The lack of a one-stop recipe in education is frustrating because it means that there are seldom simple solutions to important educational challenges. When we were writing our book Urban myths about learning and education, we soon discovered that this desire for simple solutions was frequently an important part of the appeal of such myths. They offer, or seem to offer, quick and easy answers. In his book When can you trust the experts?, Daniel Willingham3 warns us that these solutions are often mistakenly applied to different problems at the same time: do this, the theory says, because it works for dyslexia, ADHD, truancy and even sweaty feet! Okay, I admit that even teachers wouldnât try it on the last one. But there are some who would try it on just about everything else. Whatâs more, simple solutions become even more attractive when teachers are under pressure. And in many cases, the teacherâs job already involves above-average levels of stress. Educational policy-makers are also charmed by simple solutions, to some extent because they are uncertain about the quality (and qualities) of their own teaching staff. More than once in recent years we have seen the introduction of methods and materials that are supposedly âteacher-proofâ. In other words, methods and materials that even the biggest idiot in the world could use to obtain excellent results with any child. (Of course, I exaggerate; but not by much.) Nowadays, there are even plans to introduce bots and robots in the classroom. By this, I donât mean the jazzy multi-coloured machines that help motivate pupils to develop their programming skills, but rather a series of smart applications that are intended to guide pupils through their learning process. This is no longer science fiction but science fact, and it is a dream that appeals to many. As long ago as 2011, Watson, the supercomputer developed by IBM, was able to beat the strongest candidate on the American TV quiz show Jeopardy. Since then, Watson has already been used to support doctors in their work4 and the idea is to now do the same for teachers.5 But IBM and Pearson, who are currently trying to sell Watson to the educational world, use a crucial word in their promotional blurb: support. Fortunately, the discussion is not about (or at least is no longer about) replacing teachers in the classroom, because even in our high-tech age of supercomputers and mega-apps people have finally come to realize that human interaction will always be a crucial part of the educational process.
Further thinking: Jill Watson
Like most teachers, the number of emails I get from my students is in inverse proportion to the amount of time that remains before they need to hand in their next paper or before their next exams. Email is a fantastic invention, but one that seems to be costing us more and more of that precious commodity: time.
Imagine for a moment that you could use a robot to answer some of these mails. Many of the answers involve a standard text, because students tend to forget the same things or are too lazy to look them up. Often, itâs just quicker and easier (for them) to ask the teacher. Professor Ashok Goel of the Georgia Institute of Technology suspects that in the near future it will be possible for everyone to answer 40% of such emails in this way. In fact, he knows it for certain, because he has already used this kind of smart technology with success. In recent months, his students have regularly received replies from his assistant, Miss Jill Watson, who answers their questions in a firm but friendly manner or else forwards the query on to the professor, if she does not know the answer herself. The students only very recently learnt that Miss Watson does not exist; or rather that she is not a real flesh-and-blood person.6