Andy Spears is not excited about the rise of robot teachers.
I wrote recently about the deployment of a robot teaching assistant in a school district in New York.
Students will use a unique identification code when interacting with the robot during class, allowing it to access their learning data and provide personalized support based on their past communication with the avatar, Kiguel said. “They’ll be able to say, ‘Hey, I’m student number 1234,’ and then the robot will be like, ‘Hey, we were talking about this yesterday, do you want to continue that conversation?”
In arguing in favor of AI replacing teachers, one writer suggests that AI and robot teachers are both cheaper and better than their human counterparts:
The central thesis of this article is that the future of education is likely to shift from a teacher-centered model to an AI-centered learning model, where a single advanced AI teaches millions of students simultaneously while human facilitators supervise classrooms instead of delivering lectures.
As the author suggests:
If AI can teach better than humans, why will schools continue hiring thousands of subject teachers?
I’d suggest that the premise is flawed.
While AI may well be able to tailor lessons to a specific student where they are, AI is but one more tool a teacher can use to expand horizons and enhance learning.
Schools are about people. Education is about people. People are the beneficiaries of education – and people learn from and with other people. This learning takes place using various tools.
AI may be the most advanced tool (or may be becoming) available.
AI does not understand interpersonal conflict or classroom dynamics or social interaction. AI can’t sense that a student is hungry or experiencing family issues.