Total Posts:61|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Computers - The Teachers of the Future?

Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2011 10:04:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Topic: Is learning an education through a computer the future of teaching? It would seem to me that anything which can be taught by a human in a classroom, can be taught on a computer anywhere one wishes. If you incorporate social programs for social development in the physical world, I think it could be a direct replacement of the traditional education system.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2011 10:10:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/22/2011 10:04:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
Topic: Is learning an education through a computer the future of teaching? It would seem to me that anything which can be taught by a human in a classroom, can be taught on a computer anywhere one wishes. If you incorporate social programs for social development in the physical world, I think it could be a direct replacement of the traditional education system.

Most of my education (about eight years of it) was done on the computer. It worked well for me, and I could see it becoming more popular in the future.

I'm not sure that I'd make it the only way of getting an education, there are still some problems that need to be worked out. My computer used to crash a couple times a year, and all the data would get deleted, which was a big problem.

Also, what about areas of the world where people can't get reliable power or internet access? I can't imagine it working there.
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2011 11:03:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/22/2011 10:04:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
Topic: Is learning an education through a computer the future of teaching? It would seem to me that anything which can be taught by a human in a classroom, can be taught on a computer anywhere one wishes. If you incorporate social programs for social development in the physical world, I think it could be a direct replacement of the traditional education system.

Eh... I like school over computers for two reasons: a) I have good teachers and b) social stuff.

Also, this "If you incorporate social programs for social development in the physical world," could be kinda humorous.
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 12:08:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/22/2011 10:04:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
Topic: Is learning an education through a computer the future of teaching? It would seem to me that anything which can be taught by a human in a classroom, can be taught on a computer anywhere one wishes. If you incorporate social programs for social development in the physical world, I think it could be a direct replacement of the traditional education system.

Computers can be a great learning. Ie. Many students in Australia are given laptops for use in schooling (strong filtering and stuff to prevent gaming though) . The laptops make things a lot easier for some things. However, to suggest that teaching can be done entirely through computers is a bit off (in my opinion) .

Many students don't have the drive to learn, and learning off a computer accentuates this problem. Furthermore, humans can more directly fix individual student problems and such.

Also, are you talking about teaching through computers with a human giving lessons remotely, or talking about students just researching things on their computer to learn? Because the second point (and artificial intelligence teaching students) are definitely not plausible. Explaining what you believe should be done in greater depth will allow me to better answer your question.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 12:08:31 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/22/2011 10:04:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
Topic: Is learning an education through a computer the future of teaching? It would seem to me that anything which can be taught by a human in a classroom, can be taught on a computer anywhere one wishes. If you incorporate social programs for social development in the physical world, I think it could be a direct replacement of the traditional education system.

Computers can be a great learning. Ie. Many students in Australia are given laptops for use in schooling (strong filtering and stuff to prevent gaming though) . The laptops make things a lot easier for some things. However, to suggest that teaching can be done entirely through computers is a bit off (in my opinion) .

Many students don't have the drive to learn, and learning off a computer accentuates this problem. Furthermore, humans can more directly fix individual student problems and such.

Also, are you talking about teaching through computers with a human giving lessons remotely, or talking about students just researching things on their computer to learn? Because the second point (and artificial intelligence teaching students) are definitely not plausible. Explaining what you believe should be done in greater depth will allow me to better answer your question.

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 7:18:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.

Thank you for clearing some matters up. By 'future' I had been referring to the following decades or the near future, as opposed to a more distant future. Ie. I believe that it is not within our technological capabilities to have AI teach vs. humans. Any look at current AI technology shows this to be obvious (I'll list examples if need be) .

Now, I agree that computers can find patterns of learning. However, this fails to cover some key points. 1, while it's all merry to say that computers will teach you in a way that is best for you, our knowledge of the mind is still rather primitive - ie. we don't know exactly how things work, so no computer program can help here. Furthermore, I, as stated before, don't believe AI is advanced enough. At the moment trying to hold a meaningful (ie. intelligible) conversation with a computer is impossible. Computers have trouble navigating what we consider to be very simple mazes (try a room) .

Although I'm sure I'm not writing this as well as I could have, my point is this - computers becoming teachers are something for a more distant future that can only happen when progress is made in various other disciplines (psychology, brain etc.) . For now, computers are best used as a supplementary tool to teachers. Make no mistake, I have great respect for things such as technology, but if you've ever done a little bit of computer programming, you'll know the difficulties facing you in programming sentience.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 7:18:02 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.

Thank you for clearing some matters up. By 'future' I had been referring to the following decades or the near future, as opposed to a more distant future. Ie. I believe that it is not within our technological capabilities to have AI teach vs. humans. Any look at current AI technology shows this to be obvious (I'll list examples if need be) .

Now, I agree that computers can find patterns of learning. However, this fails to cover some key points. 1, while it's all merry to say that computers will teach you in a way that is best for you, our knowledge of the mind is still rather primitive - ie. we don't know exactly how things work, so no computer program can help here. Furthermore, I, as stated before, don't believe AI is advanced enough. At the moment trying to hold a meaningful (ie. intelligible) conversation with a computer is impossible. Computers have trouble navigating what we consider to be very simple mazes (try a room) .

Although I'm sure I'm not writing this as well as I could have, my point is this - computers becoming teachers are something for a more distant future that can only happen when progress is made in various other disciplines (psychology, brain etc.) . For now, computers are best used as a supplementary tool to teachers. Make no mistake, I have great respect for things such as technology, but if you've ever done a little bit of computer programming, you'll know the difficulties facing you in programming sentience.

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 9:09:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 7:18:02 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.

Thank you for clearing some matters up. By 'future' I had been referring to the following decades or the near future, as opposed to a more distant future. Ie. I believe that it is not within our technological capabilities to have AI teach vs. humans. Any look at current AI technology shows this to be obvious (I'll list examples if need be) .

Now, I agree that computers can find patterns of learning. However, this fails to cover some key points. 1, while it's all merry to say that computers will teach you in a way that is best for you, our knowledge of the mind is still rather primitive - ie. we don't know exactly how things work, so no computer program can help here. Furthermore, I, as stated before, don't believe AI is advanced enough. At the moment trying to hold a meaningful (ie. intelligible) conversation with a computer is impossible. Computers have trouble navigating what we consider to be very simple mazes (try a room) .

Although I'm sure I'm not writing this as well as I could have, my point is this - computers becoming teachers are something for a more distant future that can only happen when progress is made in various other disciplines (psychology, brain etc.) . For now, computers are best used as a supplementary tool to teachers. Make no mistake, I have great respect for things such as technology, but if you've ever done a little bit of computer programming, you'll know the difficulties facing you in programming sentience.

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.

Literary questions. Unless you want to posit an AI on par with human abilities (please, let's be a bit realistic), then you can't narrow responses down to a set of explanations the same way you might in math.

What if a kid makes a connection between two different books that were assigned to their class. He wants to ask the teacher if she believes the commonality is relevant or a coincidence.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 9:46:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 9:09:28 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 7:18:02 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.

Thank you for clearing some matters up. By 'future' I had been referring to the following decades or the near future, as opposed to a more distant future. Ie. I believe that it is not within our technological capabilities to have AI teach vs. humans. Any look at current AI technology shows this to be obvious (I'll list examples if need be) .

Now, I agree that computers can find patterns of learning. However, this fails to cover some key points. 1, while it's all merry to say that computers will teach you in a way that is best for you, our knowledge of the mind is still rather primitive - ie. we don't know exactly how things work, so no computer program can help here. Furthermore, I, as stated before, don't believe AI is advanced enough. At the moment trying to hold a meaningful (ie. intelligible) conversation with a computer is impossible. Computers have trouble navigating what we consider to be very simple mazes (try a room) .

Although I'm sure I'm not writing this as well as I could have, my point is this - computers becoming teachers are something for a more distant future that can only happen when progress is made in various other disciplines (psychology, brain etc.) . For now, computers are best used as a supplementary tool to teachers. Make no mistake, I have great respect for things such as technology, but if you've ever done a little bit of computer programming, you'll know the difficulties facing you in programming sentience.

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.

Literary questions. Unless you want to posit an AI on par with human abilities (please, let's be a bit realistic), then you can't narrow responses down to a set of explanations the same way you might in math.

What if a kid makes a connection between two different books that were assigned to their class. He wants to ask the teacher if she believes the commonality is relevant or a coincidence.

Reply: That doesn't really accurately show a need for the human teacher. The teacher would just be giving an opinion. The knowledge which is being taught can be taught by a computer program. You are asking about a human's personal belief and beliefs are not relevant as it pertains to learning solid factual knowledge. If you want to learn about what another human believes, then go and ask someone. A teacher is not needed in this way. Also, a database for such questions could exist easily. A database which replicates the structure for such things that we already use such as ask.com and the like. The educational program could have a similar database which is filled with human questions who desire to know other human's opinions or beliefs. There is no need for a human teacher in the formal traditional way. Everything can be done through a computer education program.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 9:52:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/22/2011 10:04:30 PM, A computer translated what Tiel wrote into a few different languages and back:
Thread: You know education, computer education for the future? It can be a class taught by a man, and it may be desirable in any place of education seems to me a computer. If the physical world and social programs for social development, integration, and if I could directly replace the traditional educational system.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 10:03:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 9:52:20 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/22/2011 10:04:30 PM, A computer translated what Tiel wrote into a few different languages and back:
Thread: You know education, computer education for the future? It can be a class taught by a man, and it may be desirable in any place of education seems to me a computer. If the physical world and social programs for social development, integration, and if I could directly replace the traditional educational system.

Serious Question: Does your mind really function in such a chaotic way or are you extremely high on drugs while you interact with this website?
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 10:08:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I didn't expect you to appreciate the joke anyway. Hope someone does though.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2011 11:33:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 9:46:53 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:09:28 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 7:18:02 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.

Thank you for clearing some matters up. By 'future' I had been referring to the following decades or the near future, as opposed to a more distant future. Ie. I believe that it is not within our technological capabilities to have AI teach vs. humans. Any look at current AI technology shows this to be obvious (I'll list examples if need be) .

Now, I agree that computers can find patterns of learning. However, this fails to cover some key points. 1, while it's all merry to say that computers will teach you in a way that is best for you, our knowledge of the mind is still rather primitive - ie. we don't know exactly how things work, so no computer program can help here. Furthermore, I, as stated before, don't believe AI is advanced enough. At the moment trying to hold a meaningful (ie. intelligible) conversation with a computer is impossible. Computers have trouble navigating what we consider to be very simple mazes (try a room) .

Although I'm sure I'm not writing this as well as I could have, my point is this - computers becoming teachers are something for a more distant future that can only happen when progress is made in various other disciplines (psychology, brain etc.) . For now, computers are best used as a supplementary tool to teachers. Make no mistake, I have great respect for things such as technology, but if you've ever done a little bit of computer programming, you'll know the difficulties facing you in programming sentience.

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.

Literary questions. Unless you want to posit an AI on par with human abilities (please, let's be a bit realistic), then you can't narrow responses down to a set of explanations the same way you might in math.

What if a kid makes a connection between two different books that were assigned to their class. He wants to ask the teacher if she believes the commonality is relevant or a coincidence.

Reply: That doesn't really accurately show a need for the human teacher. The teacher would just be giving an opinion. The knowledge which is being taught can be taught by a computer program. You are asking about a human's personal belief and beliefs are not relevant as it pertains to learning solid factual knowledge. If you want to learn about what another human believes, then go and ask someone. A teacher is not needed in this way. Also, a database for such questions could exist easily. A database which replicates the structure for such things that we already use such as ask.com and the like. The educational program could have a similar database which is filled with human questions who desire to know other human's opinions or beliefs. There is no need for a human teacher in the formal traditional way. Everything can be done through a computer education program.

Since any sort of intellectual growth outside of multiple choice questions seems out of the question, I'll go to another example:

Fiction Writing teacher.
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2011 12:49:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.

Well, I'm not going to write a treatise on the limitations of AI, yet I'll go through some very simple points:

1. 'Common sense'

Humans know things like 'water is wet' or, 'people do not like pain' . The problem? This can't be explained by logic and such, or at least not without the setting or premises and such. Now, can you imagine how many facts one knows, how many premises we have? To code all this would take many lifetimes. An attempt of this has been CYC (short for encyclopedia) , a brainchild of Cycorp. A version from merely a year or 2 back had what experts described as a 'paltry' 47000 concepts and 306000 facts.

2. Pattern recognition

I'll put this simply. Robots can't recognise simple objects like keys, tables etc. Give them a while and they might figure it out. Rotate and they'll spend a while trying to figure it out again. As an example the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) set up a multimillion dollar prize for the creation of a driverless vehicle that could naivgate itself over some rugged terrain in the Mojave desert. In 2004 not one vehicle could complete the 132 mile course (the furthest distance travelled was 7.4 miles) .

Also of note is that the cars had GPS systems for assistance on a totally clear road. That's right, unlike regular driving on the road there were no potential interruptions. Even with this assistance, the cars could not navigate the course.

Now, recently the course has been completed. But only with GPS assistance and multimillion dollar prize money to fund the entrants, with most failing. Is this something that we can realistically see as being comparable to human intellect in modern society?

There's a lot more that could be said.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2011 4:25:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/24/2011 12:49:15 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.

Well, I'm not going to write a treatise on the limitations of AI, yet I'll go through some very simple points:

1. 'Common sense'

Humans know things like 'water is wet' or, 'people do not like pain' . The problem? This can't be explained by logic and such, or at least not without the setting or premises and such. Now, can you imagine how many facts one knows, how many premises we have? To code all this would take many lifetimes. An attempt of this has been CYC (short for encyclopedia) , a brainchild of Cycorp. A version from merely a year or 2 back had what experts described as a 'paltry' 47000 concepts and 306000 facts.

2. Pattern recognition

I'll put this simply. Robots can't recognise simple objects like keys, tables etc. Give them a while and they might figure it out. Rotate and they'll spend a while trying to figure it out again. As an example the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) set up a multimillion dollar prize for the creation of a driverless vehicle that could naivgate itself over some rugged terrain in the Mojave desert. In 2004 not one vehicle could complete the 132 mile course (the furthest distance travelled was 7.4 miles) .

Also of note is that the cars had GPS systems for assistance on a totally clear road. That's right, unlike regular driving on the road there were no potential interruptions. Even with this assistance, the cars could not navigate the course.

Now, recently the course has been completed. But only with GPS assistance and multimillion dollar prize money to fund the entrants, with most failing. Is this something that we can realistically see as being comparable to human intellect in modern society?

There's a lot more that could be said.

Reply: Well, you don't really need AI. It would just be an addition. An upgrade of the education program in the far future. The basic program could just revolve around the textual knowledge and a question/answer system. There are only so many questions that a person could logically ask or answer on a given subject. these could all be programmed into the system accordingly.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2011 4:31:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/23/2011 11:33:42 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:46:53 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:09:28 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 7:18:02 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.

Thank you for clearing some matters up. By 'future' I had been referring to the following decades or the near future, as opposed to a more distant future. Ie. I believe that it is not within our technological capabilities to have AI teach vs. humans. Any look at current AI technology shows this to be obvious (I'll list examples if need be) .

Now, I agree that computers can find patterns of learning. However, this fails to cover some key points. 1, while it's all merry to say that computers will teach you in a way that is best for you, our knowledge of the mind is still rather primitive - ie. we don't know exactly how things work, so no computer program can help here. Furthermore, I, as stated before, don't believe AI is advanced enough. At the moment trying to hold a meaningful (ie. intelligible) conversation with a computer is impossible. Computers have trouble navigating what we consider to be very simple mazes (try a room) .

Although I'm sure I'm not writing this as well as I could have, my point is this - computers becoming teachers are something for a more distant future that can only happen when progress is made in various other disciplines (psychology, brain etc.) . For now, computers are best used as a supplementary tool to teachers. Make no mistake, I have great respect for things such as technology, but if you've ever done a little bit of computer programming, you'll know the difficulties facing you in programming sentience.

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.

Literary questions. Unless you want to posit an AI on par with human abilities (please, let's be a bit realistic), then you can't narrow responses down to a set of explanations the same way you might in math.

What if a kid makes a connection between two different books that were assigned to their class. He wants to ask the teacher if she believes the commonality is relevant or a coincidence.

Reply: That doesn't really accurately show a need for the human teacher. The teacher would just be giving an opinion. The knowledge which is being taught can be taught by a computer program. You are asking about a human's personal belief and beliefs are not relevant as it pertains to learning solid factual knowledge. If you want to learn about what another human believes, then go and ask someone. A teacher is not needed in this way. Also, a database for such questions could exist easily. A database which replicates the structure for such things that we already use such as ask.com and the like. The educational program could have a similar database which is filled with human questions who desire to know other human's opinions or beliefs. There is no need for a human teacher in the formal traditional way. Everything can be done through a computer education program.

Since any sort of intellectual growth outside of multiple choice questions seems out of the question, I'll go to another example:

Fiction Writing teacher.

Reply: That would be one of the easiest subjects, as there is not much academic teaching that needs to go on. But it would still follow the basic guidelines of the lessons needed to be taught. Any questions the person might have would be answered in the Questions/Answers section. Do you know any teachers who teach one subject? I do, they say that they hear the same kinds of questions over and over again, year after year. These would be incorporated into the data base. The student would still have to use his/her imagination, as they would in a normal class with a human teacher.

You can keep trying to find subjects that can't be taught by a computer, but you will only find a couple. All questions can be answered by a computer, because all computers can have programs that are built with the help of experts in that specific field.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2011 5:06:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/24/2011 4:31:59 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 11:33:42 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:46:53 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:09:28 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 7:18:02 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.

Thank you for clearing some matters up. By 'future' I had been referring to the following decades or the near future, as opposed to a more distant future. Ie. I believe that it is not within our technological capabilities to have AI teach vs. humans. Any look at current AI technology shows this to be obvious (I'll list examples if need be) .

Now, I agree that computers can find patterns of learning. However, this fails to cover some key points. 1, while it's all merry to say that computers will teach you in a way that is best for you, our knowledge of the mind is still rather primitive - ie. we don't know exactly how things work, so no computer program can help here. Furthermore, I, as stated before, don't believe AI is advanced enough. At the moment trying to hold a meaningful (ie. intelligible) conversation with a computer is impossible. Computers have trouble navigating what we consider to be very simple mazes (try a room) .

Although I'm sure I'm not writing this as well as I could have, my point is this - computers becoming teachers are something for a more distant future that can only happen when progress is made in various other disciplines (psychology, brain etc.) . For now, computers are best used as a supplementary tool to teachers. Make no mistake, I have great respect for things such as technology, but if you've ever done a little bit of computer programming, you'll know the difficulties facing you in programming sentience.

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.

Literary questions. Unless you want to posit an AI on par with human abilities (please, let's be a bit realistic), then you can't narrow responses down to a set of explanations the same way you might in math.

What if a kid makes a connection between two different books that were assigned to their class. He wants to ask the teacher if she believes the commonality is relevant or a coincidence.

Reply: That doesn't really accurately show a need for the human teacher. The teacher would just be giving an opinion. The knowledge which is being taught can be taught by a computer program. You are asking about a human's personal belief and beliefs are not relevant as it pertains to learning solid factual knowledge. If you want to learn about what another human believes, then go and ask someone. A teacher is not needed in this way. Also, a database for such questions could exist easily. A database which replicates the structure for such things that we already use such as ask.com and the like. The educational program could have a similar database which is filled with human questions who desire to know other human's opinions or beliefs. There is no need for a human teacher in the formal traditional way. Everything can be done through a computer education program.

Since any sort of intellectual growth outside of multiple choice questions seems out of the question, I'll go to another example:

Fiction Writing teacher.

Reply: That would be one of the easiest subjects, as there is not much academic teaching that needs to go on. But it would still follow the basic guidelines of the lessons needed to be taught. Any questions the person might have would be answered in the Questions/Answers section. Do you know any teachers who teach one subject? I do, they say that they hear the same kinds of questions over and over again, year after year. These would be incorporated into the data base. The student would still have to use his/her imagination, as they would in a normal class with a human teacher.

You can keep trying to find subjects that can't be taught by a computer, but you will only find a couple. All questions can be answered by a computer, because all computers can have programs that are built with the help of experts in that specific field.

So a computer can read a short story and tell someone where the weakness is? How they might improve? What kind of reading outside of school might benefit them?
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 7:03:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/24/2011 5:06:13 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/24/2011 4:31:59 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 11:33:42 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:46:53 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:09:28 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/23/2011 9:03:30 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/23/2011 7:18:02 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/23/2011 3:26:14 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: I'm talking about a revolutionary computer program/network designed specifically for education. What would a teacher be able to help with that artificial intelligence couldn't recognize faster and more accurately. Such a program could be developed. I could get to a certain spot in a math problem and click on a (?) button. This button would represent the fact that you don't understand the mechanics of the mathematical problem past this specific point and the AI would then reach into it's database and find the best way to teach you the problem. AI is coming along way. The AI available now would even be able to recognize patterns in your learning ability as it pertains to strengths and weaknesses and calculate this into the different ways it might teach you. Technology is rapidly increasing and I see no end in sight. A program as I have described is within our current technological capabilities.

Thank you for clearing some matters up. By 'future' I had been referring to the following decades or the near future, as opposed to a more distant future. Ie. I believe that it is not within our technological capabilities to have AI teach vs. humans. Any look at current AI technology shows this to be obvious (I'll list examples if need be) .

Now, I agree that computers can find patterns of learning. However, this fails to cover some key points. 1, while it's all merry to say that computers will teach you in a way that is best for you, our knowledge of the mind is still rather primitive - ie. we don't know exactly how things work, so no computer program can help here. Furthermore, I, as stated before, don't believe AI is advanced enough. At the moment trying to hold a meaningful (ie. intelligible) conversation with a computer is impossible. Computers have trouble navigating what we consider to be very simple mazes (try a room) .

Although I'm sure I'm not writing this as well as I could have, my point is this - computers becoming teachers are something for a more distant future that can only happen when progress is made in various other disciplines (psychology, brain etc.) . For now, computers are best used as a supplementary tool to teachers. Make no mistake, I have great respect for things such as technology, but if you've ever done a little bit of computer programming, you'll know the difficulties facing you in programming sentience.

Reply: I don't feel that we agree. I would like for you to give an example on something that a human teacher could teach or recognize that a computer could not replicate. For if a student is having trouble, he/she would ask a question. All questions could be answered and explained through a computer.

Please, I request an example if you could be so kind.

Literary questions. Unless you want to posit an AI on par with human abilities (please, let's be a bit realistic), then you can't narrow responses down to a set of explanations the same way you might in math.

What if a kid makes a connection between two different books that were assigned to their class. He wants to ask the teacher if she believes the commonality is relevant or a coincidence.

Reply: That doesn't really accurately show a need for the human teacher. The teacher would just be giving an opinion. The knowledge which is being taught can be taught by a computer program. You are asking about a human's personal belief and beliefs are not relevant as it pertains to learning solid factual knowledge. If you want to learn about what another human believes, then go and ask someone. A teacher is not needed in this way. Also, a database for such questions could exist easily. A database which replicates the structure for such things that we already use such as ask.com and the like. The educational program could have a similar database which is filled with human questions who desire to know other human's opinions or beliefs. There is no need for a human teacher in the formal traditional way. Everything can be done through a computer education program.

Since any sort of intellectual growth outside of multiple choice questions seems out of the question, I'll go to another example:

Fiction Writing teacher.

Reply: That would be one of the easiest subjects, as there is not much academic teaching that needs to go on. But it would still follow the basic guidelines of the lessons needed to be taught. Any questions the person might have would be answered in the Questions/Answers section. Do you know any teachers who teach one subject? I do, they say that they hear the same kinds of questions over and over again, year after year. These would be incorporated into the data base. The student would still have to use his/her imagination, as they would in a normal class with a human teacher.

You can keep trying to find subjects that can't be taught by a computer, but you will only find a couple. All questions can be answered by a computer, because all computers can have programs that are built with the help of experts in that specific field.

So a computer can read a short story and tell someone where the weakness is? How they might improve? What kind of reading outside of school might benefit them?

Reply: Of course a computer program can do that. Book X is part of the course. The program has been programmed to show all of the strengths and weaknesses of Book X. I have already seen such courses on writing. Anything that a physical human teacher can do, can be transferred into an educational course. Also, you forget that their may be such a thing as human online help for questions that can't seem to be answered. In this way, online teachers could address the problems of many many people at once. This would still be within the computer model of teaching. The topic is computers and will they be the future of teaching. This can be in many forms.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 7:11:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/25/2011 7:03:24 PM, Tiel wrote:
So a computer can read a short story and tell someone where the weakness is? How they might improve? What kind of reading outside of school might benefit them?

Reply: Of course a computer program can do that. Book X is part of the course. The program has been programmed to show all of the strengths and weaknesses of Book X. I have already seen such courses on writing. Anything that a physical human teacher can do, can be transferred into an educational course. Also, you forget that their may be such a thing as human online help for questions that can't seem to be answered. In this way, online teachers could address the problems of many many people at once. This would still be within the computer model of teaching. The topic is computers and will they be the future of teaching. This can be in many forms.

I mean that student A writes a short story, and the teacher reads it and gives comments.

Are you suggesting that computers are now capable of critiquing plots and character development in specific stories?

Having "human help" turns your machine into a supplemental tool, not an all-purpose teacher. Those programs are already in use in Australia and other countries where children may be isolated from society but need schooling. They have online schooling with online HUMANS. If you want to say that machines + human teachers can improve performance, then you're wasting words.

You claimed specifically that computers could teach anything humans could teach. You can now admit you are wrong.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2011 8:28:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/25/2011 7:11:24 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/25/2011 7:03:24 PM, Tiel wrote:
So a computer can read a short story and tell someone where the weakness is? How they might improve? What kind of reading outside of school might benefit them?

Reply: Of course a computer program can do that. Book X is part of the course. The program has been programmed to show all of the strengths and weaknesses of Book X. I have already seen such courses on writing. Anything that a physical human teacher can do, can be transferred into an educational course. Also, you forget that their may be such a thing as human online help for questions that can't seem to be answered. In this way, online teachers could address the problems of many many people at once. This would still be within the computer model of teaching. The topic is computers and will they be the future of teaching. This can be in many forms.

I mean that student A writes a short story, and the teacher reads it and gives comments.

Are you suggesting that computers are now capable of critiquing plots and character development in specific stories?

Having "human help" turns your machine into a supplemental tool, not an all-purpose teacher. Those programs are already in use in Australia and other countries where children may be isolated from society but need schooling. They have online schooling with online HUMANS. If you want to say that machines + human teachers can improve performance, then you're wasting words.

You claimed specifically that computers could teach anything humans could teach. You can now admit you are wrong.

Reply: I can admit that there may have been some miscommunication. A student may want to write a short story and get an opinion of another human, but that opinion is not needed in order to teach HOW to write a story. Human opinion is human opinion. Such a thing is not needed to learn the mechanics of writing a story, nor the mechanics of writing stories in a specific way. Computers can teach the mechanics of any subject quite efficiently, or even more efficiently that a human can. This is my belief.

Example. Rosetta Stone and how it teaches humans to speak different languages, more efficiently than a human teacher can. The numbers prove what the program claims.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2011 1:54:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/24/2011 4:25:40 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Well, you don't really need AI. It would just be an addition. An upgrade of the education program in the far future. The basic program could just revolve around the textual knowledge and a question/answer system. There are only so many questions that a person could logically ask or answer on a given subject. these could all be programmed into the system accordingly.

Sorry for taking so long to get to this, I've had a lot of schoolwork...

I'm not really quite sure what you're arguing for anymore. I take it you want basically a computer database which students input questions into and find answers in addition to pre-recorded lectures delivered on a computer? I'm basing my answer on my assumption (normally a flawed idea...) .

1. Interaction

Let's say a teacher is teaching a lesson and a student has a question. The student asks a question and has this resolved. What happens when the student asks during a video lecture? Does the lecture keep playing? Does the student consult their database? This seems time wasting and not friendly to the students.

Also here, computers with a question and answer format would seriously hamper the morale of the students - imagine just typing in an endless serious of questions for learning. I think the students would get really, really bored.

2. Query problems / Database

Firstly, I don't agree that we could feasibly program a computer to handle ALL possible questions with correct grammar and spelling in the first place. Secondly, and more importantly, what happens when the student spells something wrong? If you've ever checked spellcheck in word, there's a lot of options for correction, and often the computer doesn't even recognise a misspelt word. There'd be serious problems here.

3. Choice

I find that a lot of people say something like 'it's unfair that we have to learn this way ... we should learn another way!' The problem with this approach is that people learn in different ways. There's visual, auditory and kinaesthetic for a start, plus varying degrees of intelligence etc. A 1 size fits all solution is never the way to go.

While computers may be able to do something once advanced AI is developed, I don't believe a database system is a good idea. I might be missing what you're trying to implement here, but I believe you're seriously underestimating the complexity of a lot of things here, sorry to say.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2011 2:58:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/26/2011 1:54:46 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/24/2011 4:25:40 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Well, you don't really need AI. It would just be an addition. An upgrade of the education program in the far future. The basic program could just revolve around the textual knowledge and a question/answer system. There are only so many questions that a person could logically ask or answer on a given subject. these could all be programmed into the system accordingly.

Sorry for taking so long to get to this, I've had a lot of schoolwork...

I'm not really quite sure what you're arguing for anymore. I take it you want basically a computer database which students input questions into and find answers in addition to pre-recorded lectures delivered on a computer? I'm basing my answer on my assumption (normally a flawed idea...) .

1. Interaction

Let's say a teacher is teaching a lesson and a student has a question. The student asks a question and has this resolved. What happens when the student asks during a video lecture? Does the lecture keep playing? Does the student consult their database? This seems time wasting and not friendly to the students.

Also here, computers with a question and answer format would seriously hamper the morale of the students - imagine just typing in an endless serious of questions for learning. I think the students would get really, really bored.

2. Query problems / Database

Firstly, I don't agree that we could feasibly program a computer to handle ALL possible questions with correct grammar and spelling in the first place. Secondly, and more importantly, what happens when the student spells something wrong? If you've ever checked spellcheck in word, there's a lot of options for correction, and often the computer doesn't even recognise a misspelt word. There'd be serious problems here.

3. Choice

I find that a lot of people say something like 'it's unfair that we have to learn this way ... we should learn another way!' The problem with this approach is that people learn in different ways. There's visual, auditory and kinaesthetic for a start, plus varying degrees of intelligence etc. A 1 size fits all solution is never the way to go.

While computers may be able to do something once advanced AI is developed, I don't believe a database system is a good idea. I might be missing what you're trying to implement here, but I believe you're seriously underestimating the complexity of a lot of things here, sorry to say.

Reply: Yes, you did you are missing the meaning of what I am implying. Moreover, you are not able to understand my meaning because I have not given a good enough example yet. I have used Rosetta Stone as an example for a program that teaches language in a more efficient way than a teacher can. This is because the program is interactive, and people learn better when they are interacting. Different programs could be implemented for different subjects. Imagine learning business classes through a business simulation computer program. Such a program can teach you how business works on both an interactive and academic level. I feel that such programs can be developed for every subject, where interactive educational computer programs teach people the knowledge that human teachers once did. The traditional approach of a teacher speaking at the front of the class and the students all sitting there listening, taking notes, it seems outdated for the current usage of human brain power. Computer programs set up with an interactive and academic format, this would seem to be far more efficient.

Question: What do you think about Rosetta Stone?
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2011 3:02:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/26/2011 2:58:17 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 1:54:46 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/24/2011 4:25:40 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Well, you don't really need AI. It would just be an addition. An upgrade of the education program in the far future. The basic program could just revolve around the textual knowledge and a question/answer system. There are only so many questions that a person could logically ask or answer on a given subject. these could all be programmed into the system accordingly.

Sorry for taking so long to get to this, I've had a lot of schoolwork...

I'm not really quite sure what you're arguing for anymore. I take it you want basically a computer database which students input questions into and find answers in addition to pre-recorded lectures delivered on a computer? I'm basing my answer on my assumption (normally a flawed idea...) .

1. Interaction

Let's say a teacher is teaching a lesson and a student has a question. The student asks a question and has this resolved. What happens when the student asks during a video lecture? Does the lecture keep playing? Does the student consult their database? This seems time wasting and not friendly to the students.

Also here, computers with a question and answer format would seriously hamper the morale of the students - imagine just typing in an endless serious of questions for learning. I think the students would get really, really bored.

2. Query problems / Database

Firstly, I don't agree that we could feasibly program a computer to handle ALL possible questions with correct grammar and spelling in the first place. Secondly, and more importantly, what happens when the student spells something wrong? If you've ever checked spellcheck in word, there's a lot of options for correction, and often the computer doesn't even recognise a misspelt word. There'd be serious problems here.

3. Choice

I find that a lot of people say something like 'it's unfair that we have to learn this way ... we should learn another way!' The problem with this approach is that people learn in different ways. There's visual, auditory and kinaesthetic for a start, plus varying degrees of intelligence etc. A 1 size fits all solution is never the way to go.

While computers may be able to do something once advanced AI is developed, I don't believe a database system is a good idea. I might be missing what you're trying to implement here, but I believe you're seriously underestimating the complexity of a lot of things here, sorry to say.

Reply: Yes, you did you are missing the meaning of what I am implying. Moreover, you are not able to understand my meaning because I have not given a good enough example yet. I have used Rosetta Stone as an example for a program that teaches language in a more efficient way than a teacher can. This is because the program is interactive, and people learn better when they are interacting. Different programs could be implemented for different subjects. Imagine learning business classes through a business simulation computer program. Such a program can teach you how business works on both an interactive and academic level. I feel that such programs can be developed for every subject, where interactive educational computer programs teach people the knowledge that human teachers once did. The traditional approach of a teacher speaking at the front of the class and the students all sitting there listening, taking notes, it seems outdated for the current usage of human brain power. Computer programs set up with an interactive and academic format, this would seem to be far more efficient.

Question: What do you think about Rosetta Stone?

You just admitted computers couldn't teach fiction writing without the help of live humans.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2011 3:35:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/26/2011 3:02:22 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/26/2011 2:58:17 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 1:54:46 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/24/2011 4:25:40 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Well, you don't really need AI. It would just be an addition. An upgrade of the education program in the far future. The basic program could just revolve around the textual knowledge and a question/answer system. There are only so many questions that a person could logically ask or answer on a given subject. these could all be programmed into the system accordingly.

Sorry for taking so long to get to this, I've had a lot of schoolwork...

I'm not really quite sure what you're arguing for anymore. I take it you want basically a computer database which students input questions into and find answers in addition to pre-recorded lectures delivered on a computer? I'm basing my answer on my assumption (normally a flawed idea...) .

1. Interaction

Let's say a teacher is teaching a lesson and a student has a question. The student asks a question and has this resolved. What happens when the student asks during a video lecture? Does the lecture keep playing? Does the student consult their database? This seems time wasting and not friendly to the students.

Also here, computers with a question and answer format would seriously hamper the morale of the students - imagine just typing in an endless serious of questions for learning. I think the students would get really, really bored.

2. Query problems / Database

Firstly, I don't agree that we could feasibly program a computer to handle ALL possible questions with correct grammar and spelling in the first place. Secondly, and more importantly, what happens when the student spells something wrong? If you've ever checked spellcheck in word, there's a lot of options for correction, and often the computer doesn't even recognise a misspelt word. There'd be serious problems here.

3. Choice

I find that a lot of people say something like 'it's unfair that we have to learn this way ... we should learn another way!' The problem with this approach is that people learn in different ways. There's visual, auditory and kinaesthetic for a start, plus varying degrees of intelligence etc. A 1 size fits all solution is never the way to go.

While computers may be able to do something once advanced AI is developed, I don't believe a database system is a good idea. I might be missing what you're trying to implement here, but I believe you're seriously underestimating the complexity of a lot of things here, sorry to say.

Reply: Yes, you did you are missing the meaning of what I am implying. Moreover, you are not able to understand my meaning because I have not given a good enough example yet. I have used Rosetta Stone as an example for a program that teaches language in a more efficient way than a teacher can. This is because the program is interactive, and people learn better when they are interacting. Different programs could be implemented for different subjects. Imagine learning business classes through a business simulation computer program. Such a program can teach you how business works on both an interactive and academic level. I feel that such programs can be developed for every subject, where interactive educational computer programs teach people the knowledge that human teachers once did. The traditional approach of a teacher speaking at the front of the class and the students all sitting there listening, taking notes, it seems outdated for the current usage of human brain power. Computer programs set up with an interactive and academic format, this would seem to be far more efficient.

Question: What do you think about Rosetta Stone?

You just admitted computers couldn't teach fiction writing without the help of live humans.

Reply: I didn't admit any such thing. I stated the opposite actually.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2011 3:49:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/26/2011 3:35:22 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 3:02:22 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/26/2011 2:58:17 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 1:54:46 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/24/2011 4:25:40 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Well, you don't really need AI. It would just be an addition. An upgrade of the education program in the far future. The basic program could just revolve around the textual knowledge and a question/answer system. There are only so many questions that a person could logically ask or answer on a given subject. these could all be programmed into the system accordingly.

Sorry for taking so long to get to this, I've had a lot of schoolwork...

I'm not really quite sure what you're arguing for anymore. I take it you want basically a computer database which students input questions into and find answers in addition to pre-recorded lectures delivered on a computer? I'm basing my answer on my assumption (normally a flawed idea...) .

1. Interaction

Let's say a teacher is teaching a lesson and a student has a question. The student asks a question and has this resolved. What happens when the student asks during a video lecture? Does the lecture keep playing? Does the student consult their database? This seems time wasting and not friendly to the students.

Also here, computers with a question and answer format would seriously hamper the morale of the students - imagine just typing in an endless serious of questions for learning. I think the students would get really, really bored.

2. Query problems / Database

Firstly, I don't agree that we could feasibly program a computer to handle ALL possible questions with correct grammar and spelling in the first place. Secondly, and more importantly, what happens when the student spells something wrong? If you've ever checked spellcheck in word, there's a lot of options for correction, and often the computer doesn't even recognise a misspelt word. There'd be serious problems here.

3. Choice

I find that a lot of people say something like 'it's unfair that we have to learn this way ... we should learn another way!' The problem with this approach is that people learn in different ways. There's visual, auditory and kinaesthetic for a start, plus varying degrees of intelligence etc. A 1 size fits all solution is never the way to go.

While computers may be able to do something once advanced AI is developed, I don't believe a database system is a good idea. I might be missing what you're trying to implement here, but I believe you're seriously underestimating the complexity of a lot of things here, sorry to say.

Reply: Yes, you did you are missing the meaning of what I am implying. Moreover, you are not able to understand my meaning because I have not given a good enough example yet. I have used Rosetta Stone as an example for a program that teaches language in a more efficient way than a teacher can. This is because the program is interactive, and people learn better when they are interacting. Different programs could be implemented for different subjects. Imagine learning business classes through a business simulation computer program. Such a program can teach you how business works on both an interactive and academic level. I feel that such programs can be developed for every subject, where interactive educational computer programs teach people the knowledge that human teachers once did. The traditional approach of a teacher speaking at the front of the class and the students all sitting there listening, taking notes, it seems outdated for the current usage of human brain power. Computer programs set up with an interactive and academic format, this would seem to be far more efficient.

Question: What do you think about Rosetta Stone?

You just admitted computers couldn't teach fiction writing without the help of live humans.

Reply: I didn't admit any such thing. I stated the opposite actually.

So you are claiming that a computer could assign a class to write a story of their choice, and that computer can then correct students and explain how they might make their stories stronger?

Learning how to write isn't just about learning a set of rules, it's about improving on your capabilities and exploring your style. Computers can't even keep up with grammar checks.

Your overconfidence in AI is very telling of your actual understanding of modern AI technology.

I learned how to type with a computer program. A computer program was not able to tell me where my plot needed work.

Have you ever actually attended a class where the teacher asks questions and starts class discussions? You do realize there are more methods of teaching than writing facts down and memorizing them, right?
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2011 5:38:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/26/2011 3:49:24 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/26/2011 3:35:22 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 3:02:22 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/26/2011 2:58:17 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 1:54:46 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/24/2011 4:25:40 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Well, you don't really need AI. It would just be an addition. An upgrade of the education program in the far future. The basic program could just revolve around the textual knowledge and a question/answer system. There are only so many questions that a person could logically ask or answer on a given subject. these could all be programmed into the system accordingly.

Sorry for taking so long to get to this, I've had a lot of schoolwork...

I'm not really quite sure what you're arguing for anymore. I take it you want basically a computer database which students input questions into and find answers in addition to pre-recorded lectures delivered on a computer? I'm basing my answer on my assumption (normally a flawed idea...) .

1. Interaction

Let's say a teacher is teaching a lesson and a student has a question. The student asks a question and has this resolved. What happens when the student asks during a video lecture? Does the lecture keep playing? Does the student consult their database? This seems time wasting and not friendly to the students.

Also here, computers with a question and answer format would seriously hamper the morale of the students - imagine just typing in an endless serious of questions for learning. I think the students would get really, really bored.

2. Query problems / Database

Firstly, I don't agree that we could feasibly program a computer to handle ALL possible questions with correct grammar and spelling in the first place. Secondly, and more importantly, what happens when the student spells something wrong? If you've ever checked spellcheck in word, there's a lot of options for correction, and often the computer doesn't even recognise a misspelt word. There'd be serious problems here.

3. Choice

I find that a lot of people say something like 'it's unfair that we have to learn this way ... we should learn another way!' The problem with this approach is that people learn in different ways. There's visual, auditory and kinaesthetic for a start, plus varying degrees of intelligence etc. A 1 size fits all solution is never the way to go.

While computers may be able to do something once advanced AI is developed, I don't believe a database system is a good idea. I might be missing what you're trying to implement here, but I believe you're seriously underestimating the complexity of a lot of things here, sorry to say.

Reply: Yes, you did you are missing the meaning of what I am implying. Moreover, you are not able to understand my meaning because I have not given a good enough example yet. I have used Rosetta Stone as an example for a program that teaches language in a more efficient way than a teacher can. This is because the program is interactive, and people learn better when they are interacting. Different programs could be implemented for different subjects. Imagine learning business classes through a business simulation computer program. Such a program can teach you how business works on both an interactive and academic level. I feel that such programs can be developed for every subject, where interactive educational computer programs teach people the knowledge that human teachers once did. The traditional approach of a teacher speaking at the front of the class and the students all sitting there listening, taking notes, it seems outdated for the current usage of human brain power. Computer programs set up with an interactive and academic format, this would seem to be far more efficient.

Question: What do you think about Rosetta Stone?

You just admitted computers couldn't teach fiction writing without the help of live humans.

Reply: I didn't admit any such thing. I stated the opposite actually.

So you are claiming that a computer could assign a class to write a story of their choice, and that computer can then correct students and explain how they might make their stories stronger?

Learning how to write isn't just about learning a set of rules, it's about improving on your capabilities and exploring your style. Computers can't even keep up with grammar checks.

Your overconfidence in AI is very telling of your actual understanding of modern AI technology.

I learned how to type with a computer program. A computer program was not able to tell me where my plot needed work.

Have you ever actually attended a class where the teacher asks questions and starts class discussions? You do realize there are more methods of teaching than writing facts down and memorizing them, right?

Reply: Your mockery is unneeded and quite frankly it is very rude. I understand perfectly well what the traditional teaching methods involve and I am very knowledgeable in both the limits of AI, as well as the limits of the traditional teaching educational model. The basics of writing, ALL FORMS OF WRITING, can be taught by an interactive computer program. I am sorry that you are so heavily dependent on the opinion of one human teacher to critique your work so that you may develop your skills better. Any person that reads could give you a review of your writing. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LEARNING THE ACTUAL MECHANICS OF WRITING. I could scan the internet write now and learn how to write fiction. Google could provide me with enough information to do that and it's not even a program designed specifically for fictional writing. Google "How to write fiction" and you will have more than enough information at your finger tips to learn the mechanics of it. A computer program that was designed with the input of actual fiction writers and fiction writing experts would be no problem.

As a matter of fact.... hold on.... There we go. Googled "fiction writing program" and I got a whole list of programs already developed. Such things could be the future of education.

Example: http://www.masterfreelancer.com...
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2011 6:41:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/26/2011 5:38:10 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 3:49:24 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/26/2011 3:35:22 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 3:02:22 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/26/2011 2:58:17 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/26/2011 1:54:46 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/24/2011 4:25:40 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Well, you don't really need AI. It would just be an addition. An upgrade of the education program in the far future. The basic program could just revolve around the textual knowledge and a question/answer system. There are only so many questions that a person could logically ask or answer on a given subject. these could all be programmed into the system accordingly.

Sorry for taking so long to get to this, I've had a lot of schoolwork...

I'm not really quite sure what you're arguing for anymore. I take it you want basically a computer database which students input questions into and find answers in addition to pre-recorded lectures delivered on a computer? I'm basing my answer on my assumption (normally a flawed idea...) .

1. Interaction

Let's say a teacher is teaching a lesson and a student has a question. The student asks a question and has this resolved. What happens when the student asks during a video lecture? Does the lecture keep playing? Does the student consult their database? This seems time wasting and not friendly to the students.

Also here, computers with a question and answer format would seriously hamper the morale of the students - imagine just typing in an endless serious of questions for learning. I think the students would get really, really bored.

2. Query problems / Database

Firstly, I don't agree that we could feasibly program a computer to handle ALL possible questions with correct grammar and spelling in the first place. Secondly, and more importantly, what happens when the student spells something wrong? If you've ever checked spellcheck in word, there's a lot of options for correction, and often the computer doesn't even recognise a misspelt word. There'd be serious problems here.

3. Choice

I find that a lot of people say something like 'it's unfair that we have to learn this way ... we should learn another way!' The problem with this approach is that people learn in different ways. There's visual, auditory and kinaesthetic for a start, plus varying degrees of intelligence etc. A 1 size fits all solution is never the way to go.

While computers may be able to do something once advanced AI is developed, I don't believe a database system is a good idea. I might be missing what you're trying to implement here, but I believe you're seriously underestimating the complexity of a lot of things here, sorry to say.

Reply: Yes, you did you are missing the meaning of what I am implying. Moreover, you are not able to understand my meaning because I have not given a good enough example yet. I have used Rosetta Stone as an example for a program that teaches language in a more efficient way than a teacher can. This is because the program is interactive, and people learn better when they are interacting. Different programs could be implemented for different subjects. Imagine learning business classes through a business simulation computer program. Such a program can teach you how business works on both an interactive and academic level. I feel that such programs can be developed for every subject, where interactive educational computer programs teach people the knowledge that human teachers once did. The traditional approach of a teacher speaking at the front of the class and the students all sitting there listening, taking notes, it seems outdated for the current usage of human brain power. Computer programs set up with an interactive and academic format, this would seem to be far more efficient.

Question: What do you think about Rosetta Stone?

You just admitted computers couldn't teach fiction writing without the help of live humans.

Reply: I didn't admit any such thing. I stated the opposite actually.

So you are claiming that a computer could assign a class to write a story of their choice, and that computer can then correct students and explain how they might make their stories stronger?

Learning how to write isn't just about learning a set of rules, it's about improving on your capabilities and exploring your style. Computers can't even keep up with grammar checks.

Your overconfidence in AI is very telling of your actual understanding of modern AI technology.

I learned how to type with a computer program. A computer program was not able to tell me where my plot needed work.

Have you ever actually attended a class where the teacher asks questions and starts class discussions? You do realize there are more methods of teaching than writing facts down and memorizing them, right?

Reply: Your mockery is unneeded and quite frankly it is very rude. I understand perfectly well what the traditional teaching methods involve and I am very knowledgeable in both the limits of AI, as well as the limits of the traditional teaching educational model. The basics of writing, ALL FORMS OF WRITING, can be taught by an interactive computer program. I am sorry that you are so heavily dependent on the opinion of one human teacher to critique your work so that you may develop your skills better. Any person that reads could give you a review of your writing. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LEARNING THE ACTUAL MECHANICS OF WRITING. I could scan the internet write now and learn how to write fiction. Google could provide me with enough information to do that and it's not even a program designed specifically for fictional writing. Google "How to write fiction" and you will have more than enough information at your finger tips to learn the mechanics of it. A computer program that was designed with the input of actual fiction writers and fiction writing experts would be no problem.

As a matter of fact.... hold on.... There we go. Googled "fiction writing program" and I got a whole list of programs already developed. Such things could be the future of education.

Example: http://www.masterfreelancer.com...

It's called "feedback," Tiel. Teacher to student feedback. It is an important part of learning. That's what the "opinion" is.

How-to programs are great to get you off the ground, but it won't lead to the plot equivalent of spell-check. Spell-check being an appropriate analogy since even the most advanced current AI is incapable of performing this relatively simple task.

The best teachers I have had in high school (a public one) would present facts and lead our discussion about those facts. They would engage their class actively. Some even altered their tests depending on what was discussed during class.

The Rosetta stone and typing programs do not do that. Books on writing to not do that. Being given "example problems" on a computer is not the same as a class discussion/argument.

Considering student apathy WITH teachers present in the room, the idea that all education should be automated becomes even more ridiculous.

Computers are aids for students and teachers. They can aid greatly or they may not aid much.

They are not replacements.

Don't take my word for it. Ask A.L.I.C.E. http://alice.pandorabots.com...

You said: Will computers replace teachers?
A.L.I.C.E.: How should I know.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2011 7:16:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
It's called "feedback," Tiel. Teacher to student feedback. It is an important part of learning. That's what the "opinion" is.

Nobody ever said anything about banning a feedback system. All this could still be incorporated into a computer program via internet. Also, nobody is outlawing you to have a fiction writing group where you all interact with each other on a physical level. The point is that a computer program can teach you how to write fiction and it can teach you how to write fiction very efficiently. I would be willing to challenge you directly on it. If I had nothing but a computer and you had nothing but a human fiction writing teacher, who would write the best book with in a 1 month time period. I would love to see this challenge personally. Further, a lot of creative skills have nothing to do with a teacher and are naturally more present in some people than in others. The mechanics can be taught by a computer program either way, and very efficiently. My brother learned how to speak Italian in a month from Rosetta Stone. Computer programs can educate, and they can educate very efficiently.

How-to programs are great to get you off the ground, but it won't lead to the plot equivalent of spell-check. Spell-check being an appropriate analogy since even the most advanced current AI is incapable of performing this relatively simple task.

The best teachers I have had in high school (a public one) would present facts and lead our discussion about those facts. They would engage their class actively. Some even altered their tests depending on what was discussed during class.

I already explained that there is no reason why you can't participate in study groups. Also, everything you said can still be done on a computer. Read the topic.

COMPUTERS - THE TEACHERS OF THE FUTURE?

Personal Fact: I have learned at least 500-600% more information from the computer than I ever did from any of my teachers in highschool.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2011 1:35:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/26/2011 2:58:17 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Yes, you did you are missing the meaning of what I am implying. Moreover, you are not able to understand my meaning because I have not given a good enough example yet. I have used Rosetta Stone as an example for a program that teaches language in a more efficient way than a teacher can. This is because the program is interactive, and people learn better when they are interacting. Different programs could be implemented for different subjects. Imagine learning business classes through a business simulation computer program. Such a program can teach you how business works on both an interactive and academic level. I feel that such programs can be developed for every subject, where interactive educational computer programs teach people the knowledge that human teachers once did. The traditional approach of a teacher speaking at the front of the class and the students all sitting there listening, taking notes, it seems outdated for the current usage of human brain power. Computer programs set up with an interactive and academic format, this would seem to be far more efficient.

Question: What do you think about Rosetta Stone?

Okay, I just researched Rosetta Stone in a google search, besides that I know nothing, so I'm not going to discuss this much (ie. try other examples) . Put simply, the US Department of State only ever uses this as a 'companion' to their language learning programs.

As for the 'traditional' approach, it's not used that often anymore. Plus, it really isn't that bad, depending on the content. Also, discipline is taught through such a process (both mental and behavioural). Obviously, such a process shouldn't be used uniformly, but then the method isn't applied universally.

Besides the fact that interactive programs don't exist (to the best of my knowledge) for widespread use by themselves over a variety of subjects, I would argue that interactivity, while certainly helpful in some things, also has a number of downsides. It comes back to my choice point of earlier - people learn in different ways - disabling ways of learning is no positive.

Also, would it be possible for you to give a clearer outline of your vision? Frustrating as it must seem to you to be repeating yourself, but I think there's a disconnection in our conversation.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2011 3:22:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/27/2011 1:35:12 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 7/26/2011 2:58:17 PM, Tiel wrote:

Reply: Yes, you did you are missing the meaning of what I am implying. Moreover, you are not able to understand my meaning because I have not given a good enough example yet. I have used Rosetta Stone as an example for a program that teaches language in a more efficient way than a teacher can. This is because the program is interactive, and people learn better when they are interacting. Different programs could be implemented for different subjects. Imagine learning business classes through a business simulation computer program. Such a program can teach you how business works on both an interactive and academic level. I feel that such programs can be developed for every subject, where interactive educational computer programs teach people the knowledge that human teachers once did. The traditional approach of a teacher speaking at the front of the class and the students all sitting there listening, taking notes, it seems outdated for the current usage of human brain power. Computer programs set up with an interactive and academic format, this would seem to be far more efficient.

Question: What do you think about Rosetta Stone?

Okay, I just researched Rosetta Stone in a google search, besides that I know nothing, so I'm not going to discuss this much (ie. try other examples) . Put simply, the US Department of State only ever uses this as a 'companion' to their language learning programs.

As for the 'traditional' approach, it's not used that often anymore. Plus, it really isn't that bad, depending on the content. Also, discipline is taught through such a process (both mental and behavioural). Obviously, such a process shouldn't be used uniformly, but then the method isn't applied universally.

Besides the fact that interactive programs don't exist (to the best of my knowledge) for widespread use by themselves over a variety of subjects, I would argue that interactivity, while certainly helpful in some things, also has a number of downsides. It comes back to my choice point of earlier - people learn in different ways - disabling ways of learning is no positive.

Also, would it be possible for you to give a clearer outline of your vision? Frustrating as it must seem to you to be repeating yourself, but I think there's a disconnection in our conversation.

Reply: It's not problem at all. It is refreshing to have an exchange of intelligent thought with someone, even though we may not agree. I wish there was more energy like this throughout the forums.

I will give a better understanding as soon as I have a longer time period to do so. It should be within the next 24-48 hours.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."