One observation from Sparsha Hebbur, captured in Jorden’s notes, brought the challenge into focus: “STEM is not short of jobs, it is short of entry-level jobs.”
As AI takes on tasks that might previously have been carried out by someone starting their career, employers face an important question: where will the next
generation gain experience? Early roles give people the chance to ask questions, make mistakes, learn from colleagues and gradually take on responsibility. If those roles change, the opportunities to learn need to be protected. There is a question of fairness here, too. If getting started requires more experience, professional contacts or additional training, young people without access to those advantages could face an even harder route into work. Encouraging young people to consider STEM must go alongside realistic opportunities for them to enter the workforce and develop.

The use of AI on both sides of recruitment prompted plenty of discussion. Candidates can use it to produce applications quickly, while employers can use automated tools to manage the volume they receive. But how do we make sure someone’s potential is recognised in that process? A polished application can only tell us so much about a person’s curiosity, practical ability or willingness to learn. Young people need clear guidance about acceptable AI use and opportunities to demonstrate their own strengths.
For those unfamiliar with recruitment, or without someone to help them navigate it, that support can make a considerable difference.

Another comment recorded in Jorden’s notes came from Aubree Slavik: “If you want women to worry less about AI, give them less to worry about.” It was a reminder that reassurance needs to be supported by action. Concerns about bias, fairness and opportunity deserve practical responses, including clear expectations, accountability and meaningful human oversight. The discussion also considered AI’s potential to support inclusion. Used thoughtfully, it could help some neurodivergent people organise or communicate their ideas, support learning and reduce time spent on routine tasks. Those benefits depend on people having access to appropriate tools, guidance and opportunities to question how they are used.

What this means for STEM education

For STEMunity, the session reinforced the importance of giving young people opportunities to develop and trust their own thinking. Subject knowledge, critical thinking, creativity and communication all featured in the discussion. Young people need to be able to question evidence, recognise bias, explain their reasoning and judge whether an answer makes sense.

These skills need practice. Through hands-on STEM activities, young people can test ideas, make decisions, work with others and explain what they have discovered. When a design does not work first time, they have a reason to investigate, adapt and try again.

These experiences help young people recognise their strengths and build confidence in the contribution they can make. We left Parliament with plenty to reflect on, particularly the importance of keeping education and employers connected as roles change. Young people deserve an honest understanding of the challenges ahead, alongside support to explore the opportunities.

Thank you to the APPG on Diversity Inclusion in STEM, the British Science Association, the hosts and all the contributors for a thoughtful discussion. At STEMunity, we will keep working to help young people develop the skills, confidence and connections to find their place in STEM.