staff and governors comes from live discussion.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collaborating with teachers to develop and maintain curriculum standards
The software now makes the first pass at teachers, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Collaborate with teachers to develop and maintain curriculum standards, develop mission statements, and set performance goals and objectives.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Curriculum standards and goal documents are straightforward to draft, but getting teachers to agree to them is a live discussion.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing and submitting budget requests and recommendations
The software now makes the first pass at budget requests, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare and submit budget requests and recommendations, or grant proposals to solicit program funding.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 58 out of 100 (51–65 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Software can draft a budget request or funding bid, but making it convincing to a specific funder still takes heavy editing.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Staying human
18 tasksTasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.
Conferring with parents and staff to discuss educational activities
The value here is that a specific person handles parents and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Confer with parents and staff to discuss educational activities, policies, and student behavior or learning problems.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (24–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: These conversations work because a parent or teacher trusts the person they are talking to about a specific child.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Observing teaching methods and examining learning materials to evaluate and standardize curricula and teaching techniques and to determine areas
This work happens in the physical world: methods, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Observe teaching methods and examine learning materials to evaluate and standardize curricula and teaching techniques and to determine areas for improvement.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Judging teaching quality means sitting in classrooms and watching, even though the learning materials themselves can be reviewed on screen.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Counseling and providing guidance to students regarding
The value here is that a specific person handles guidance and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Counsel and provide guidance to students regarding personal, academic, vocational, or behavioral issues.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (24–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: A student opening up about a personal or behavioural problem depends on trusting the particular adult sitting with them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Show the other 22 tasks
Collecting and analyzing survey data
shifting to AIThis is reading one thing and writing another: survey data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Collect and analyze survey data, regulatory information, and data on demographic and employment trends to forecast enrollment patterns and curriculum change needs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Enrolment forecasting from demographic, employment and survey data is standard data analysis with plentiful public figures to work from.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Preparing, maintaining or overseeing the preparation and maintenance of attendance, activity, planning or personnel reports and records
shifting to AIThis is reading one thing and writing another: the preparation in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare, maintain, or oversee the preparation and maintenance of attendance, activity, planning, or personnel reports and records.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Attendance, activity and personnel records are structured school data, and keeping them is routine record-keeping.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Writing articles, manuals and other publications and assisting in the distribution of promotional literature about facilities and programs
shifting to AIThis is reading one thing and writing another: articles, manuals and other publications in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Write articles, manuals, and other publications, and assist in the distribution of promotional literature about facilities and programs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (62–76 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing manuals, articles and promotional material about the school is standard writing work that software does to a publishable standard.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Determining allocations of funds
shifting to AIThis is reading one thing and writing another: allocations of funds in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Determine allocations of funds for staff, supplies, materials, and equipment, and authorize purchases.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Working out how to split a budget across staff and supplies is calculation work, though someone with authority must approve it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing and interpreting government codes
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at government codes, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Review and interpret government codes, and develop programs to ensure adherence to codes and facility safety, security, and maintenance.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Building codes are published documents, so reading them and turning them into a compliance programme suits automated drafting.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing and approving new programs
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at new programs, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Review and approve new programs, or recommend modifications to existing programs, submitting program proposals for school board approval as necessary.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: A programme review can be drafted from documents, but approving it and taking it to the school board is a person's responsibility.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning, coordinating and overseeing school logistics programs, such as bus and food services
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at school logistics programs, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Plan, coordinate, and oversee school logistics programs, such as bus and food services.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Bus routing and meal planning are scheduling problems software solves well, though someone must oversee the services day to day.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Establishing, coordinating and overseeing particular programs across school districts, such as programs to evaluate student academic achievement
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put particular programs across school districts well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Establish, coordinate, and oversee particular programs across school districts, such as programs to evaluate student academic achievement.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 37 out of 100 (30–44 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Designing a district-wide assessment programme is largely planning work, but overseeing it across schools needs a person on the ground.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recommending personnel actions related to programs and services
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put personnel actions well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Recommend personnel actions related to programs and services.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 37 out of 100 (30–44 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: A staffing recommendation can be drafted from records, but it rests on judgements about particular people and needs a manager's sign-off.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Meeting with federal, state and local agencies to stay abreast of policies and to discuss improvements for education programs
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles federal, state and local agencies and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Meet with federal, state, and local agencies to stay abreast of policies and to discuss improvements for education programs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Policy updates can be read and summarised easily, but these meetings are about building working relationships with agencies.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Organizing and directing committees of specialists
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles committees of specialists and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Organize and direct committees of specialists, volunteers, and staff to provide technical and advisory assistance for programs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Committee papers can be prepared easily, but getting specialists and volunteers to turn up and contribute is a live task.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Directing and coordinating school maintenance services and the use of school facilities
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: school maintenance services, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Direct and coordinate school maintenance services and the use of school facilities.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (17–31 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Scheduling maintenance and facility use is desk work, but directing the actual work means being on site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Advocating for new schools to be built
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles new schools and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Advocate for new schools to be built, or for existing facilities to be repaired or remodeled.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Making the case for a new or repaired school building depends on persuading specific people who must trust the advocate.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Developing partnerships with businesses, communities and other organizations to help meet identified educational needs and to provide school-to-work programs
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles partnerships and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Develop partnerships with businesses, communities, and other organizations to help meet identified educational needs and to provide school-to-work programs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (17–25 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Partnerships with local businesses and community groups are built on personal relationships and repeated face-to-face contact.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Recruiting, hiring, training and evaluating primary and supplemental staff
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles primary and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Recruit, hire, train, and evaluate primary and supplemental staff.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (17–25 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Sifting applications can be automated, but interviewing, training and judging staff rests on face-to-face impressions.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Planning and leading professional development activities
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: professional development activities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Plan and lead professional development activities for teachers, administrators, and support staff.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Planning training is easy to draft, but leading a development session means standing in front of colleagues.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Coordinating and directing extracurricular activities and programs
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: extracurricular activities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Coordinate and direct extracurricular activities and programs, such as after-school events and athletic contests.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Planning an after-school programme is desk work, but running events and matches means being there on the day.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Mentoring and supporting administrative staff members
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles administrative staff members and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Mentor and support administrative staff members, such as superintendents and principals.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (10–18 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Mentoring a principal works because of a long-standing personal relationship and candid conversations, which cannot be handed to software.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Directing and coordinating activities of teachers
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles activities of teachers and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Direct and coordinate activities of teachers, administrators, and support staff at schools, public agencies, and institutions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (9–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Running a school staff depends on standing relationships and authority with particular people, not on producing a document.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Participating in special education-related activities
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles special education-related activities and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Participate in special education-related activities, such as attending meetings and providing support to special educators throughout the district.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 12 out of 100 (5–19 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supporting special educators and attending pupil meetings depends on being present and trusted by families and staff.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Enforcing discipline and attendance rules
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: discipline, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Enforce discipline and attendance rules.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Enforcing rules depends on an adult being physically present and on students respecting that person's authority.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Teaching classes or courses to students
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: classes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Teach classes or courses to students.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Teaching a class of children depends on being in the room and on the relationship with the pupils there.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $105,870a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
- People doing this job
- 328,330in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.
Why this is shifting
The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: the scope of educational program offerings in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: determining the scope of educational program offerings and evaluating curricula. What it cannot do is be trusted in person, which is what activities of teachers run on: someone specific doing it and standing behind it. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.
Your move
Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend
Your week is splitting in two, and which half fills it is the whole question. Determining the scope of educational program offerings is going; directing and coordinating activities of teachers is not.
So, given all that: 27% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 19% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 54% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 32 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.
The occupation is an average and you are not, so the first job below is finding out where your own week actually sits.
This week: one thing
Print the task ledger above and put your own hours next to each row. Roughly, in pen, in one sitting. Then look at which group your hours actually pile up in. Twenty minutes, this week.
- What you end up holding
- your own week, on one page, sorted into what is shifting and what is not
- How long it takes
- about twenty minutes
If printing it isn’t practical: Read the rows off this page and write the same list on the back of an envelope. Same twenty minutes, same page, and it works just as well said out loud to someone who knows the job. The point is your hours next to the rows, not the paper it is on.
Over the next 90 days
Volunteer toward the durable end, visibly. Over the next ninety days put your hand up for the work in the bottom group (directing and coordinating activities of teachers) and let people see you doing it. Not a new project: the same job, with your mix deliberately tilted. The point is that when the rota or the reorganisation comes, the version of you people picture is the one doing the part that stays.
Over the next 12 months
Claim a specialism at the durable end and let the other end go. Over a year, deliberately become the person who handles directing and coordinating activities of teachers, and deliberately stop being the first choice for the rows in the top group. That trade costs something, because the exposed work is often the comfortable work. Decide it on purpose rather than by drift. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.
The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them
I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.
I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to education administrators, kindergarten through secondary (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was education and childcare administrators, preschool and daycare: only about 32% of its durable work is work you already do, it pays 44.0% less and there are far fewer of those jobs than of yours. Your own job splits about 27/73: that share of the list sits in the top exposure band and the rest does not. On this evidence the honest move is inside the job rather than out of it. Become the person who owns “confer with parents and staff to discuss educational activities, policies, and student…”, and let the exposed end go.
How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.
3 moves I checked and rejected
These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.
Education and Childcare Administrators, Preschool and Daycare
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already confer with parents and staff to discuss educational activities, policies, and student behavior…, and their equivalent is to confer with parents and staff to discuss educational activities and policies and students'…. Across both published task lists that is about 32% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: It is closer than most, and still not close enough: about 32% of that job's durable work is already yours, against the 35% I want to see before I will call something a route. It is a pay cut, in those words: $59,300 against your $105,870, 44.0% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 73,660 of those jobs against 328,330 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 22% as many seats.
Career/Technical Education Teachers, Middle School
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already enforce discipline and attendance rules, and their equivalent is to enforce all administration policies and rules governing students. Across both published task lists that is about 7% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 7% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $65,030 against your $105,870, 38.6% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 16,870 of those jobs against 328,330 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 5% as many seats.
Secondary School Teachers, Except Special and Career/Technical Education
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already enforce discipline and attendance rules, and their equivalent is to enforce all administration policies and rules governing students. Across both published task lists that is about 7% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 7% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $72,040 against your $105,870, 32.0% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
What I’d stop worrying about
A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.
The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 27% of its task weight, across 32 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The whole-job doom story
Nothing on this page says this job ends. It says the mix inside it moves. Half the rows above are unchanged or changing shape, and the plan is about which half your week sits in. That is a very different problem, and a solvable one.
Panic-buying a course
Do the twenty-minute sorting exercise first. Most people who buy a course before they have done it buy the wrong one, and the free services listed below will tell you the same thing without charging for it.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.
You are reading the United States figures
The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Head teachers and principals is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.
Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match
The other groups this work is counted across:
In UK official statistics this job is counted as Head teachers and principals and Education managers. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
Free, and complete
The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it
Nothing Collab365 runs is built for education administrators / kindergarten through secondary, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.
There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 27% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.
7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.
The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for education administrators / kindergarten through secondary. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.
Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for education administrators / kindergarten through secondary launches. Nothing else.
That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.
We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.
No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.
Questions people ask about this job
- Will AI replace Education Administrators, Kindergarten through Secondary?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 32 official task statements scored for Education Administrators, Kindergarten through Secondary (United States, SOC 11-9032), 27% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 41 out of 100 (range 35–46, band: partial). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
- Which tasks in “Education Administrators, Kindergarten through Secondary” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Collect and analyze survey data, regulatory information, and data on demographic and employment trends to forecast enrollment patterns and curriculum change…” (83/100, very high); “Prepare, maintain, or oversee the preparation and maintenance of attendance, activity, planning, or personnel reports and records” (75/100, high); “Plan and develop instructional methods and content for educational, vocational, or student activity programs” (75/100, high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
- Which tasks in “Education Administrators, Kindergarten through Secondary” stay human?
- About 54% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Teach classes or courses to students” (6/100, minimal); “Enforce discipline and attendance rules” (9/100, minimal); “Participate in special education-related activities, such as attending meetings and providing support to special educators throughout the district” (12/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
- What should someone working in “Education Administrators, Kindergarten through Secondary” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 27% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 54% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
- How is the AI exposure score for Education Administrators, Kindergarten through Secondary calculated?
- Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 32 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.
Where these numbers come from
Worth knowing about these figures
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 2 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
- Task statements
- onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- onet-db (im-rt)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-04.
- Pay and employment
- bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))
Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.
The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.
The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.
Using these figures?
Cite this
Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.
Plain text
Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).
BibTeX
@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
title = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
author = {{Collab365}},
year = {2026},
url = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
note = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.