Top 5 Jobs in Education That Are Most at Risk from AI in Sioux Falls - And How to Adapt

Sioux Falls educators should pay attention: AI isn't a distant industry story but a local workforce force that reshapes hiring and classroom work in ways schools must plan for now.

Goldman Sachs warns that widespread AI adoption could put roughly 6–7% of U.S. jobs at risk, and a Stanford-backed analysis has already found steep declines in entry-level hires for young workers in AI-exposed roles - trends that threaten the “first-rung” opportunities many students rely on to launch careers (Goldman Sachs analysis on AI workforce impact, Fortune coverage of the Stanford study on entry-level AI impacts).

In Sioux Falls classrooms and district offices this can look like automated routine tasks, shifts in who gets hired, and new expectations for digital skills - so practical tools that cut grading time or improve accessibility (for example, rubric-aligned feedback with Copilot) matter as much as policy decisions (Example: rubric-aligned AI feedback tools for education).

Treating AI as a workforce-development challenge - and building teacher upskilling pathways - will help preserve local pathways from classroom to career.

“A recent pickup in AI adoption and reports of AI-related layoffs have raised concerns that AI will lead to widespread labor displacement,” - Joseph Briggs and Sarah Dong, Goldman Sachs Research.

To pick the top five education jobs most at risk in Sioux Falls, the analysis started with Microsoft Research's “AI applicability” framework - built from 200,000 anonymized Copilot conversations - to identify which tasks (research, writing, advising, communication) AI already handles well, then narrowed the list to the education occupations the study flags most often (for example, postsecondary business, economics, and library science teachers, plus farm and home management educators) and cross-checked that ranking against national press summaries and explainers; read the full Microsoft paper for the technical approach and the Fortune roundup for how the findings map to degree-holding roles (Microsoft Research paper on AI occupational implications, Fortune article on Microsoft Research generative AI occupational impact).

Finally, local relevance was judged by matching those high‑overlap education tasks to practical classroom and district workflows in Sioux Falls and by highlighting Nucamp's classroom-use cases (rubric-aligned Copilot feedback and accessibility tools) to show what adaptation looks like on the ground (Nucamp AI Essentials for Work syllabus - rubric-aligned AI feedback for teachers), producing a focused, evidence-based short list for targeted upskilling and policy planning.

“Our research shows that AI supports many tasks, particularly those involving research, writing, and communication, but does not indicate it can fully perform any single occupation. As AI adoption accelerates, it's important that we continue to study and better understand its societal and economic impact,” - Kiran Tomlinson, Microsoft researcher.

Post‑secondary business teachers in South Dakota are exposed because large chunks of their daily work - grading, drafting case prompts, summarizing readings, and coaching research and writing - are precisely the tasks modern generative AI handles well, and employers increasingly expect graduates to be AI‑literate; ColoradoBiz notes that colleges are already weaving AI across curricula and employers want graduates who can use AI as a complementary tool (how Colorado business schools are integrating AI).

Left unaddressed, this can hollow out entry‑level learning and the mentorship that builds real-world problem solving, but adaptation is practical: secure leadership buy‑in, run faculty workshops, form a cross‑functional team, teach ethical AI use, and fold AI into core coursework so instructors can move from late‑night grading to mentoring - using scalable tools to provide individualized, step‑by‑step feedback even in larger classes.

Local teachers can pilot rubric‑aligned Copilot feedback and accessibility tools in Sioux Falls classrooms to cut grading time while improving feedback quality (rubric‑aligned AI feedback for teachers) and follow AACSB's playbook for training trainers and integrating AI across core courses (Transforming Business Education With AI).

“It's not enough to add a course on AI; we first have to educate our faculty so that they can bring AI to life in the classroom.”

Post‑secondary economics instructors in South Dakota face clear, practical risks - and equally practical options to stay relevant - because many of the core tasks they do (drafting assessments, giving feedback on paper drafts, summarizing literature, and running data analyses) are already areas where generative AI excels, and students increasingly use these tools in ways that challenge traditional assessment and academic integrity.

That doesn't mean replacement so much as rapid role‑shift: AI copilots can free up late‑night grading time and generate tailored problem sets, while tutor bots can give students on‑demand explanations - so instructors who ignore these shifts risk losing control over learning outcomes and the chance to teach higher‑order economic reasoning.

The playbook from global analyses is straightforward: treat AI as augmentation, redesign assessment and attribution rules, and teach AI literacy alongside econometrics and critical thinking (see the Economics Network's practical guidance on AI in economics teaching).

Pilot classroom copilots for lesson planning and rubric‑aligned feedback, co‑design tools with students and colleagues to protect equity, and use accessibility/transcription tech to reach diverse learners; policy and phased rollout matter because large studies show AI‑enabled education can boost attainment if implemented thoughtfully (and uneven adoption changes labor demand over time).

Local pilots that fold AI into syllabi - rather than banning it - will help Sioux Falls economics faculty move from policing answers to coaching judgment and applied analysis.

Economics Network guidance on AI in economics teaching, Report: Economic case for AI‑enabled education, Rubric‑aligned feedback using Microsoft 365 Copilot

Post‑secondary library science instructors in South Dakota face a concrete crossroads: AI can automate core tasks - cataloging, keyword extraction and routine reference answers - freeing staff for deeper research support but also changing the very skills that make librarians indispensable.

Reporting from Cronkite News shows cataloging and research are ripe for automation and flags a shift toward semantic search that can surface materials keyword searches miss, while researchers warn AI brings hallucinations, deepfakes and new information‑literacy burdens that libraries must teach students to spot; at the same time patron privacy and vendor policy choices become front‑line decisions for campus libraries (Cronkite News report on AI's impact on libraries, research, and information retrieval, Study: the impact of artificial intelligence on information retrieval systems).

Practical adaptation for Sioux Falls faculty includes becoming prompt‑engineering and semantic‑search experts, updating information‑literacy curricula to cover hallucinations and attribution, vetting vendor privacy terms carefully, and piloting accessibility/transcription tools to widen access for all students - so the reference desk transforms from answering “what are your hours?” into a coaching hub for critical research skills, not a relic of the past (Parrot AI transcription and accessibility tool overview for education).

“If people want to know what time the library is open, a chatbot can easily answer that, which would then free me up to answer the longer questions,” - Kira Smith, Ask a Librarian.

K–12 administrators in Sioux Falls are at the crossroads where AI can be both a time‑saving ally and a new source of risk: district leaders can use AI to draft family communications, flag chronic absenteeism, and automate scheduling so staff can focus on students, but imperfect outputs, privacy worries, and equity gaps mean oversight is nonnegotiable.

National surveys show the urgency - 97% of superintendents say schools must teach AI literacy, yet only 37% have a plan and 84% report teacher anxiety about students using generative AI to shortcut assignments (EAB Voice of the Superintendent survey on K‑12 AI preparedness) - and RAND/EDSpaces reporting finds principals already lean on AI for operations (about 58% reported use), which argues for careful pilots rather than blanket bans (EDSpaces guide on using AI in school operations and procurement).

South Dakota has limited statewide guidance, so Sioux Falls districts should start with small, supervised pilots (think “AI as intern” not colleague), clear privacy checks, task‑based integrity rules, and professional development focused on bias mitigation and tool evaluation - practical steps that turn tedious workflows into coaching time without handing students unverified answers (yes, an AI draft holiday letter once suggested an outdoor California rink - proof that human review matters).

“EAB's report confirms that teacher shortages, behavioral disruptions, worsening student mental health, and other familiar challenges are so pervasive that exploring how new technologies such as AI can help doesn't even make the ‘to‑do' list,” - EAB Senior Director of K‑12 Research Ben Court.

Tutors and academic-support staff in Sioux Falls should treat AI tutors as powerful helpers that require clear guardrails and human supervision: research shows AI can make learning more engaging and personalized - especially for English learners - but unrestricted use often leads students to treat chatbots like answer keys and walk away after a quick check, so careful design matters.

Practical steps for local tutoring programs include piloting structured AI tutors that never give full answers, training tutors to monitor student–bot sessions, and using AI to coach human tutors in real time (examples include Tutor CoPilot and live feedback on talk ratios), while keeping equity and accessibility front and center.

Start small: onboard students in-class, require teacher‑in‑the‑loop prompts, document outcomes, and invest in professional development so Sioux Falls tutors move from policing shortcuts to amplifying curiosity - turning a cheap chatbot into a dependable study partner that nudges students toward thinking, not just answers (and pairing these pilots with transcription/accessibility tools can widen reach across South Dakota classrooms).

“Any technology intervention that leaves out the teacher… is not going to kickstart.”

Educational content creators and curriculum writers in Sioux Falls are at a fork: generative AI can now automate the routine heavy lifting - study guides, project outlines, quizzes and full lesson plans - so teams that once spent five hours a week on planning (that's roughly one workday reclaimed) can instead focus on localizing curriculum, equity, and deeper student-facing work (University of Michigan guide to designing teaching activities with generative AI, Panorama Education guide to generative AI for district leaders).

But the risk is real: cookie‑cutter, unvetted content and integrity/privacy gaps unless writers adopt clear guardrails. Practical pivots for South Dakota teams: treat AI as a co‑designer (the Edutopia 80/20 approach - AI drafts most of a lesson, instructors refine the rest - works well for quality control), build prompt libraries and template patterns from Vanderbilt and U‑M to preserve pedagogical intent, add transparent assignment language and AI audit trails from OSU, and require human review for bias, relevance, and FERPA concerns; these steps turn a threat into an efficiency win while keeping the human judgment that matters most in local classrooms (Edutopia article on AI tools for lesson planning).

Sioux Falls educators don't need to guess at next steps - start small, then scale: run supervised classroom pilots that use rubric‑aligned Copilot feedback to reclaim late‑night grading time while teaching AI literacy, then stack practical AI training onto formal leadership credentials so career pivots are intentional, not reactive.

For hands‑on workplace skills, the Nucamp AI Essentials for Work bootcamp (15 weeks; early‑bird $3,582) teaches promptcraft, tool workflows, and job‑based AI use that translate to classroom pilots and staff PD (Nucamp AI Essentials for Work syllabus - practical AI skills for educators); for district or school leaders eyeing a lasting role shift, Buena Vista University's online Master of Education in Educational Administration (33 credits at $495/credit) is built for working teachers and includes applied simulations and internships that prepare candidates for PK–12 leadership (Buena Vista University M.Ed. in Educational Administration program).

Pair short courses with a clear local rollout plan - privacy checks, ethics rules, and co‑designed evaluation metrics - and map outcomes (time saved, student access, assessment integrity) before wider adoption; that way South Dakota educators can convert AI risk into new coaching capacities, leadership credentials, or tech‑adjacent career pivots without leaving the classroom behind.

“Now, more than ever, our schools need great educational leaders. At BVU, we are excited to offer a fully online, affordable, and flexible program for teachers who are dedicated to growing in leadership and becoming administrators.” - Dr. Lucas DeWitt, Program Director