Anna Esaki-Smith: AI, International Education, and Other Trends to Watch

Anna Esaki-Smith is a journalist and global education expert who has written widely about workforce development, global issues, and higher education trends. She’s also the cofounder of Education Rethink and author of the soon-to-be-published book Make College Your Superpower: It’s Not Where You Go, It’s What You Know.

Esaki-Smith spoke with International Educator about artificial intelligence (AI) and other emerging technologies, their effects on the higher education landscape—including international education specifically—and other higher education trends to watch.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

People across all sectors and industries are concerned about AI making their jobs redundant. What are some of the things about international educators’ work that will endure, rather than be replaced by AI?

In this tech-disrupted world, international educators are among the lucky ones! They bring a unique blend of cultural sensitivity and emotional intelligence to their roles, which is necessary when navigating the complexities of diverse student needs and experiences. The personalized guidance they offer is rooted in an understanding of individual aspirations and challenges, which goes beyond the capabilities of AI.

The ability to understand the push-and-pull factors that influence international students is often intuitive and personal—nothing is more helpful to recruitment than speaking to a student about their decision-making journey. And there’s a lot conveyed through how students speak, their facial expressions and hand gestures, and their emotional countenance. Technology doesn’t necessarily enhance, much less replace, that kind of engagement.

The ability to understand the push-and-pull factors that influence international students is often intuitive and personal—nothing is more helpful to recruitment than speaking to a student about their decision-making journey.

The ethical decision-making involved in addressing cultural differences and sensitive student issues requires nuanced judgment that AI currently lacks. You could probably train an AI with data on thousands of case studies and subsequent outcomes, but due to the high-stakes nature of international student services, personal attention is paramount. It’s very difficult for AI to authentically replicate human connection.

You’ve said that the challenge of education is less about integrating AI into classrooms and more about preparing students. What do you mean by that?

The challenges universities face at the moment are quite profound. Generative AI is disrupting industries and, as a result, the professions within those industries. But that process is continual and open ended as AI develops and evolves. How can universities produce employable graduates when the playing field continues to shift?

In the past, the discussion centered on how automation impacted “blue collar” workers and how, for example, advanced automation would replace long-haul truck drivers with driverless vehicles and human tollbooth collectors with cashless tolling systems. How could these displaced workers be retrained to participate in a new economy?

But generative AI focuses on a new population. AI automation targets cognitive tasks such as complex problem-solving, decision-making, and strategic planning, so we’re talking “white collar” job displacement. Teachers, budget analysts, journalists, web developers, data scientists—the net cast on jobs that are being affected by AI is wide and deep.

In order to prepare students to enter this dynamic, quickly evolving environment, universities need to instill them with the transferable skills that won’t limit them to a single industry or profession, as well as the ability to roll with the punches.

There are professions, too, that will require keen alignment with AI. Right now, AI won’t replace radiologists, but radiologists who don’t use AI to recognize complex patterns in imaging and provide quantitative rather than qualitative assessments will have a hard time finding patients, if not jobs. Who wouldn’t want a doctor who can draw on data drawn from thousands, if not millions, of past patients when making a diagnosis rather than one who bases decisions on a single perspective?

In order to prepare students to enter this dynamic, quickly evolving environment, universities need to instill them with the transferable skills that won’t limit them to a single industry or profession, as well as the ability to roll with the punches. To a degree, a niche specialization might help a graduate get a job, but if AI uproots that niche, there needs to be a plan B.

What’s the top thing you wish people knew was coming or understood about AI?

There are two things I wish people understood about AI.

First, I think there probably will be—or at least should be—a pretty critical discussion about how we define “ethics” and “bias” when it comes to AI. Through whose lens are we defining those terms? Because so much AI development is being done in the United States, one assumes those definitions are rooted in an American perspective. But as AI is being used globally, are we all on the same page when deciding what constitutes fairness or accountability? When we talk about the bias of the data AI is being trained on, is there a definition of “bias” that is agreed upon globally?

I wish people could grasp just how profoundly AI will change the world we live in.

Secondly, I wish people could grasp just how profoundly AI will change the world we live in. Take your wildest scenario about our AI-enhanced future, multiply that by 100 or even 1,000, and maybe you might come close to estimating the potential. That’s obviously a jokey thing to say, but before ChatGPT exploded in late 2022, the general public had no idea how AI would impact their lives. In a very short period, the scope of what’s being talked about, both in terms of economic potential and doomsday scenarios, has grown exponentially, and that rapid pace of change will likely continue unabated.

How can international educators use AI as a tool to enhance their work and free up their time for the things only they can do, like the personalized guidance you mentioned earlier? How can they embrace these new tools rather than resist changes?

International educators need to stay informed of emerging technologies and foster a culture of adaptability. Currently, the automation of routine administrative tasks, such as data entry or scheduling, can save time, allowing educators to focus on more value-added activities like personalized student engagement. AI-powered analytics can provide insights into student performance, enabling educators to tailor their support more effectively. Virtual assistants or chatbots can handle common queries, freeing up educators for more complex interactions.

International educators need to stay informed of emerging technologies and foster a culture of adaptability.

Utilizing AI as a supportive tool is a win-win for both educators and students as the streamlining of administrative processes opens up more time for educators to dedicate to the uniquely human aspects of their roles. With regards to embracing versus resisting change—it’s pretty obvious at this point that there is nothing to be gained by cordoning off the power of AI. Certainly, there are discussions to be had about moderation and implementation, but in terms of mindset, I think everyone must pretty much be all in.

In addition to emerging technology like AI, what are some of the trends you’re seeing in higher education right now? And what are the implications for international education?

We are keenly aware of the dramatic drop in the college-aged population that will occur starting in 2025, the so-called “enrollment cliff.” This stems from the great recession that begin in 2008, when economic stress and concern resulted in people having fewer children. Carleton College economist Nathan Grawe has written extensively about this phenomenon.

While some states will experience more severe student declines than others, the overall impact on higher education enrollments will inevitably be dampening. In fact, some universities expect to simply shrink in size, which will result in a decline in tuition revenue and subsequent cuts in faculty, programs, and student services. And that poorer campus experience, of course, leads to a bad cycle of even fewer students who want to enroll.

There needs to be deeper discussion of how strategically bringing more international students to campus might lessen the “enrollment cliff” sting.

To help address this challenge, there needs to be deeper discussion of how strategically bringing more international students to campus might lessen the “enrollment cliff” sting. For a number of universities, domestic and international recruitment functions operate as separate entities. Can’t a recruitment strategy integrate both, so they are more complementary? I know there are no hard or fast answers, but with the upcoming enrollment drop—which will further exacerbate an already existing decline due to other factors—a more collaborative relationship between the two functions can only be beneficial.

Are you seeing any additional trends in international student mobility?

There’s a lot of excitement about the rise of India as a recruitment market, surpassing China in many host destinations as the major source country. But if you look at the Open Doors data, the number of Indian graduate students in the United States rose 62.6 percent, while the number of Indian undergraduates is about a third of Chinese counterparts. The value of enrolling undergraduates is the potential to keep them for four years and then possibly through graduate school. If we’re capturing their interest at just the graduate level, we’re not reaping the benefits of that full cycle.

In fact, that’s the situation for international students in the United States overall. While there’s a lot to be said about once again exceeding the 1 million international student benchmark, the number of undergraduates only rose by 0.9 percent. Without more growth in undergraduate student numbers, I don’t think overall enrollments can rise much further.

You have a new book coming out about what high school students can do to make good decisions in their pursuit of higher education. Can you tell us a bit more about your book?

Most books written for a high school student audience center on test-taking tips or advice on writing killer college essays. My book, Make College Your Superpower: It’s Not Where You Go, It’s What You Know, which will be published in April by Rowman & Littlefield, gives students a bird’s-eye view of how an economy influenced by technology has placed a focus on skills and knowledge rather than the pedigree of a degree. It helps debunk the myth that “brand is best” and empowers students to better “own” the college application process through data-based decision-making rather than to feel like the system is dictating what they must do to achieve success.

I hope Make College Your Superpower helps defuse the overwhelming stress and anxiety high schoolers normally associate with the college selection and application process. After the pandemic and all the mental health challenges young people are experiencing, they really deserve our care and support.  •