I remember my time as a student back in 1999: a new search engine, Google, was starting to edge out AltaVista and Yahoo — both of which dominated the Internet search landscape throughout the 90s. It was an exciting time for Computer Engineering, as open-source software like Linux was gaining traction in Enterprises. Microsoft and the Java ecosystem were also equipping us with powerful IDEs like Visual Studio, JBuilder, and IntelliJ with features like code completion. Yet, despite these advancements, we still relied heavily on books as primary sources of information. Exams were still handwritten, even for coding: we memorised library functions and syntax, despite having access to the Internet and some fairly advanced tools.

Our schools insisted on handwritten code and taught us programming using Notepad instead of IDEs. At the time, student laptops were underpowered, and IDEs were huge memory and CPU hogs, running painfully slow. Despite the inconvenience, students like me made every endeavour to set them up, knowing the efficiencies they offered.

Today, this all sounds ridiculous. With modern IDEs, who would memorise hundreds of function calls or API structures? I actively work across multiple programming languages and frameworks and use countless DevOps tools and certainly can not memorise everything; perhaps it’s age, but it’s nearly impossible to keep all these details in my head.

Twenty-five years on, the world is vastly different, but education systems still lag in adapting to technological shifts. Educators remain cautious about how AI impacts academic integrity and the assessment of written or coding assignments. While AI use isn’t necessarily discouraged, it’s also not fully encouraged; students are however already using AI, much as we once turned to Google and IDEs in place of traditional textbooks.

For Software Development, AI coding assistants are here to stay, yet they’re unlikely to replace Software Developers soon — especially those who leverage AI-enabled tools. There are stories of startups built by non-technical founders using AI-generated code, but the actual efficacy of purely AI-driven development remains unproven. 

So, what should we teach students, and how should we evaluate professionals? Educational institutions and hiring managers must rethink how they assess skills in this new landscape.

Developing Strong Fundamentals

AI models today, especially large language models (LLMs), are not infallible. They can produce erroneous or nonsensical responses. Strong foundational knowledge enables students and professionals to evaluate AI outputs critically and refine prompts to achieve the desired results. From my experience with students using AI-generated code, those lacking fundamentals struggle to interpret the code correctly and often can’t integrate it with existing codebases. For instance, AI models can generate verbose scaffolding or unnecessary details that may disrupt the intended functionality. Without solid fundamentals, these additional complexities create confusion instead of clarity.

Cultivating Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is crucial for discerning when and how to use AI solutions effectively. Humans bring valuable contextual knowledge to problem-solving — something not easily available to AI. Tackling complex real-world problems often involves navigating nuances such as geographical, cultural, and political factors. As a simple example, a form with “first and last name” fields may not be culturally appropriate in some countries, especially in parts of Asia where such naming conventions are uncommon. While an AI model might “know” this in theory, it often requires a user’s insight and critical thinking to specify it in an AI prompt when generating a form.

Mastering Communication

Although AI can generate well-structured text, effective communication remains a uniquely human skill. Communication goes beyond words to include emotional intelligence, empathy, and cultural sensitivity. AI may one day grow up with us and learn every little bit of detail of our lives (it is a scary thought, but absolutely possible future) but it won’t easily replicate the nuances of face-to-face interactions, emotional cues, or the subtleties involved in team dynamics. Communication skills, therefore, remain vital for collaborating with others and expressing complex ideas in ways that are both clear and motivating.

Conclusion

As we move forward, Software Developers will still need to synthesize large amounts of information before even engaging AI. We may no longer need to memorise every technical detail or write every bit of code, but we’ll still need a robust foundation to understand, prompt, and critically evaluate AI-generated responses. AI is reshaping learning and hiring, but the fundamentals of understanding, thinking critically, and communicating effectively will remain core competencies in software development for the foreseeable future.

This article was also posted on Medium.com:
https://medium.com/@detach8/how-ai-will-transform-learning-and-hiring-in-software-development-642e3d678cc5