A couple of weeks ago, I was listening to a series of stories on Marketplace called Robots Ate My Job, in which David Broncaccio drove from coast to coast trying not to have personal contact with anyone, dealing only with automated hotel check ins and self checkouts, etc. It was very interesting.
Over the last few weeks, I've been at several meetings and conferences where I encountered a very real fear among faculty that technology would take over their jobs. This, for example, was a frequent unspoken message when folks talked about why they didn't use Tegrity (what if my students stop coming to class?).
This fear is, frankly, baffling to me. In my mind, if technology can do the same thing that I do, that means it probably does not require my two terminal degrees to get that job done. So, hooray for technology - I'll let it do that job while I do something more worthwhile that does require at least one of my fancy degrees. Technology isn't stealing our jobs, it's liberating us from the mundane to really engage with students in a more authentic way. It's a tool that makes it easier for us to do our jobs.
Of course, if you are reading this, I'm preaching to the choir, so I'll get down off my soapbox. I'll wrap up this commentary with a brief postscript. On my way home from the ATL conference, I stopped for lunch at Jack in the Box. In the lobby of the restaurant was a big machine urging me to use it to place my order instead of the friendly looking woman at the counter. Thinking of the Broncaccio story, I decided to try the machine. I should say that I am one who generally opts for self check out at the grocery store and ATMs instead of going in the bank. The Jack in the box machine was quick and easy to use. However, it somehow felt rather unsatisfying. I would have preferred to chat for a moment with the friendly woman at the counter.
Hi Stephanie,
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with you when you say that "robots are taking my job" is something that teachers don't have to fear. I think this scenario is a very real possibility.
The quest to cut corners and cut costs will lead to having technology do not just the "worthwhile" parts of teaching, but everything possible-- BUT at a lower level of competence. In other words, teaching by machine will become acceptable, even if it is not as good as teaching by humans, because it will be either (a) justified on the grounds that the difference in teaching quality is negligible or (b) accepted as inevitable for budgetary reasons.
My guess is that the first step towards the death of teaching will happen when, like the WGU model, teachers will be asked to "outsource" their grading to rubric-driven machines. Teachers will fall into the trap, and will agree because who likes grading, right? But machine-grading will be the wedge that separates us from our students, and after that it will all go downhill.
Geeta Sadashivan
I do think some of the fear is real, especially with modules that are self paced but require only the right answer. The creative problem solving piece is sometimes missing. I do agree that educators need to embrace the changes in their field and try different ways of teaching. Seems that would be true for any field as important as teaching!
Delete