Opens in a new tab
needsahuman
Search ⌘KGet the data

Will AI replace philosophy and religion teachers, postsecondary?

A little.

This job scores 64 out of 100 on (higher is safer). Today AI could do about 8% of the work by itself, people do 55% with AI’s help, and 37% still needs a person.

Updated 3 October 2026O*NET-SOC 25-1126UK SOC 2311Release 2026-Q4
Educational Instruction and LibraryPhilosophy and Religion Teachers, Postsecondary25-1126 · 2026-Q4
8% AI does it55% AI helps37% needs a human
Your job's name, lit by the work that still needs a human.Needs a human 37%AI helps 55%AI does it 8%
Each ridge is a slice of the job's task time.Needs a human 37%AI helps 55%AI does it 8%
The job’s mark

No two jobs leave the same print

Every job gets its own fingerprint, drawn from its code. The amber ridges are the share of task time that still needs a person. Below them, the same ridges are written out in ones and zeros: slate for the work AI helps with, white for the work AI can do.

Philosophy and Religion Teachers, Postsecondary, O*NET-SOC 25-1126. 37% of the job’s task time still needs a human, so 37 of every 100 ridges are amber; slate is what AI helps with, white what AI can do.

What AI can and cannot do

The tasks that make up the job, from O*NET, and where AI stands on each today. 37% of the task time still needs a human.

Each block is one task; its height is its share of working time.Needs a human 37%AI helps 55%AI does it 8%
The job's task list: the parts AI can do are blacked out.Needs a human 37%AI helps 55%AI does it 8%
Evaluate and grade students' class work, assignments, and papers.AI helps
Initiate, facilitate, and moderate classroom discussions.Needs a human
Prepare and deliver lectures to undergraduate or graduate students and the community on topics such as ethics, logic, and contemporary religious thought.AI helps
Compile, administer, and grade examinations, or assign this work to others.AI helps
Prepare course materials, such as syllabi, homework assignments, and handouts.AI helps
Keep abreast of developments in the field by reading current literature, talking with colleagues, and participating in professional conferences.AI helps
Maintain student attendance records, grades, and other required records.AI helps
Write articles and books.AI helps
Perform administrative duties, such as serving as department head.Needs a human
Conduct research in a particular field of knowledge and publish findings in professional journals, books, or electronic media.AI does it
Plan, evaluate, and revise curricula, course content, course materials, and methods of instruction.AI helps
Maintain regularly scheduled office hours to advise and assist students.Needs a human
Advise students on academic and vocational curricula and on career issues.AI helps
Supervise undergraduate or graduate teaching, internship, and research work.Needs a human
Select and obtain materials and supplies, such as textbooks.AI helps
Collaborate with colleagues to address teaching and research issues.Needs a human
Serve on academic or administrative committees that deal with institutional policies, departmental matters, and academic issues.Needs a human
Participate in student recruitment, registration, and placement activities.AI helps
Compile bibliographies of specialized materials for outside reading assignments.AI does it
Participate in campus and community events.Needs a human
Act as advisers to student organizations.Needs a human
Write grant proposals to procure external research funding.AI helps

Is it better than a person? The evidence

No direct test against people in this job yet. Every study is graded A to D, and vendor studies are labelled as such.

When could it be replaced?

Could be largely automated 2034–2044

80% of scenarios between 2034 and 2044. A range from our scenario model of capability, adoption and friction, not a forecast that the job ends.

The sand is the human working years left, measured in the same 40-year glass for every job, so a safe trade starts nearly full and an exposed job with a thin layer.

The sand is the human working years left, in the same 40-year glass for every job.Years still needing a humanYears run out

How this job could shift, year by year

Where the job could sit on our scale each year to 2060, across the ten scenarios behind its replacement range.

Today
Will AI replace this job?
A little.
By 2045
100%
of our scenarios have AI largely doing this job by 2045 (Largely.)
0% still have it mostly needing a person (A little. or Nah.)
By 2060
100%
of our scenarios have AI largely doing this job by 2060 (Largely.)
0% still have it mostly needing a person (A little. or Nah.)

We run this job as ten scenarios spread across its replacement range. In each, the score moves towards the bottom band (Largely: AI could largely do the job) by the year that scenario reaches it, slowly at first and faster later, as adoption usually goes. Each bar splits the ten by the band they put the job in. The model stops at 2060. How the timeline works

Share of this job's scenarios in each verdict band, today to 20600%25%50%75%100%2026: 100.0% of scenarios: AI could do a little of this job (A little.)100%Today2030: 90.0% of scenarios: AI could partly do this job (Partly.)90%2030: 10.0% of scenarios: AI could mostly do this job (Mostly.)10%20302035: 10.0% of scenarios: AI could partly do this job (Partly.)10%2035: 30.0% of scenarios: AI could mostly do this job (Mostly.)30%2035: 60.0% of scenarios: AI could largely do this job (Largely.)60%20352040: 10.0% of scenarios: AI could mostly do this job (Mostly.)10%2040: 90.0% of scenarios: AI could largely do this job (Largely.)90%20402045: 100.0% of scenarios: AI could largely do this job (Largely.)100%20452050: 100.0% of scenarios: AI could largely do this job (Largely.)100%20502055: 100.0% of scenarios: AI could largely do this job (Largely.)100%20552060: 100.0% of scenarios: AI could largely do this job (Largely.)100%2060
Will AI replace the job?Largely.Mostly.Partly.A little.Nah.
Share of this job's scenarios in each band, year by year. Updated with every release.
Show the data
YearLargelyMostlyPartlyA littleNah
Today (2026)0.0%0.0%0.0%100.0%0.0%
20300.0%10.0%90.0%0.0%0.0%
203560.0%30.0%10.0%0.0%0.0%
204090.0%10.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
2045100.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
2050100.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
2055100.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
2060100.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%

What’s stopping AI taking over?

The things that keep this work with people, strongest first. Each is scored 0 to 100 from O*NET work context, licensing and the evidence we have.

LicensingUsual entry requirement (BLS): doctoral or professional degree; 1 task statement mentions a licence or certification.
LiabilityMistakes are rated 2.4 out of 5 for consequence and decisions 3.8 out of 5 for impact; someone has to answer for them.
Evidence gapNo study yet compares AI with people doing this job, so employers have no proof it is good enough.
Clients want a personFace-to-face contact is rated 4.3 and physical closeness 2.8 out of 5; caring for or serving people is 3.2 out of 5 in importance.
RegulationWorkers rate responsibility for others' health and safety 1.8 out of 5; the sector has its own rules on who may do the work.
Physical work0% of the task time is physical.

What would it cost to hand the work to AI?

The share of the year AI could handle (851 of 2,080 hours a year), priced two ways. Both are ranges, not quotes.

AI model usage, a year
$90–$8,510
A person’s wage for the same hours
$20,100–$57,090

AI cost covers model usage only: no integration, licences, oversight or the human time still needed to review the work. Human cost is the wage for the same hours, without benefits or overheads. As of 2026-10.

Robots and humanoids

AI software can only take the work at a screen. The rest needs a robot that can do it.

0%
of the task time is physical work
None needed
the kind of robot the physical work would need
Little of this job is physical, so robotics is not what holds AI back.

Source: Anthropic Economic Index, 'What work can robots do?' (30 September 2026); O*NET 31.0 task weights.

Which AI skills does this job lean on?

The job’s task time split by what an AI model would need to be good at, and where models stand today.

Each star is a task, grouped by the AI skill it leans on.Needs a human 37%AI helps 55%AI does it 8%
Writing · 16.5% of time
Strong
Drafts, edits and translates most routine documents at professional quality.
Analysis · 20% of time
Strong
Reliable on structured data and rules; uneven on judgement calls with thin information.
Coding · 0% of time
Strong
Agents complete many routine software tasks end to end; larger systems still need people.
Vision and design · 0% of time
Good
Reads documents, images and layouts well; specialist imaging needs dedicated, approved tools.
Speech · 7% of time
Good
Voice agents handle routine calls and live interpreting; complex or sensitive calls still go to people.
Planning and agents · 22.4% of time
Emerging
Multi-step agents work in narrow, well-tooled workflows; open-ended coordination is unreliable.
Physical manipulation · 0% of time
Early
Robots handle structured, repetitive handling; general dexterity outside fixed settings is not commercial.
Care and persuasion · 34.2% of time
Limited
Can script, coach and advise; trust, presence and accountability still need a person.
Amber matter holds its orbit, slate circles the inner disc, white falls in.Needs a human 37%AI helps 55%AI does it 8%
How exposed is it?

Still needs a human: 64/100↑ safer

The amber matter on the outside holds its orbit: that is the task time that still needs a person. The slate matter circling the inner disc is the work AI helps with. The white matter is the share AI can do; it spirals in and is gone over the edge.

The matter follows the job’s task split: 37% needs a human, 55% AI helps, 8% AI does it. Still needs a human: 64/100 ↑ safer. Will AI replace them? A little.

What the AIs say

We asked four AI assistants the same question: will AI replace this job in the next 10 years? One word (Yes, Partly or No), then one sentence. Our own answer, from the data: Still needs a human: 64/100 ↑ safer. Will AI replace them? A little.

ChatGPTPartly

AI may support religion teachers with resources and personalized learning, but the human role in guidance, community, values, and lived faith formation will remain essential.

gpt-5.5-2026-04-23 · asked 2026-10-03
ClaudeNo

Teaching religion involves nuanced moral guidance, personal mentorship, and community/spiritual connection that AI cannot authentically replicate within that timeframe.

claude-sonnet-5 · asked 2026-10-03
GeminiNo

While AI can assist by providing information and analyzing texts, it cannot replicate the human empathy, spiritual mentorship, and lived faith that are essential to teaching religion.

gemini-3.8-flash · asked 2026-10-03
PerplexityPartly

AI will automate some instructional and administrative tasks, but human religion teachers will likely remain essential for mentorship, spiritual formation, ethical guidance, and community.

sonar · asked 2026-10-03

Assistants answer from what they learned in training (Perplexity also searches the web), so they can be confidently wrong, and the same question can get a different answer tomorrow. Our score is built from task data and graded evidence. Answers collected through DataForSEO.

Cite this page

NeedsAHuman.com (2026). Will AI replace Philosophy and Religion Teachers, Postsecondary? A little. Still needs a human: 64/100, higher is safer; release 2026-Q4. https://needsahuman.com/jobs/philosophy-and-religion-teachers-postsecondary/ (accessed 3 October 2026).

Scores change with each , so cite the release. The data is open under : credit NeedsAHuman.com with a link. Open data · Press

Put the badge on your site

The badge updates itself with each release and links back to this page.

Sources

  • Tasks and work context: 31.0, ().
  • Jobs, pay and projections: US , and 2025–35.
  • How AI is used today: ; Microsoft Research, .
  • What AI can do: our task ratings ( r1) and the quality evidence register.
  • UK names and employment: coding index and .

How each score is built: methodology. Every figure on this page: open data. Release 2026-Q4.