The Necessities for 21st Century Classrooms

Throughout the research and learning more in depth of whether or not computers can replace teachers, I don't think my opinion has changed. It is more so my understanding of both sides of the argument that has evolved since I stated my initial thoughts.

The extent to which computers can replace teachers, I think that a satisfactory answer has come down to be that teachers are irreplaceable. Rather, technology is best to be used and is necessary as a tool in the 21st century classroom. As said by Jeff and Katie Dunn in their article, " Technology is not the lesson, it is there to enhance the lesson." It is the best of both worlds that will provide the best form of education for students. " The modern teacher must be willing to take chances and be able to figure out not just how technology works but how it works for each student, and where its use is most appropriate."

                                                                                                                   (picture source)

The bar for education has evolved and risen high in this 21st century and will continue to do so. To adapt to that, change to the teaching and learning in the classroom is necessary to prepare students for the also ever changing outside world beyond their education career. According to Thomas Arnett, he mentions in his article that " Traditional classrooms were designed to prepare students for jobs in the industrial economy of the past.  To meet this end, the system was set up to process seemingly homogeneous batches of similarly aged students through one-sized fits all instruction." Times have long since changed, " The model of monolithic classroom instruction from the late 1800's just wasn't designed to allow teachers to meet 21st century expectations."


                                                                                                                                     (picture source)

Debate

What is the view from the other side of the argument? While researching a debate poll concerning computers replacing teachers, arguments that supported the idea were repetitive in bringing up the points that: schools can save their money by using technology to improve/provide other things for the students instead of paying teachers, you can find all the answers to your questions through a computer unlike a teacher, computers are more efficient and time saving, and that we are becoming more and more dependent on technology so it's only natural to use computers instead of teachers. Although there is some truth to these points, is it significant enough to enforce the change?


                                                                                                                                         (picture source)

In arguments against replacing teachers, reiterate the importance of human interaction as the best form of learning and that as efficient the use of technology may seem to be, it does more harm than good to the students. Compared to the arguments in support of computers replacing teachers in advancing education in the debate poll, according to an article in Times of India, an Indian English-language daily newspaper, " A 2000 report from a US organization comprising of educationists and health professionals-Alliance for Childhood-stated that instead of raising the standard of learning, computers are actually negating the healthy development of young students". To provide a middle ground, or balance, it especially depends on the parents to be important enforcers, for " the learning process begins at home."

The Human Aspects of Good Instruction

Computers are no doubt, pretty efficient in direct instruction and assessing students' abilities. However, teachers do that, and more. They involve interactive ways for students to understand new information through class activities and projects, whereas computers only present it.  A lot of times we wonder why such activities are necessary, especially as students. Isn't it just a big waste of time to create a shoe box diorama of the planets just to learn about the solar system since it's going to be thrown out afterwards? Why do I have to write a whole book report on Shakespeare and present it to the class? In Thomas Arnett's article, he says, " The best teachers are driven by a "whatever it takes" attitude to ensure all their students receive the resources and support needed." This connects to a point I made in my first blog about emotion. In times when students struggle learning on their own, teachers are their support. This includes changing up the methods of teaching and adapting to the student's needs to help them evaluate and incorporate what they learn to multiple subjects and the real world and " Those human aspects of good instruction are not going to be replaced by machines anytime soon."



(picture source)

Lisa Mims, an educator herself, shares her perspective in her blog, against the idea of replacing teachers with computers. She also reiterates the point that computers can't adjust to student needs. Student performance shouldn't be based on simply memorizing information, teachers encourage critical and higher level thinking. With the technology that students have access to these days, they are already lacking in human interaction. Can you imagine how students will be if the only thing they interact with for the majority of everyday in the entirety of their school career is a computer?  Education is important but social skills are also significant for the real world.

We don't always have the ability to perform at our 100%, most days are good and some days it can't be helped. We tend to forget that teachers are human too. They honestly don't get enough credit for the amount of work that comes with the job: designing lesson plans, coming up with different approaches for different student needs, supervise in clubs or sports, other administrative responsibilities, and professionally handle student behavior.

The Indespensable Role of People

Are the students' pursuit of education only being slowed down by teachers? Sugata Mitra, a professor and computer scientist, presents in his ted talk of his famous "hole in the wall" experiment he did in India. In New Delhi, Mitra is head of research and development at NIIT, a software and training company. Outside of his office is a wall which separates the NIIT building from the slums. In the wall, a computer was installed for children in the slums to access. It's a technology those children have no familiarity with and it was set in the English language. Without any guidance, they learned how to use the computer on their own and taught others who also caught interest.

This can leave an impression that the role of teachers teaching is no longer needed, rather, it is only to carry out discipline and oversee testing. Mitra says, " Teachers often ask me, am I going to lose my job? I say no because your job will get harder. It will become a different job. It will go from being a master standing at the front of class to a helpful friend at the back."

But why replace teachers who are affectively doing their job with technology that is supposed to enhance their work? " The idea that computers can ever replace teachers and schools reveals a deep lack of understanding about the role leadership plays in student success" in which Wendy Kopp says in her article, supporting the effectiveness of teachers being the leader and supporter for students. The secret of successful schools to having successful students is to recruit the best teachers. " Computers cannot create a culture of excellence and push students to meet high expectations."

Technology is meant to be a tool, a means of helping us to efficiently achieve our goals. However, it all depends on how we use it that will determine if it is helpful or harmful.


This graph represents students learning in a classroom with a teacher and students that study without.

Can Computers Replace Teachers?

(picture source)

Whether used to get things done or as a way to entertain ourselves, these days, technology is accessible practically everywhere and is practically used by everyone, everyday. When put into the hands of kids, a lot of the times it is used for more fun things than work. Not going to deny it, it is pretty easy to get distracted, everyone has been guilty of it. What is known to cause distractions for kids in school has taken a turn in being integrated as an additional way of learning in the classroom, accessible as early as elementary. Technology has evolved learning in classroom and has been a game changer; paper tests turned into tests taken online, homework can be accessed online, hand written essays evolved to typing and submitting it online, researching online is preferred rather than books, even online classes. The only thing that remains are the teachers, if we can get information on computers already, then why not replace them altogether as well?

I think replacing teachers entirely isn't the best way. We humans are emotional creatures, and that is something computers can't sense and don't understand, unlike teachers. Like a computer, they are a source of knowledge for the students but, as much as it may be taken for granted, they can see more than just your grades. They can provide the extra support when students struggle to learn on their own.

Does the use of computers eliminate chances for human error and prove to be more efficient? Is using technology only a way to find answers rather than actually learning? I hope to find some answers though researching detailed articles and debates on the different perspectives, and especially involving the opinions of  teachers and students. In addition, I am also going to look into studies of student success rates in online learning and in the classroom.