New research is flagging negative cost-adjusted returns for some graduate pathways and raising questions about how students and families should evaluate “AI-proof” graduate degrees. A report from the Postsecondary Education and Economic Research Center estimated that several master’s degrees can produce negative returns once tuition and fees are accounted for, with the weakest outcomes reported for psychology and clinical psychology. In the broader labor market, reporting also highlights how AI and hiring practices are shifting entry points for young workers. Indeed data described “experience creep,” with employers posting roles requiring more experience and shrinking entry-level opportunities; Stanford research cited in the coverage links AI exposure to declines in early-career employment. Taken together, the pieces suggest a growing accountability gap: academic programs and student decision-making may not be aligned with evolving labor market demand, especially for roles vulnerable to automation and for degrees whose career pipelines are sensitive to market conditions. For universities, the immediate priority is improving student-facing information about program-level outcomes and connecting graduate and career services to the labor shifts shaping job openings.