A guide on the side to a sage on the stage.

Bots should train teachers to standardise education system.

As the age of AI approaches, the question of whether robots can replace teachers looms larger. People say that robots can never replace teachers because teachers inspire us. But inspirational robots are possible and can be adapted to each student’s individual learning style.

The idea of robot teachers may sound appealing on some levels because teachers are expensive and in increasingly short supply. Robots do not require pay, health care or pensions, are fairly reliable and do not have preconceived notions about race or gender that can impact the delivery of knowledge and expectations. 

However, education is not just about the acquisition of knowledge, it is about relationships and shaping young minds. A true teacher does not just impart facts; he or she creates a thirst for knowledge and teaches students how to quench that thirst. Teachers also inspire students to think for themselves and to innovate new solutions, something that AI cannot do.

Few years down the line, when the current generation who just processes knowledge just for the sake of clearing an exam will become teachers of tomorrow. Fearing that it will high likely create poor-quality teachers. These fears may be both worse than expected and closer than anticipated.

Setting aside existential questions such as whether lines of code can search, find, utter, reply or engage discussions, without question, they are being designed to automate important parts of teaching. the use of bot-teachers will be very helpful in increasing interaction within a learning community and can be used as an assistant during the teaching/learning process.

Teaching presence has three basic categories: facilitating discourse, direct instruction, and design and organisation.” And that, “it appears that bot-teachers mainly fulfils the facilitating discourse category of teaching presence” by “playing the role of friendly and tireless assistant to the instructor that can respond to course-related enquiries in live chat as frequently as needed.” What that really means is that researchers believe that a bot can replace at least one of the three essential functions of teaching in a way that’s better than having a human teacher. New technological advances would not replace teachers just because teachers are problematic or lacking in ability but would be used to augment, train and assist teachers to bring their understanding and ability to match industry standards and henceforth, teach students to match industry requirements.

New technology would not replace/train teachers just because they are bad but, presumably, for other reasons entirely.

Bots are also almost certain to be less expensive than actual teachers too. Since those who run educational institutions in the country already turn to less expensive, less experienced teachers, a bot that can do part of a teacher’s job is likely to be an enticing alternative to having any teacher whatsoever. Or a teacher trainer to match industry standards.

It’s easy to be scared about the future of teaching when an academic report on bot teachers says, “ … the concerning question of what role the human plays in a post-humanist bot-teacher scenario becomes less apparent the more technology advances. If AI developers can program responses, emotions, memory, and the intelligence of deceased thought leaders into future bots, the role of the human becomes more and more diminished.” By human, they mean teacher. And by diminished, they mean irrelevant. Before teachers become irrelevant, bots should start training teachers of today, to standardise the education of tomorrow.

The AI industry should start developing bots to train teachers to match industry standards before a sage on the stage becomes a guide on the side and the guide on the side becomes a sage on the stage.