Technology is becoming increasingly prevalent in the world today. In the not too distant future, technology will completely replace the teacher in the classroom. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
The use of technology is increasing rapidly in the modern world. Growing technological influence can even be seen in the classroom. Despite this, it is disagreed that technology will completely replace the classroom teacher in the foreseeable future. Analyzing the inability of a technology-driven teacher to both cater to student learning needs and instill motivation will show this.
Firstly, a teacher powered by artificial intelligence would have difficulty interpreting the educational needs of a classroom of students. For example, Honda Asimov, one of the world’s most advanced robots, has trouble distinguishing simple human emotions. If today’s most advanced artificial intelligence cannot categorize these basic physical cues, it is difficult to believe that a robot could be capable of altering study plans and teaching styles in a dynamic classroom setting. Thus, this makes it clear that a technology-driven teacher is not going to be operational anytime in the near future.
Secondly, a robotic teacher would not be able to establish the emotional connection needed to motivate students. The American scientific theory of education plays a good example here. This widely supported theory argues that young learners are most motivated when they share an emotional relationship with their instructor. As most would agree expecting children to form emotional ties to machinery is unrealistic, the argument that technology will replace the teacher in the classroom can be debunked.
In summary, a robotic teacher would lack the classroom dynamism and emotional intelligence needed to be an effective instructor. Thus, it is clear why having a class run entirely by a machine is an idea that will not be realized anytime soon. It is predicted that computer technology will not replace traditional human teachers in the foreseeable future.
Discourse Markers used:
['first', 'firstly', 'if', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'still', 'thus', 'for example', 'in summary']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.229559748428 0.247107183377 93% => OK
Verbs: 0.179245283019 0.155533422707 115% => OK
Adjectives: 0.119496855346 0.0946595960268 126% => OK
Adverbs: 0.062893081761 0.0501214627716 125% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0220125786164 0.0437548338989 50% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0880503144654 0.122226691241 72% => OK
Participles: 0.0691823899371 0.0403226058552 172% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.1922504773 2.80594681477 114% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0283018867925 0.0326793684256 87% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00163938923432 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.11320754717 0.0861772015684 131% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0408805031447 0.021408717616 191% => Less modal verbs wanted (like 'must , shall , will , should , would , can , could , may , and might').
WH_determiners: 0.00943396226415 0.011925033212 79% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1857.0 1933.35771543 96% => OK
No of words: 283.0 316.048096192 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.56183745583 6.12580529183 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.20517956788 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.434628975265 0.374742101984 116% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.39222614841 0.28420135186 138% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.282685512367 0.203846283523 139% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.212014134276 0.137316102897 154% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1922504773 2.80594681477 114% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 176.037074148 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.558303886926 0.56093040696 100% => OK
Word variations: 57.4577606632 60.7387585426 95% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0891783567 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.8666666667 20.7743622355 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0360275314 49.517814964 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.8 127.492653851 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8666666667 20.7743622355 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.666666666667 0.814263465372 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38877755511 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.99599198397 0% => OK
Readability: 58.0892815077 49.1944974215 118% => OK
Elegance: 1.46428571429 1.69124875643 87% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.465718658275 0.332605444948 140% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.116352322011 0.102741220458 113% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0579606329783 0.0668466124924 87% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.523819825008 0.534860350844 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.108733062653 0.148594505496 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.207959566969 0.134430193775 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.144826949327 0.0742795772207 195% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.33993362982 0.324371583561 105% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0341099819815 0.0638462369009 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.345327440461 0.228012699653 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.111717544862 0.058150111329 192% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.68436873747 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.41683366733 59% => OK
Positive topic words: 9.0 5.90881763527 152% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 2.5751503006 116% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 1.9629258517 102% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 10.4468937876 134% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.