Robots could replace teachers as the main source of information in classrooms around the world, according to a leading academic at UK's University of Oxford.
The professor's warning about the increasing use of machines in the schoolroom will mean teachers will be less important when transmitting knowledge. These days. students absorb content better from online videos. By allowing technology's superior delivery of information, the teacher will be free to engage with students in a more interactive fashion.
But, machines can't show a deep understanding of human society. Nor can they empathize with students about their personal problems. They don't have the social intelligence required to monitor a classroom, or to inspire students struggling with a concept.
In the future, students will need to take control of their own learning. A device at each student's desk will deliver content tailored to their interest and expertise, rather than everyone receiving the same material from the teacher standing in front of the class. Source: The Telegraph.
The professor's warning about the increasing use of machines in the schoolroom will mean teachers will be less important when transmitting knowledge. These days. students absorb content better from online videos. By allowing technology's superior delivery of information, the teacher will be free to engage with students in a more interactive fashion.
But, machines can't show a deep understanding of human society. Nor can they empathize with students about their personal problems. They don't have the social intelligence required to monitor a classroom, or to inspire students struggling with a concept.
In the future, students will need to take control of their own learning. A device at each student's desk will deliver content tailored to their interest and expertise, rather than everyone receiving the same material from the teacher standing in front of the class. Source: The Telegraph.
In theory, this sounds good. Students work at their own speed, learning things they are interested in, while a teacher walks around class helping where needed. It reminds me of the experiment in Australian schools in the late sixties called 'open plan' schools.
My three children attended a new school of this type when we moved into our house at Henley Beach in South Australia. The whole infant school's learning area consisted of one big room. In each section, a teacher stood beside a blackboard or equipment speaking to students seated around a table or on the floor. Children were free to roam from one area to another, seeking the subject that held their interest. Back then, technology didn't enter the equation. As an aside, the teaching method didn't work. My son's disruptive nature, contained in his high IQ, caused more trouble than the system could handle. Rather than allowing each child to learn at their own pace, the shy ones were swamped by overbearing children. It might have suited my son to be able to learn all he needed via a screen. His life could have turned out differently before his early demise. Maybe it would suit other personalities as well, like children with attention deficiency disorder.
I can see good points in learning from technology. But how would a child balance that with his family's relationships? Would he listen when his mother or father laid down the rules? Would she appreciate her mother's guidance in personal matters? It seems to me they might reject anything we consider normal. Maybe our whole social structure would collapse without close personal ties.
But I'm a writer—a novelist. (See my books on the sidebar.) That's my creative process taking over—working out a future scenario.
Would children be more likely to be inspired by robot technology or a human teacher? Do you like the way our society is headed?
My three children attended a new school of this type when we moved into our house at Henley Beach in South Australia. The whole infant school's learning area consisted of one big room. In each section, a teacher stood beside a blackboard or equipment speaking to students seated around a table or on the floor. Children were free to roam from one area to another, seeking the subject that held their interest. Back then, technology didn't enter the equation. As an aside, the teaching method didn't work. My son's disruptive nature, contained in his high IQ, caused more trouble than the system could handle. Rather than allowing each child to learn at their own pace, the shy ones were swamped by overbearing children. It might have suited my son to be able to learn all he needed via a screen. His life could have turned out differently before his early demise. Maybe it would suit other personalities as well, like children with attention deficiency disorder.
I can see good points in learning from technology. But how would a child balance that with his family's relationships? Would he listen when his mother or father laid down the rules? Would she appreciate her mother's guidance in personal matters? It seems to me they might reject anything we consider normal. Maybe our whole social structure would collapse without close personal ties.
But I'm a writer—a novelist. (See my books on the sidebar.) That's my creative process taking over—working out a future scenario.
Would children be more likely to be inspired by robot technology or a human teacher? Do you like the way our society is headed?
RSS Feed
