It is the last day of classes before summer break and emotions are running high throughout the school. In one of the classrooms, a young student is tearfully giving her final goodbyes to her favorite teacher. “I am going to miss you so much and I cannot wait to see you in the fall when I come back to school”, the pupil exclaims. The stunned teacher does not know how to respond to the distress that her student is clearly going through. She desires to give the girl a hug and explain how everything will be fine because they will meet again in just a few short months… but sadly, that statement would be false. The odds are against them because a few weeks ago, the beloved teacher received the horrid pink slip- stating that she was being terminated from her job. The severing of her employment was not for personal reasons, since her evident passion for teaching caused her to be appreciated by both her students and coworkers. She was let go for circumstances out of her control: robots hijacked her job and there was nothing she could do about it. This scenario is something that may become a real predicament in the near future, to the dismay of many individuals throughout the world. While there are various benefits of having robotic teachers, robots will never have the capability of being a truly effective instructor because machines are unable to complete much of the tasks expected of teachers, lack empathy, and cannot inspire young minds.
The robotic apocalypse has already begun and it is only the start of the twenty-first century. This rapid revelation has forced some research to be conducted on the matter in order to predict the future path of the workforce. Luckily, numerous experts have stated that robots will not be taking over the field of teaching anytime soon and the profession is a reliable option to consider when choosing an occupation. Oxford University thoroughly studied over 700 areas of work and published a report that describes how all jobs in education are safe from impersonal machines. A teacher can be actively involved in preschool, elementary school, middle school, high school, or college studies- it does not matter. In all of these sectors of education, teachers possess crucial skills that robots have not yet perfected (Frey and Osborne 36-42). Even with such promising research, society is still in doubt when it comes to job security in teaching because of the increase usage of online learning. Lectures from well-known universities can be watched on a computer, tutoring is easy to receive from a website called Khan Academy, and most colleges offer online courses to those who cannot or do not want to physically show up to class. On the other hand, dropout rates for online courses are unbelievably high… why is this the case? The reason is quite simple- students still prefer a tangible classroom experience, opposed to being taught by a machine (Purewal 2-3).
To start off with, robots do not have the ability to fully replace teachers because the occupation requires an infinite number of tasks to be completed that are outside the realm of teaching. Being an excellent teacher consists not only of delivering information to an interested audience, but also doing other duties that make the classroom setting run smoothly. Teachers are expected to oversee clubs, help in school performances, plan field trips, meet overbearing parents, and much more. Robots cannot even accomplish the few duties listed, never mind considering the fact that the stated responsibilities barely begin to cover everything that a teacher is expected to do in a timely manner. After all, government statistics have shown that “almost a third of teachers who began their career in 2010 quit the classroom within five years of qualifying” (Weale 1-5). This situation is caused by teachers being forced to stretch themselves out too thin and complete an overbearing amount of tedious work, tasks that robots cannot even accomplish. If human teachers are currently being defeated by difficult workloads, then it is impossible for robots to be able to successfully do such tasks.
Next, robots are unable to be outstanding teachers because machines lack the quality of empathy, which is an essential tool in a classroom setting. LIke said before, teaching is more than just stating knowledge to uninformed individuals. In a way, teachers are similar to those who take part in a theater production. Instructing can be thought of as a “performance, it’s reading the room and working it” (Purewal 6). Human teachers have the useful capability of noticing the behaviors of their students and adapting accordingly. If a lesson being taught is boring, confusing, or incomprehensible, teachers are generally able to pick up on issues through clues and fix any situations that arise. On the contrary, technology has not been created to decipher the emotional or mental state of human beings, which will result in students needs not being catered to if robots take over the teaching profession. This will lead to students falling behind in their studies, which will have catastrophic consequences when these individuals are expected to apply their educational knowledge in the world or work (Mubin and Ahmad 3-9).
Lastly, robots lack the strength to take over the occupation of teaching because machines are in no way, shape, or form inspirational. While robots may be able to deliver intellectual content, technology is incapable of fulfilling a facet of teaching that can be contemplated as the most critical part of instructing, which is motivating. Teachers are the individuals who motivate students to strive for greatness and become the best person they can possibly be. The hard work, compassion, and devotion of instructors are the qualities that aid in shaping students into productive members of society. Teachers are the adults who inspire students to follow their dreams and gain the confidence to succeed in whatever obstacle is thrown their way through relentless support. Sadly, robots will not have the same effect on students as human teachers do. Robots are detached and passionless, which will create individuals who just walk through the motions. Machines do not have feelings and are indifferent on whether or not someone prospers. Students engulfed in this atmosphere day-in and day-out will feel isolated, causing them to believe that no one cares about their well-being. This will result in troubled children turning into anxious adults- which kills any hope for advancement and growth in the universe (Johnson 1-6).
While there are many disadvantages with having robotic teachers, there are a couple of positive aspects to it. First, robots have the ability to work all hours of the day because they do not become burnt out, unlike humans. Technology allows for students to receive instruction, exams, and additional learning mechanisms in the comfort of their own home. This allows for a person to learn at their own pace and convenience. However, an online class grants a higher opportunity for slacking and no time-management because it is solely a student’s responsibility to stay on top of completing their work for each week. This can easily lead to student failure, to the point where an individual is too far behind to fix the issue. Also, robots have the patience to repeat information in their lessons multiple times. While human teachers may become frustrated by the lack of progress of their students when attempting to explain a complicated lecture, robots do not allow any negative emotions to cloud their judgement because they do not have feelings (Ivanov 4-10). Having said that, machines with unwavering composure when teaching can have its downfalls. Sometimes, students need teachers with real emotions in order to learn a concept. The limited patience of human teachers encourages students to work hard towards learning something in order to satisfy their instructor. A calm robot will allow students to be unambitious and take advantage of such a calm situation.
In conclusion, while robots have not yet made significant strides in education, the future will always be uncertain. Someday, there is a possibility that teachers will have to witness students sobbing, begging them to oppose the powerful machines taking over their jobs. Sooner rather than later, robots may be teaching all students across the world, lowering the quality of an educational experience one day at a time. Hopefully, society will fight the robotic revolution and protect our vulnerable, human teachers from being discarded.
Work Cited:
Frey, Carl Benedikt, and Michael Osborne. “The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?” 17 Sept. 2013. Accessed 10 Aug. 2017.
Ivanov, Stanislav Hristov. “Will Robots Substitute Teachers?.” Browser Download This Paper (2016). Accessed 10 Aug. 2017.
Johnson, Eric. “Robots Won’t Replace Teachers Because They Can’t Inspire Us.” Recode, Vox Media, Inc. , 22 June 2016, http://www.recode.net/2016/6/22/11985726/robot-teachers-artificial-intelligence-coursera-daphne-koller. Accessed 10 Aug. 2017.
Mubin, Omar, and Muneeb Imtiaz Ahmad. “Why Teachers Shouldn’t Fear Robots Taking Over Their Jobs.”Newsweek, Newsweek LLC , 20 Nov. 2016, http://www.newsweek.com/robots-teachers-classroom-students-wall-e-education-521442. Accessed 10 Aug. 2017.
Purewal, Harpreet. “Can Technology Replace Teachers? You Asked Google – Here’s the Answer.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 Dec. 2016,http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/07/can-technology-replace-teachers-google. Accessed 10 Aug. 2017.
Vincent, Jane, et al. Social Robots from a Human Perspective. Springer International Publishing, 2015.
Weale, Sally. “Almost a Third of Teachers Quit State Sector Within Five Years of Qualifying.”The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 24 Oct. 2016, http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/oct/24/almost-third-of-teachers-quit-within-five-years-of-qualifying-figures. Accessed 10 Aug. 2017.
Almost every modification in human existence has brought people closer and closer to living a less strenuous life- a reality, at least claimed, to be superior. In order to escape from the horrors of backbreaking work, individuals created machines that overtook industries that required laborers to have exceptional strength, like agriculture. Following that era of advancement, those with occupations revolving around mental labor and skills, like clerks and pilots, allowed machines to slowly take over their profession. The next logical step is to grant robots the opportunity to overcome the field of caregiving- more specifically, with the elderly (Tufekci 9-18). In all actuality, people are already witnessing this step occurring right in front of them. Each and every day, robots are gaining the power to not only act as a thoughtful companion for the elderly, but to also aid the older population with activities of daily living.
Why is it thought of to be necessary to have robots care for the older population? After all, humans have been accomplishing this rewarding duty for centuries without any evident issues. The answer lies in the idea that civilization is completely different from even a century ago and humans need to accommodate for this change. The number of elderly people in the community is rising exponentially and there are not enough caregivers to meet the soaring demand. By the year 2050, it is anticipated that there will be 1.5 billion people over the age of 65 on the Earth (Hudson 1-3). This means that over 20% of the world’s population will need some kind of assistance in a few decades, which is an enormous amount of people in comparison to the total number of individuals who are willing to take on the exhausting task of being a caregiver. In addition, robots are not only unwaveringly patient, but the machines also do not have feelings that affect their performance in a task. Ultimately, being a caregiver is tiresome, unsafe, and unpleasant. The job allows for minimal breaks and consists of hard work, even though the pay is degradingly low. Scientists believe that robotic caregivers will have the ability to alleviate these concerns altogether because machines are not affected by human weaknesses (Caruso 7).
Since it has been discovered that robots have the ability to become an asset in elderly caregiving, people have worked relentlessly over the past couple of decades to create robots that can provide the elderly with the best of both worlds- help with physical functions and social interaction. Louise Aronson, an associate professor of geriatrics at the University of California, explained how the elderly need “someone who is always there, who can help with everyday tasks, who will listen and smile” (Aronson 3). Luckily, robots are being given the capability to do just that. Assistive robots have been invented in order to guide the elderly through their daily routines, such as bathing or dressing. For example, a robot has been devised in order to help a person with washing their hair. This machine consists of 24 fingers in order to provide maximum satisfaction to those who have little to no arm movement because of illness, injury, or old age. On the contrary, companion robots have been created in order to collaborate with the elderly on a social, emotional, and mental level. The machines are designed in order to look like a friend or a pet, which tugs on the heartstrings of the older population. For example, a robot named Paro is extremely popular in Japan for its adorable nature. The robot, which looks like both a seal and a Furby at the same time, offers solely companionship to the elderly (Hudson 6 and 22-24). Kazuo Nashimura, a Japanese home care resident, exclaimed, “Paro is my friend. I like it that he seems to understand human feelings” (qtd. in Hudson 14). Since robots are programmed to meet all the criteria for being a caregiver, they are said to be well-rounded enough to make their mark on the world.
In conclusion, robots will soon be advanced enough to properly take care of the growing elderly population. There are various ethical issues to be addressed, as there is with all types of breakthroughs. When robots take over the world of caregiving, the economy will experience a rapid change. Thousands and thousands of people will end up on the unemployment line, scrambling to find new jobs in order to make a living, without much success. Also, handing off emotional labor to machines is considered to be inhumane. Having robots take care of the elderly population not only displays a lack of caring altogether, but is plain cruel to those who crave the attention of others during the worse moments of their life. However, many individuals firmly believe that the benefits of a robotic caregiver highly outweigh the negative possibilities. Sooner rather than later, the entire world will receive a real taste of machines integrated into their lifestyle- whether someone is receiving necessary care from a robot or they know a suffering loved one who is being provided with robotic services. Would you desire to have a robot taking care of your well-being during the last moments of your life?
Work Cited:
Aronson, Louise. “The Future of Robot Caregivers.” The New York Times, The New York Times Company, 19 July 2014, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/opinion/sunday/the-future-of-robot-caregivers.html.
The source talks about a caregiver’s point of view on the topic of robotic companionship. The information comes from a credible source- Louise Aronson, who is an associate professor of geriatrics at the University of California. The source is not biased because the authors uses research and statistics to support all statements. The source is current, since it was published on July 19, 2014.
Caruso, Catherine. “Grandma’s Robot Helper.” EBSCOhost, July 2017, bristolcc.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=123611367&site=ehost-live.
The source explains the work put towards having a robot that assists the elderly socially, opposed to just physically. The information comes from a credible source- Catherine Caruso, who is a part of Nature America Incorporated. The source is not biased because it explains recent robotic advances without providing the opinion of the author. The source is extremely current, having been published in July 2017.
“Cheery Robots May Make Creepy Companions, but Could Be Intelligent Assistants.”General OneFile [Gale], 15 Jan. 2017, libraries.state.ma.us/login?gwurl=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=ITOF&sw=w&u=mlin_s_bristcc&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CA477614399&it=r&asid=8bc71a00b3a1c37f2d917498426280c6.
The source explains how the elderly want a robotic companion who has a serious demeanor, but an assistant robot who is cheerful. The information comes from a credible source- written for Space Daily and endorsed by United Press International for Space Media Network. The source is not biased because it talks about the experiment conducted to find the information revealed above without stating the thoughts of the authors. The source is not outdated because it was recently published on January 15, 2017.
Granata, C., et al. “Robot Services for Elderly with Cognitive Impairment: Testing Usability of Graphical User Interfaces.” EBSCOhost, 17 Dec. 2012, bristolcc.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hch&AN=87819221&site=ehost-live.
The source talks about the results of two experiments completed on services (a grocery shopping list and an agenda application) provided by a social assistive robot intended for the elderly. The information comes from a credible source- C. Granata, M. Pino, G. Legouverneur, J.S. Vidal, P. Bidaud, and A.S. Rigaud, who have been supported by French National Agency through TECSAN program. The source is not biased because the information is all research and experiments conducted, which solely rely on facts. The source is not outdated because it was published on December 17, 2012.
Hudson, Alex. “’A Robot Is My Friend’: Can Machines Care for Elderly?” BBC News, BBC, 16 Nov. 2013, http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-24949081.
The source explains the expectation for robots being companions in the future, while talking about the reasons for needing such an advancement. The information comes from a credible source- Alex Hudson, who wrote the article for BBC News. The source is not biased because it provides information on both sides of the argument for the topic of robotic companionship and caregiving for the elderly. The source is not outdated, since it was published on November 16, 2013.
Mohammed, Samer, et al. Intelligent Assistive Robots: Recent Advances in Assistive Robotics for Everyday Activities. Springer, 2015.
The source provides information on the challenges of using assistive robots in activities of daily living and using technology to connect with elderly people. The information comes from a credible source- Samer Mohammed, Juan Moreno, Kyoungchul Kong, and Yacine Amirat Springer, who wrote down accurate knowledge in order to be able to get the book published. The source is not biased because it provides factual information supported by research, opposed to being plagued with opinionated statements. The source is current, since it was published on March 26, 2015.
Perez, P.J., et al. “Caregiver and Social Assistant Robot for Rehabilitation and Coaching for the Elderly.” EBSCOhost, 6 Jan. 2015, bristolcc.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hch&AN=108767235&site=ehost-live.
The source talks about the work put into creating a well-rounded robot, which can perform both mental and physical activities for elderly people in order to keep them healthy and improve their quality of life. The information comes from a credible source- it was written by P.J. Perez, B. Garcia-Zapirain, and A. Mendez-Zorrilla, who are from DeustoTech Institute of Technology. The source is not biased because of its informative statements, opposed to opinionated ones. The source is current, since it was published on January 6, 2015.
Royakkers, Lamber, and Rinie van Est. Just Ordinary Robots: Automation from Love to War. CRC Press, 2016.
The source explains the background on social robots and goes into depth on how far humans should go with creating robots who can take over caregivers and provide for the elderly. The information comes from a credible source- it was written by Lamber Royakkers and Rinie van Est, who wrote down accurate knowledge in order to be able to get it published by CRC Press. The source is not biased because it provides information supported by pure research and statistics. The source is current, since it was published on August 28, 2015.
Tufekci, Zeynep. “Failing the Third Machine Age: When Robots Come for Grandma.” The Message, The Message, 22 July 2014, medium.com/message/failing-the-third-machine-age-1883e647ba74.
The source explains the reasons why robotic caregivers are not a good idea. The information comes from a credible source- Zeynep Tufekci, who is an assistant professor at UNC iSchool, Princeton CITP fellow, and Harvard Berkman faculty associate. The source is not biased because the writing contains all factual information. The source is current enough, since it was published on July 22, 2014.
It is the last day of classes before summer break and emotions are running high throughout the school. The staff and students are experiencing feelings of excitement, nostalgia, and sadness all at the same time. In one of the classrooms, a young student is tearfully giving her final goodbyes to her favorite teacher, who she has grown fond of throughout the year. “I am going to miss you so much and I do not know how I am going to repay you for everything you have done for me. I cannot wait to come back to school in the fall and see you”, the pupil exclaims. The stunned teacher does not know how to respond to the distress that her student is clearly going through. She desires to provide the girl with a sentimental hug and explain how everything will be fine because their paths will cross again in a few months… but sadly, that statement would be utterly false. The odds are against them because a few weeks ago, the loved teacher received the horrid pink slip- stating that she was being terminated from her job. The severing of her employment was not for personal reasons, since her evident passion for teaching caused her to be appreciated by both her students and coworkers. She was let go for circumstances out of her control: robots hijacked her job and there was nothing she could do about it. This scenario is something that may become a real predicament in the near future, to the dismay of many individuals throughout the world. While there are various benefits of having robotic teachers, robots will never have the capability of being a truly effective instructor because machines are unable to complete much of the tasks expected of teachers, lack empathy, and cannot inspire young minds.
The robotic apocalypse has already begun and it is only the start of the twenty-first century. This rapid revelation has forced some research to be conducted on the matter in order to predict the future path of the workforce. Luckily, numerous experts have stated that robots will not be taking over the field of teaching anytime soon and the profession is a reliable option to consider when choosing an occupation. Oxford University thoroughly studied over 700 areas of work and published a report that describes how all jobs in education are safe from impersonal machines. A teacher can be actively involved in preschool, elementary school, middle school, high school, or college studies- it does not matter. In all of these sectors of education, teachers possess crucial skills that robots have not yet perfected (Frey and Osborne 36-42). Even with such promising research, society is still in doubt when it comes to job security in teaching because of the increase usage of online learning. Lectures from well-known universities can be watched on a computer, tutoring is easy to receive from a website called Khan Academy, and most colleges offer online courses to those who cannot or do not want to physically show up to class. On the other hand, drop-out rates for online courses are unbelievably high… why is this the case? The reason is quite simple- students still prefer a tangible classroom experience, opposed to being taught by a machine (Purewal 2-3).
To start off with, robots do not have the ability to fully replace teachers because the occupation requires an infinite number of tasks to be completed that are outside the realm of teaching. Being an excellent teacher does not only consist of delivering information to an interested audience, since that expectation is unrealistic when thinking about how life works. There are other aspects to teaching- like running clubs, helping in school performances, ordering supplies, planning field trips, meeting overbearing parents, marking homework, and much more. Robots cannot even accomplish the few duties listed, never mind considering the fact that the stated responsibilities barely begin to cover everything that a teacher is expected to do in a timely manner. After all, government statistics have shown that “almost a third of teachers who began their career in 2010 quit the classroom within five years of qualifying” (Weale 1-5). If human teachers are currently being defeated by difficult workloads, then it is impossible for robots to be able to successfully do such tasks.
Next, robots are unable to be outstanding teachers because machines lack the quality of empathy, which is an essential tool in a classroom setting. LIke said before, teaching is more than just stating knowledge to uninformed individuals. In a way, teachers are similar to those who take part in a theater production. Instructing can be thought of as a “performance, it’s reading the room and working it” (Purewal 6). Human teachers have the useful capability of noticing the behaviors of their students and adapting accordingly. If a lesson being taught is boring, confusing, or incomprehensible, teachers are generally able to pick up on issues and fix any situations that arise. On the contrary, technology has not been created to decipher the emotional or mental state of human beings, which will result in students needs not being catered to if robots take over the teaching profession. This will lead to students falling behind in their studies, which will have catastrophic consequences when these individuals are expected to apply their educational knowledge in the world or work (Mubin and Ahmad 3-9).
Lastly, robots lack the strength to take over the occupation of teaching because machines are in no way, shape, or form inspirational. While robots may be able to deliver intellectual content, technology is incapable of fulfilling a facet of teaching that can be contemplated as being the most critical part of instructing, which is motivating. Teachers are imperative towards the goal of compelling students to strive for greatness and become the best person they can possibly be. The hard work, compassion, and devotion of instructors are the qualities that aid in shaping students into productive members of society. Teachers are the adults who inspire students to follow their dreams and gain the confidence to succeed in whatever obstacle is thrown their way through relentless support. Sadly, robots will not have the same effect on students as human teachers do. Robots are detached and passionless, which will create individuals who just walk through the motions. Machines do not have feelings and are indifferent on whether or not someone prospers. Students engulfed in this atmosphere day-in and day-out will feel isolated, causing them to believe that no one cares about their well-being. This will result in troubled children turning into anxious adults- which kills any hope for advancement and growth in the universe (Johnson 1-6).
While there are many disadvantages with having robotic teachers, there are a couple of positive aspects to it. First, robots have the ability to work all hours of the day because they do not become burnt out, unlike humans. Technology allows for students to receive instruction, exams, and additional learning mechanisms in the comfort of their own home. This allows for a person to learn at their own pace and convenience. Although, an online class grants a higher opportunity for slacking and no time-management because it is solely a student’s responsibility to stay on top of completing their work for each week. Also, robots have the patience to repeat information in their lessons multiple times. While human teachers may become frustrated by the lack of progress of their students when attempting to explain a complicated lecture, robots do not allow any negative emotions to cloud their judgement because they do not have feelings at all (Ivanov 4-10). Even though this is a wonderful benefit, it cannot outweigh all of the drawbacks of robotic teachers.
In conclusion, while robots have not yet made significant strides in education, the future will always be uncertain. Someday, there is a possibility that teachers will have to witness students sobbing, begging them to oppose the powerful machines taking over their jobs. Sooner rather than later, robots may be teaching all students across the world, lowering the quality of an educational experience one day at a time. Hopefully, society will fight the robotic revolution and protect our vulnerable, human teachers from being discarded.
Sources:
Frey, Carl Benedikt, and Michael Osborne. “The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?” 17 Sept. 2013.
Ivanov, Stanislav Hristov. “Will Robots Substitute Teachers?.” Browser Download This Paper (2016).
Johnson, Eric. “Robots Won’t Replace Teachers Because They Can’t Inspire Us.” Recode, Vox Media, Inc. , 22 June 2016, http://www.recode.net/2016/6/22/11985726/robot-teachers-artificial-intelligence-coursera-daphne-koller.
Mubin, Omar, and Muneeb Imtiaz Ahmad. “Why Teachers Shouldn’t Fear Robots Taking Over Their Jobs.”Newsweek, Newsweek LLC , 20 Nov. 2016, http://www.newsweek.com/robots-teachers-classroom-students-wall-e-education-521442.
Purewal, Harpreet. “Can Technology Replace Teachers? You Asked Google – Here’s the Answer.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 Dec. 2016,http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/07/can-technology-replace-teachers-google.
Vincent, Jane, et al. Social Robots from a Human Perspective. Springer International Publishing, 2015.
Weale, Sally. “Almost a Third of Teachers Quit State Sector Within Five Years of Qualifying.”The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 24 Oct. 2016, http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/oct/24/almost-third-of-teachers-quit-within-five-years-of-qualifying-figures.
For this essay, I am claiming that robots are incapable of truly being an effective teacher. There are numerous reasons why the statement above is accurate. First, teachers are responsible for completing an infinite number of tasks that are much outside the realm of pure teaching. They are expected to direct plays, recognize and assist vulnerable pupils, mentor new teachers, grade assignments, order resources, write newsletters, take field trips, meet parents, and much more. While robots may earn the ability to deliver information to others, they will be unable to satisfy all the tasks listed above and more. Second, teachers are known to have empathy when around students. Robots tend to lack this quality, which is much needed in a classroom setting. After all, teaching is not just spewing out information to a seemingly-interested audience… teaching is a thought-out performance. Humans have the capability of detecting emotional states and changing their behavior in order to cater to the needs of their audience, unlike technology. Next, teachers are expected to have the quick thinking skills necessary to conduct their day in a classroom. Anything can possibly take a turn for the worse on a normal school day and to the dismay of many, robots cannot adjust to such situations. While humans have the capability to adapt to arising circumstances and problem solve through issues, machines are unable to think on the spot. Also, teachers are proven to be the source towards inspiring young minds. Robots are incapable of having such an effect on people because they are not human and have not done anything worth admiration. While robots may be able to deliver intellectual content, human teachers are desired in order to motivate their students to reach for the stars. Lastly, the world has received their first taste of robotic teachers from the various online classes currently being offered. While some people have been taking advantage of some of the benefits of this opportunity, it has been proven that drop-out rates for these courses are extremely high because students still prefer being in a real classroom… with real teachers, opposed to robots.
Sources:
Ivanov, Stanislav Hristov. “Will Robots Substitute Teachers?.” Browser Download This Paper (2016).
Johnson, Eric. “Robots Won’t Replace Teachers Because They Can’t Inspire Us.” Recode, Vox Media, Inc. , 22 June 2016, http://www.recode.net/2016/6/22/11985726/robot-teachers-artificial-intelligence-coursera-daphne-koller.
Mubin, Omar, and Muneeb Imtiaz Ahmad. “Why Teachers Shouldn’t Fear Robots Taking Over Their Jobs.” Newsweek, Newsweek LLC , 20 Nov. 2016, http://www.newsweek.com/robots-teachers-classroom-students-wall-e-education-521442.
Purewal, Harpreet. “Can Technology Replace Teachers? You Asked Google – Here’s the Answer.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 Dec. 2016, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/07/can-technology-replace-teachers-google.
Vincent, Jane, et al. Social Robots from a Human Perspective. Springer International Publishing, 2015.
Dear Thomas,
Your essay is quite well-written! I am impressed by the amount of details shared throughout the writing and the clear effort put into the piece. To start off with, your sources are of decent quality. All of your sources are from reliable outlets, whether there is information from a published newspaper or from someone who has majored in political science. On the other hand, it does seem like there are not a variety of sources used. While an abundance of articles were used from the internet, no books are shown in your citations. This leads me to the thought that there seems to not be enough sources used in your essay. While five or six sources are ideal, your essay only contains four. I would add a book or two in your citations in order to provide an interested reader with some more information at their disposal. There is no need to add information from the book(s) into your paper… just incorporate them into your work cited page, so a person who desires to learn more about the topic can easily discover new information. Second, the essay for the most part accurately and carefully follows MLA citation guidelines, both with in-text citations and annotated bibliography. With the in-text citations, you properly cite all quotations by placing the authors name in parentheses next to the quotation. Although, it is also crucial to cite paraphrases and summaries too, which I do not witness occurring in this essay. After every piece of information extracted from another source- things that are not common knowledge- need to be followed by an in-text citation, even if it is not placed in quotations. On another note, the annotated bibliography has no major issues. Each source is cited correctly, completely, and accurately on the work cited page. The only suggestion I will provide is to make the titles of the sources into hyperlinks, so a person looking through the work electronically can have the opportunity to be directed to the websites, periodicals, and books used during the research process. If you choose to not place hyperlinks in the bibliography, I would at least have all of the citations contain URLs for the readers benefit. In addition, the annotations are mostly accurate and useful. While all of the sources are provided with information on its relevance, authority, and currency, there are no details given about biases. It is important for a source to be unbiased in order to be credible, so I hope that it has been factored in even though it is not formally stated in the annotation. Lastly, the paragraphs in the essay are unified and coherent. Strong topic sentences are used for each paragraph and transitional devices are evident throughout the paper. Also, I completely approve of the sequence in which you placed information into your paragraphs. I enjoy how you talk about why technology is becoming so advanced, what a drone is, the benefits of drone warfare, the disadvantages of drone warfare, and a summary of everything explained all in that order exactly. I find the order of the information to be extremely fitting and flowing smoothly. There are logical links between each pair of adjoining sentences. On the other hand, I find that there is one paragraph that can be expanded upon a little bit in order to make the smoothness of it improve. Paragraph four, on the topic of unethical drone warfare, would be more persuading if more knowledge is added into it to back up the statements already in there. I find that the multiple paragraphs talking about the positive aspects of drones are quite well-done, but it is a shame to have the opposing information be cut so short. My last piece of advice, while it is not in the criteria, is to proofread for grammatical errors. There are a couple of places where there is a lack of question marks, a forgotten quotation mark, et cetera… fixing those small mistakes would allow the essay to flow better and improve the work overall. In conclusion, great job on the thorough essay and keep up the excellent work!
-Rebecca
Throughout the span of time, the world has been constantly changing in order to adapt to arising circumstances. For the most part, the varying transitions in history have had a positive effect on society. Almost every modification in human existence has brought people closer and closer to living a less strenuous life- a reality, at least claimed, to be superior. In order to escape from the horrors of backbreaking work, individuals created machines that overtook industries that required laborers to have exceptional strength, like agriculture. Following that era of advancement, those with occupations revolving around mental labor and skills, like clerks and pilots, allowed machines to slowly take over their profession. The next logical step is to grant robots the opportunity to overcome the field of caregiving- more specifically, with the elderly (Tufekci 9-18). In all actuality, people are already witnessing this step occurring right in front of them. Each and everyday, robots are gaining the power to not only act as a thoughtful companion for the elderly, but to also aid the older population with activities of daily living.
Why is it thought of to be necessary to have robots care for the older population? After all, humans have been accomplishing this rewarding duty for centuries without any evident issues. The answer lies in the idea that civilization is completely different from even a century ago and humans need to accommodate for this change. The number of elderly people in the community is rising exponentially and there are not enough caregivers to meet the soaring demand. By the year 2050, it is anticipated that there will be 1.5 billion people over the age of 65 on the Earth (Hudson 1-3). This means that over 20% of the world’s population will need some kind of assistance in a few decades, which is an enormous amount of people in comparison to the total number of individuals who are willing to take on the exhausting task of being a caregiver. In addition, robots are not only unwaveringly patient, but the machines also do not have feelings that affect their performance in a task. Ultimately, being a caregiver is tiresome, unsafe, and unpleasant. The job allows for minimal breaks and consists of hard work, even though the pay is degradingly low. Scientists believe that robotic caregivers will have the ability to alleviate these concerns altogether because machines are not affected by human weaknesses (Caruso 7).
On another note, people have worked relentlessly over the past couple of decades to create robots that can provide the elderly with the best of both worlds- help with physical functions and social interaction. Louise Aronson, an associate professor of geriatrics at the University of California, explained how the elderly need “someone who is always there, who can help with everyday tasks, who will listen and smile” (Aronson 3). Luckily, robots are being given the capability to do just that. Assistive robots have been invented in order to guide the elderly through their daily routines, such as bathing or dressing. For example, a robot has been devised in order to help a person with washing their hair. This machine consists of 24 fingers in order to provide maximum satisfaction to those who have little to no arm movement because of illness, injury, or old age. Companion robots have been created in order to collaborate with the elderly on a social, emotional, and mental level. The machines are designed in order to look like a friend or a pet, which tugs on the heartstrings of the older population. For example, a robot named Paro is extremely popular in Japan for its adorable nature. The robot, which looks like both a seal and a Furby at the same time, offers solely companionship to the elderly (Hudson 6 and 22-24). Kazuo Nashimura, a Japanese home care resident, exclaimed, “Paro is my friend. I like it that he seems to understand human feelings” (Hudson 14). Since robots are programmed to meet all the criteria for being a caregiver, they are said to be well-rounded enough to make their mark on the world.
In conclusion, robots will soon be advanced enough to properly take care of the growing elderly population. While there are various ethical issues to be addressed, as there is with all types of breakthroughs, many individuals firmly believe that the benefits of a robotic caregiver highly outweigh the negative possibilities. Sooner rather than later, the entire world will receive a real taste of machines integrated into their lifestyle- whether someone is receiving necessary care from a robot or they know a suffering loved one who is being provided with robotic services. Would you desire to have a robot taking care of your well-being during the last moments of your life?
Work Cited:
- Aronson, Louise. “The Future of Robot Caregivers.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 19 July 2014. Web. 22 July 2017.
- The source is relevant because it talks about a caregivers point of view on the topic of robotic companionship. The information comes from a credible source- Lousie Aronson, who is an associate professor of geriatrics at the University of California. The source is not biased because the authors uses research and statistics to support all statements. The source is current, since it was published on July 19, 2014.
- Caruso, Catherine. “Grandma’s Robot Helper.” Scientific American, vol. 317, no. 1, July 2017, p. 24. EBSCOhost, July 2017. Accessed 22 July 2017.
- The source is relevant because it explains the work put towards having a robot that assists the elderly socially, opposed to just physically. The information comes from a credible source- Catherine Caruso, who is a part of Nature America Incorporated. The source is not biased because it explains recent robotic advances without providing the opinion of the author. Instead, it uses research and experiments to talk about the topic at hand. The source is extremely current, having been published in July 2017.
- “Cheery robots may make creepy companions, but could be intelligent assistants.” Space Daily, 15 Jan. 2017. Accessed 22 July 2017.
- The source is relevant because it explains the discovery that the elderly want a robotic companion who has a serious demeanor, but an assistant robot who is cheerful. The information comes from a credible source- written for Space Daily and endorsed by United Press International for Space Media Network. The source is not biased because it talks about the experiment conducted to find the information revealed above without stating the thoughts of the author(s). The source is not outdated because it was recently published on January 15, 2017.
- Hudson, Alex. “‘A Robot Is My Friend’: Can Machines Care for Elderly?” BBC News. BBC, 16 Nov. 2013. Web. 22 July 2017.
- The source is relevant because it explains the expectation for robots being companions in the future, while talking about the reasons for needing such an advancement. The information comes from a credible source- Alex Hudson, who wrote the article for BBC News. The source is not biased because it provides information on both sides of the argument for the topic of robotic companionship and caregiving for the elderly. The source is not outdated, since it was published on November 16, 2013.
- Mohammed, Samer. Intelligent Assistive Robots: Recent Advances in Assistive Robotics for Everyday Activities. Cham: Springer, 2015. Print.
- The source is relevant because it provides information on the challenges of using assistive robots in activities of daily living and using technology to connect with elderly people. The information comes from a credible source- Samer Mohammed, Juan Moreno, Kyoungchul Kong, and Yacine Amirat Springer, who wrote down accurate knowledge in order to be able to get the book published. The source is not biased because it provides factual information supported by research, opposed to being plagued with opinionated statements. The source is current, since it was published on March 26, 2015.
- Royakkers, LambeÌr M. M., and Quirinus Cornelis Van. Est. Just Ordinary Robots: Automation from Love to War. Boca Raton, FL: CRC, 2016. Print.
- The source is relevant because it explains the background on social robots and goes into depth on how far humans should go with creating robots who can take over caregivers and provide for the elderly. The information comes from a credible source- it was written by Lamber Royakkers and Rinie van Est, who wrote down accurate knowledge in order to be able to get it published by CRC Press. The source is not biased because it provides information supported by pure research and statistics. The source is current, since it was published on August 28, 2015.
- Tufekci, Zeynep. “Failing the Third Machine Age: When Robots Come for Grandma.” Medium. The Message, 22 July 2014. Web. 22 July 2017.
- The information is relevant because it explains the reasons why robotic caregivers are not a good idea. The information comes from a credible source- Zeynep Tufekci, who is an assistant professor at UNC iSchool, Princeton CITP fellow, and Harvard Berkman faculty associate. The source is not biased because the writing contains all factual information. The source is current enough, since it was published on July 22, 2014
Living in a household where the main source of income is payment from a position in the United States Post Office has been a viable issue for numerous families over the past few years. While being involved in the process of delivering mail is a considerably respected profession, the fretting does not lie with the prestige of the occupation. Society understands that this line of work is a crucial task- after all, sending mail has been an essential form of communication for decades and decades. When considering all of these fundamental statements, a couple of basic questions arise: why is there an issue at all? Why are postal workers forced to constantly worry about whether they are going to be employed in the near future? The answer to these legitimate questions are quite simple… robots are taking over the workforce.
In the article “Welcome, Robot Overlords. Please Don’t Fire Us?” by Kevin Drum, he argues that robots are soon going to have the power to throw all humans on the unemployment line as shown by his detailed explanation of the timeline towards reaching such a point. Since 1956, computer scientists have predicted the advancement of machine intelligence, but their progress has been slower than anticipated. The reason for this is because recreating the human brain is more difficult than expected, since such a structure is imperceivable in terms of power. Although, it has been estimated that a computer equivalent to the human brain will be invented by 2025 because while it seems like that fantasy will not occur anytime soon, it will actually become a reality quite suddenly. It is never noticed that individuals have been making developments on the front of artificial intelligence because even a tremendous revelation only touches upon a miniscule fraction of the capacity of the human brain, along with the fact that the expectations for robots are too low. The world has made more growth on improving robots than numerous people realize, but everyone has been more focused on the faults of computers than its strengths. In addition, people are fixated on modeling the human brain, but Drum explains how doing so is unnecessary. He says, “Just as there’s more than one way to fly, there’s probably more than one way to think, too.” An accurate schedule for future strides cannot possibly be determined because of the many factors that play into calculating it, but the modest victories already reached hint at a robot wonderland awaiting by the year 2040.
Drum reveals how the economics community has not spent much time concentrating on the effect that artificial intelligence will have on the workforce. It is imperative that society begins to take the Digital Revolution more seriously because the world is not prepared enough to take on such a new set of challenges. This upcoming era involves computers being able to execute cognitive assignments along with physical tasks, so the machines will ultimately run themselves. This will result in the permanent destruction of work opportunities for entire groups of workers. While this is not a concept that will take over rapidly, machines have already and will continue to become increasingly capable. People are under the solid impression that some professions cannot be overcome by machinery- like nursing- but that is inaccurate. Dissimilar to human beings, robots have been invented to do anything that is expected of them, whenever necessary. Therefore, robots will take over job after job and the wealthy will be the ones who own these machines. Capital will turn into something even more influential and labor will become meaningless. Drum goes on to describe how there are trends that are the “five horsemen of the robotic apocalypse” and we are already witnessing them with our own eyes. While in some aspects humans should not become fearful of this, another sense requires people to be extremely afraid. The first jobs to disappear will be the middle-skill ones, followed by everyone else, all the way to the CEOs.
Drum describes that to gain some control in this predicament, people can pay close attention to the five economic trends. Furthermore, humans need to forget about the idea that undesired incomes can be fixed with better education and equality, along with the thought that the unemployed should not be helped because they are lazy. When individuals finally begin accepting that the world is drastically changing, there will only be a few choices left. The most obvious option will be to heavily tax capital in order to support those who cannot work. Another option will be to divide up corporate profit and distribute it eveningly to all. No matter what, it is necessary for all humans to begin contemplating a robotic future, which is not far away. After all, it has already begun to take a toll on society.
Although the author makes some excellent points, I do not believe that the essay is entirely accurate because I find it to be unrealistic to expect robots to have the ability to do anything that humans can do, but more efficiently. While I do agree that artificial intelligence has taken huge strides in terms of improvement, there are some aspects of human nature that cannot be replicated by a machine, no matter how much effort scientists put in to do so. I comprehend the idea that robots will be created to have the capability to complete any type of physical task handed to them, whether it be something simple or complex. On the other hand, robots will never, at any point in time, replace human beings on an emotional and social level.
The article explains how robots are going to be able to act as a companion- offering a shoulder to cry on, support, personal conversations, et cetera. These qualities will allow robots to even dominate fields like healthcare, teaching, and any other profession that relies on human contact. In all honesty, I find it to be far-fetched to expect robots to have the ability to replace workers in occupations that require impressive social skills. Personally, if I was ever admitted into a hospital in immense pain, the last thing I would want to see is a robot taking care of my well-being. I would crave compassion and empathy from a human who would truly worry about my health, opposed to a cold object with no sincere feelings. It might be achievable to invent a robot who can imitate human emotions, but a machine will never be able to actually feel them, which keeps them from truly exceeding in specific jobs.
Before reading this essay, I had assumed that a future involving robots taking over various fields of work is something that I would not witness in my lifetime, but now I understand that a robotic takeover is already afflicting the world. For years and years, technology has steadily improved because of every minor update or revision created in order to produce a foolproof invention. On the other hand, scientists have never had the capability to make any piece of machinery that is actually flawless and completely reliable. For example, I am undeniably atrocious with directions, so the GPS that I keep in my vehicle is an absolute lifesaver most of the time. Without it, there would be moments where I would be stranded in the middle of nowhere, unsure of where I am and how to find my way back to civilization. On the contrary, there have been a few times where the GPS has taken me to the incorrect destination or has claimed that I have reached my location when I have not. While technology is even more advanced than ever before, it cannot be completely trusted.
That is the reason why I previously doubted that robots were going to overpower a large portion of the workforce. I never witnessed the creation of a machine that did not have evident faults, so I refused to believe that technology would ever become exceptional enough to take over millions of jobs worldwide. Currently, I now comprehend the idea that the small-scale victories have the potential of turning into something tremendous. Every advancement made in technology brings scientists closer and closer to developing robots that have the ability to complete any task imaginable. Sooner rather than later, robotics will be dominant in a numberless amount of industries (except for those that depend on social skills of course) because of all the little things that add up to make an influential difference. No human has the capability of predicting the future, so the world will just have to settle on patiently waiting to see where robots take us.
Work Cited:
Drum, Kevin. “Welcome, Robot Overlords. Please Don’t Fire Us?” Mother Jones. Mother Jones and the Foundation for National Progress, May-June 2013. Web. 15 July 2017. <http://www.motherjones.com/media/2013/05/robots-artificial-intelligence-jobs-automation/?src=longreads#>.
- Grandma’s Robot Helper
- Caruso, Catherine. “Grandma’s Robot Helper.” Scientific American, vol. 317, no. 1, July 2017, p. 24. EBSCOhost, bristolcc.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=123611367&site=ehost-live.
- The source is relevant because it explains the work put towards having a robot that assists the elderly socially, opposed to just physically. The information comes from a credible source- Catherine Caruso, who is a part of Nature America Incorporated. The source is not biased because it explains recent robotic advances without providing the opinion of the author. Instead, it uses research and experiments to talk about the topic at hand. The source is extremely current, having been published in July 2017.
- A Silver Lining?
- Stewart, Alex. “A Silver Lining?.” J@Pan Inc, no. 29, Mar. 2002, p. 6. EBSCOhost, bristolcc.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=6333406&site=ehost-live.
- The source is relevant because it involves information on an experiment that was completed in Japan where robots took care of elderly individuals in a specific nursing home facility. It provides knowledge on the results of the trial. The information comes from a credible source- Alex Stewart, who is principal of Kansai Capital Access (a venture capital advisory firm in Osaka). The source is biased because the author was only talking positive about the experiment, since it was conducted by a company in Japan in which he endorses. The source is outdated, since it was published in December 2001.
- Cheery robots may make creepy companions, but could be intelligent assistants
- “Cheery robots may make creepy companions, but could be intelligent assistants.” Space Daily, 15 Jan. 2017. General OneFile, libraries.state.ma.us/login?gwurl=http://www.bristolcc.edu:2083/ps/i.do?p=ITOF&sw=w&u=mlin_s_bristcc&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA477614399&asid=8bc71a00b3a1c37f2d917498426280c6. Accessed 22 July 2017.
- The source is relevant because it explains the discovery that the elderly want a robotic companion who has a serious demeanor, but an assistant robot who is cheerful. The information comes from a credible source- written for Space Daily and endorsed by United Press International for Space Media Network. The source is not biased because it talks about the experiment conducted to find the information revealed above without stating the thoughts of the author(s). The source is not outdated because it was recently published on January 15, 2017.
- ‘A robot is my friend’: Can machines care for elderly?
- Hudson, Alex. “‘A Robot Is My Friend’: Can Machines Care for Elderly?” BBC News. BBC, 16 Nov. 2013. Web. 22 July 2017. <http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-24949081>.
- The source is relevant because it explains the expectation for robots being companions in the future, while talking about the reasons for needing such an advancement. The information comes from a credible source- Alex Hudson, who wrote the article for BBC News. The source is not biased because it provides information on both sides of the argument for the topic of robotic companionship and caregiving for the elderly. The source is not too outdated, but it is a little old, since it was published on November 16, 2013.
- A personalized robot companion for older people
- European Commission, CORDIS. “A personalized robot companion for older people.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 16 August 2013. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/08/130816125631.htm>.
- The source is relevant because it explains how a robot companion has been designed by researchers to offer support for older people. It is currently being displayed across Europe and could become a crucial part of peoples homes in just two or three years- raising quality of life for the elderly. The information comes from a credible source, since materials were provided by European Commission. The source is biased because the writing talks all about the successes of this robot being created and all of the benefits of it, but it does not reveal any negative attributes. After all, the project was created in Europe and the European Commission does not desire to look bad. The source is a little outdated, since it was published on August 16, 2013.
- The Future of Robot Caregivers
- Aronson, Louise. “The Future of Robot Caregivers.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 19 July 2014. Web. 22 July 2017. <https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/opinion/sunday/the-future-of-robot-caregivers.html>.
- The source is relevant because it talks about a caregivers point of view on the topic of robotic companionship. The information comes from a credible source- Lousie Aronson, who is an associate professor of geriatrics at the University of California. The source is biased because the authors frame of mind may be affected by her personal experiences with the elderly and her judgement may be clouded. The source is pretty current (although it is on the brink of being outdated), since it was published on July 19, 2014.
- Failing the Third Machine Age: When Robots Come for Grandma
- Tufekci, Zeynep. “Failing the Third Machine Age: When Robots Come for Grandma.” Medium. The Message, 22 July 2014. Web. 22 July 2017. <https://medium.com/message/failing-the-third-machine-age-1883e647ba74>.
- The information is relevant because it explains the reasons why robotic caregivers are not a good idea. The information comes from a credible source- Zeynep Tufekci, who is an assistant professor at UNC iSchool, Princeton CITP fellow, and Harvard Berkman faculty associate. The source is biased because the writing contains mostly the authors opinions with a lack of information and research to back up her thoughts. The source is current enough, since it was published on July 22, 2014.
- Just Ordinary Robots: Automation from Love to War
- Royakkers, LambeÌr M. M., and Quirinus Cornelis Van. Est. Just Ordinary Robots: Automation from Love to War. Boca Raton, FL: CRC, 2016. Print.
- The source is relevant because it explains the background on social robots and goes into depth on how far humans should go with creating robots who can take over caregivers and provide for the elderly. The information comes from a credible source- it was written by Lamber Royakkers and Rinie van Est, who wrote down accurate knowledge in order to be able to get it published by CRC Press. The source is not biased because it provides information supported by pure research and statistics. The source is current, since it was published on August 28, 2015.
- Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other
- Turkle, Sherry. Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Perseus, 2013. Print.
- The source is relevant because it talks about how technology promises closeness, but robots more often than not offer a connection to stimulations of people, opposed to the real thing. This same concept proves true with robots taking care of the elderly population. The information comes from a credible source- Sherry Turckle, who wrote down accurate knowledge in order to be able to get the book published by Basic Books. The source is not biased because the author provides research to back up all statements made and the information is factual, free of the authors opinions. The source is outdated, since it was published on January 11, 2011.
- Intelligent Assistive Robots: Recent Advances in Assistive Robotics for Everyday Activities
- Mohammed, Samer. Intelligent Assistive Robots: Recent Advances in Assistive Robotics for Everyday Activities. Cham: Springer, 2015. Print.
- The source is relevant because it provides information on the challenges of using assistive robots in activities of daily living and using technology to connect with elderly people. The information comes from a credible source- Samer Mohammed, Juan Moreno, Kyoungchul Kong, and Yacine Amirat Springer, who wrote down accurate knowledge in order to be able to get the book published. The source is not biased because it provides factual information supported by research, opposed to being plagued with opinionated statements. The source is current, since it was published on March 26, 2015.
- Close enough to care: replacing human caregivers with robots in homecare
- Trynacity, Kim. Close Enough to Care: Replacing Human Caregivers with Robots in Homecare. Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI/Proquest, 2015. Print.
- The source is relevant because it explains the emotions and thoughts of the elderly who are receiving robotic care, along with robotic companionship. The information is from a credible source- Kim Trynacity, who has a Master of Arts in Intercultural and International Communications from Royal Roads University. The source is biased, since it explains the point of view of people who are waist-deep in robotic companionship, which clouds their judgement. The source is current, since it was published in 2015.
- Do you want a robot companion when you get old?
- Hulick, Kathryn. “Do you want a robot companion when you get old?” Muse, Apr. 2017, p. 47. General OneFile, libraries.state.ma.us/login?gwurl=http://www.bristolcc.edu:2083/ps/i.do?p=ITOF&sw=w&u=mlin_s_bristcc&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA492664660&asid=6ff9451491a15ace2655f5e006b68b59. Accessed 22 July 2017.
- The source is relevant because it talks about a robot created named Paro, who has apparently taken strides towards connecting with the elderly. The information might not come from a credible source- Kathryn Hulick is the author of the piece, but information is not provided on her credentials. The source is not biased because the writing provides knowledge on the things Paro has accomplished and other peoples reactions towards it, but the authors own opinion is not evident. The source is current because it was published in April 2017.
Drum, Kevin. “Welcome, Robot Overlords. Please Don’t Fire Us?” Mother Jones. Mother Jones and the Foundation for National Progress, May-June 2013. Web. 15 July 2017. <http://www.motherjones.com/media/2013/05/robots-artificial-intelligence-jobs-automation/?src=longreads#>.
Ruth,
Your essay is wonderfully written! I am thoroughly impressed on its completeness and I can see that you have put a lot of effort into the assignment. The essay is structured excellently. I find it remarkable that you had the capability of mixing together the summary and your own personal response. After all, I know that I personally have difficulty doing so and I ended up having no other option, but to put those two topics in different sections in my own writing. For the most part, your essay clearly displays that you followed assignment guidelines when creating the piece. The only thing that I find to be missing is a general paragraph, in the beginning, that introduces the issue involved. Instead of including some interesting facts or speaking about some personal experience that drags the reader in, your essay just jumps right to the point- speaking about the article before the audience can even interpret what the topic is that they are reading. Other than that, your writing follows criteria. The essay contains a summary and an opinionated response, which can be easily differentiated. The article was accurately summarized, the response was deeply considered, the response included specifics, and the paragraphs were carefully structured. In terms of a complete summary, the only piece of advice I have is to possibly go into a little more detail on the current and future improvements in robots abilities. I would talk about how robots are not only going to be able to do manual work, but will also have the capability of social interaction that will allow these machines to take over jobs in healthcare, teaching, et cetera. Next, you handled the source quite ethically. Not only did you completely use your own wording to paraphrase information, but you also used quotations sparingly and correctly. Your work cited page at the end of the essay accurately portrays the article used. Also, your paragraphs are focused, well-developed. and coherent for the most part. Although, I would just proofread for some grammatical errors or awkward word usage. For example, I found the following sentence to be difficult to follow: “Two more jobs (dairy farm worker and computer repairer) have been so changed by technological advances that they barely resemble the jobs they once were.” Instead, I would have wrote, “Repairing computers and working on a dairy farm involves jobs that barely resemble the same occupation from years ago because of technological advances.” This revised sentence allows for improved flow and easier comprehension. Other than that minor dilemma, everything else is fine in regard to quality of the writing. Each paragraph contains a main idea that can be easily discovered. Lastly, the response is very substantive. You made interesting, thought-provoking connections to the article. For example, I was thrilled about your explanation of how robots are taking over your own life, in the world of work. In addition, I enjoyed hearing your opinion on Google Translate and driverless cars- even though it is amazing that the world has such things, technology has a long way to go in order to be completely reliable. In conclusion, you should be proud of your essay, since it is wonderfully put together. Keep up the good work!
-Rebecca