Portfolio Cover Letter

Dear Portfolio Readers,

When I started this class, I knew it was going to be a challenge, I felt a little better at ease when I seen that it was going to be based on robots. Although throughout time it still has been a challenge I tried to compare some topics to some things in my life

This brings me to essay 2 “Should we welcome robots as Teachers” In this essay I read and learned about the differences of a human teacher and a robot teacher. As a preschool teacher I put in my opinion and experiences that I have as a teacher and the strategies a human teacher has from social emotional skills to fine motor skills that a robot teacher may not be able to accomplish.

After essay 2 I have essay 3 “The use of robots with autistic children”. Again, as a preschool teacher I have worked with autistic children. Autistic children receive special care and have a special follow up plan (IEP- Individual Evaluation Plan) that a worker, school department, and teacher all need to follow. In this essay, by reading different sources I believe robots do not have all credentials to work with autistic children.

Finally, there is essay 4 “What human jobs do robots have”. In this essay I talk about the different human jobs that robots are possibly going to take over and the poverty people will end up in losing their jobs to robots.

Essay 4 (What human jobs do robots have?)

What Human Jobs do Robots have?

 

Robots in some states are taking over different human jobs starting at manufacturing to having an office or clerk job. As reading the different sources and starting to read on one job description a robot took over lead to robots taking over other human jobs as well.

Man versus machine: 9 human jobs that have been taken over by robots By Jamie Harris, October 10,2018.

As the news article states Technology has reshaped the workplace and caused some jobs to disappear. The rapid improvements in technology have transformed how we work, and in most cases have made our jobs easier. But It’s having another effect too – removing the need for a human worker altogether (Harris,2018).

A report released in November 2017 by McKinsey Global Institute found that up too 800 million global workers will lose their jobs to new technology by 2030. The findings add to a study carried out by Deloitte, The big Four accountancy firm, and the University of Oxford in 2014, which predicted that 35% of the jobs we do today in the UK could go to robots by 2034. Reading about this report, UK is just as much in risk as the US for robots taking over human jobs.

The 9 jobs that have been taken over by robots are a switchboard operator, bowling alley pinsetter, lift operator, film projectionist, knocker-upper, bridge toll collector, check-out cashier, railway station ticket seller, and factory worker. Because of technological intervention enabling machines to take on the repetitive heavy labor, the number of factory workers in manufacturing has fallen sharply. Only a few human staff members are required to keep an eye on working robots and carry out maintenance. “There not always better” Elon Musk realized robots weren’t always better when he had to bring human workers back when the robots couldn’t keep up with demand after replacing his human workers with robots.

In the news article “Robots are leaving the factory floor and heading for your desk- and your job” By Zoe Corbyn, February 2015, It could be said that the job of a bridge toll collector was invented in San Francisco. In 1968, the Golden Gate Bridge became the worlds first major bridge to start employing people to take tolls. The bridge went electronic in 2013. With the small band of collectors, 17 people were deployed or retired and nine found themselves out of work. The software that did it was a clear cut case of what economists call technological unemployment. License Plate recognition technology took over. Technology can now do many more things that used to be unique to people. Places like taxi sharing companies like UBER is in on the act- its has just announced it will open a robotics research facility to work on building self-driving cars.

Robotics Research Facility is an opening by UBER in Pittsburg to build self-driving cars (John Biggs). Uber Driver-on-Demand service is building a robotics research lab to “kickstart autonomous taxi fleet development”. Sources affiliated with tech crunch tells them that Uber is hiring more then fifty senior scientists from Carnegie Mellon as well as from the National Robotics Engineering Center, a CMU affiliated research entity. Uber will be developing the core technology, the vehicles, and associated infrastructure. They have hired a number of employees and made moves to outfit them with the software.

The upshot of this will be many people losing jobs to software and machines, says Silicon Valley- based futurist Martin Ford, whose book “The rise of the robots”. Ford forecasts significant unemployment and rising inequality unless radical changes are made. Based on past history, standard economic wisdom holds that technology creates as many jobs as it destroys and makes people better off by making goods and services cheaper. Nearly half of almost 2,000 experts recently surveyed by the pew centre said technology will have displaced more jobs than it creates by 2025. “Robots aren’t just in factories threatening blue-collar workers”, Ford says. “It is really now anyone who sits in front of a desk doing any kind of job that involves manipulating information- especially if it is more routine and formulaic”. For an example Ford cites New York based startup work fusion, which sells software to businesses to automate big projects that would previously have been done by office workers, such as updating company records or extracting specific information from internet websites. The software divides the job into micro-tasks, automates the repetitive bit then recruits freelance workers through crowdfunding platforms for tasks that require thinking. “As the freelance workers do their jobs they are, in effect, training the system to replace them. That’s a pretty good preview of what the future looks like”.

Routine jobs such as payroll clerk(cognitive) and assembly line workers(manual) are most dramatically falling away as for non-routine jobs such as financial analyst(cognitive) and chambermaid(manual) are not so simple and are repetitive in ways that can be easily programmed have held up better. These are skills that are most affected and are categorized by routine or non-routine or whether they are cognitive or manual. There are robots that are now programmed to do some non-routine manual tasks and have skills such as medical diagnosis and legal analysis.

In the United States there are many people and families living and trying to survive with no job due to many reasons such as no childcare for their children to work or even a disability to people that do work at minimum wage just to make ends meet. It is difficult now with the economy we live in to survive day by day, just imagine if robots fully took over all human jobs they poverty people will be living in. Job loss predictions were at high risk as there were an earlier study of the US, which has more manufacturing, suggested 47% of jobs were at risk because of automation. Peoples jobs that involve three types of tasks- originality, social intelligence and interacting with complex objects in unstructured environments were less likely to become automated because them tasks come naturally to us but is hard for robots. Low skilled and office jobs such as sales and services, bank and post office clerks, manufacturing and telemarketers were either most at risk or at the highest risks.

In 2010 researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, programmed a robot to fold a pile of towels. The robot costs $400,000, 25 minutes a towel, with the most time spent working out how to grasp it. With that being said I do not agree with robots taking over human jobs. The society is letting go their employees to replace them with one $400,000 robot. The money being spent for one robot is enough to pay their employers for the upcoming years at a company guaranteeing a job to be done as for a robot will work at its own pace and may not be able to multi task like human. Is it really worth letting go of human workers and leaving them with no job?

 

 

REFERENCES

 

(Harris, 2018) http://home.bt.com/tech-gadgets/future-tech/9-jobs-overtaken-by-robots-11364003046052

(Corbyn, 2015) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/09/robots-manual-jobs-now-people-skills-take-over-your-job

(Biggs, n.d.)https://techcrunch.com/2015/02/02/uber-opening-robotics-research-facility-in-pittsburgh-to-build-self-driving-cars/

Essay 3 (The use of robots with Autistic Children)

The use of Robots with Autistic Children

As Andrew Williams states in his article “Robots help teach STEM concepts to students with Autism” As schools around the world look for ways to better teach science, technology, engineering, and math to students, many teachers are finding that robots can help teach STEM concepts to children with autism because of their physical nature”

Amelia Moody, an associate professor at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, said” “she believes robots are a very useful tool to keep children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) more engaged” Amelia states “We use cosmos to teach behaviors, emotions, and review calming strategies”. Cozmo is a real-life robot with a one-of-a-kind personality. Cozmo can recognize people and pets. To recognize faces and peoples name cozmo has an advanced facial recognition software. Cozmos explore mode allows you to guide him through an environment by using a smart device. Cozmo plays three games using his power cubes, 1) memory match, 2) keep away, and 3) quick tap. After playing the three games, you will unlock other mini games. Cozmo is ran using a smart device, Which I believe Autistic children should do more hands-on learning then technology.

“Some humanoid robots, like the NAO or Milo, are also specifically designed by researchers to meet the needs of children with ASD” moody said. “For example, they have decreased facial features and human traits in an effort to bridge the gap between people and robots. These robots engage learners in communication and social skills” moody stated.

NAO is a humanoid robot created by soft bank robotics. NAO is a tremendous program and has become a standard in education and research. NAO has 25 degrees of freedom which enable him to move and adapt to his environment. NAO had 7 touch sensors that are located on the head, hands, feet, sonars and an inertial unit to perceive his environment and locate himself in space. There are 4 directional microphones and speakers for NAO to interact with humans. NAO has speech recognition and has the ability to speak in 20 different languages (English, French, Spanish, German, Russian etc.). There at two 2D cameras for NAO to recognize shapes, objects, and even people. NAO has constantly evolved since the beginning of his adventure in 2006 and the 6th version, launched in 2018, integrates a new CPU which enhances his performances. With NAO you can design attractive and flexible curriculums according to the potential, progress and ability of each learner. NAO reinforces learning of STEM knowledge. NAO establishes an effective learning approach for special education.

Milo is a robot to help learners with ASD to practice their communication and social skills. Individuals with ASD learn to tune in with emotions, express empathy, act more appropriately in social situations, become self-motivated, an generalize in the population. Milo verbally delivers lessons to his learners. As Milo speaks there are symbols that are displayed on his chest screen to help the learner better understand what he is saying. Throughout the lessons the learner will watch four to five second video clips on the student tablet. These videos show learners the correct and incorrect way of the skills and behaviors milo is teaching. The learner will then be asked simple “yes” or “no” questions to determine if the behaviors in the video are right or wrong.

Robots are consistent and predictable. Joby Otero, chief product officer at ozobot, said he believes robots are “even more beneficial then tablets”. Oteros reason is that robots provide “physical engagement that can connect students to the rest of the world”, which is “more stimulating then screens” “Social expectations like making eye contact can be tricky for children with ASD” said Otero. Otero also states the robot system is “easy for all students to learn with and more engaging than traditional techniques, resulting in better learning retention”.

Other robots that are more likely to enter a classroom are Bee-Bot and Pro-Bot (by terrapin Software), Ozobot (by Evollve), Buzzbots, and Lego Mindstorms robots (by LEGO).

 

 

 

(Williams, 2018)https://www.roboticsbusinessreview.com/consumer/robots-help-teach-stem-to-students-with-autism/

(Moody) “she believes robots are a very useful tool to keep children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) more engaged”, “We use cosmos to teach behaviors, emotions, and review calming strategies”, “Some humanoid robots, like the NAO or Milo, are also specifically designed by researchers to meet the needs of children with ASD”, “For example, they have decreased facial features and human traits in an effort to bridge the gap between people and robots. These robots engage learners in communication and social skills”

https://www.softbankrobotics.com/emea/en/robots/nao

https://robots4autism.com/milo/

(Otero) “even more beneficial then tablets”, “physical engagement that can connect students to the rest of the world”, which is “more stimulating then screens” “Social expectations like making eye contact can be tricky for children with ASD”, “easy for all students to learn with and more engaging than traditional techniques, resulting in better learning retention”.

Essay 2 (Should we welcome robots as Teachers?)

In “Should we welcome Robot Teachers?” Amanda J.C Sharkey explains and talks about the many/different ways how robots would interact in a classroom. Sharkey discusses current uses of robots in classrooms that are reviewed and used to characterize four scenarios: 1) Robot as classroom teacher, 2) Robot as companion and peer, 3) Robot as care-eliciting companion, and 4) telepresence robot teacher, as well as main ethical concerns such as privacy; attachment, deception, and loss of human contact; and control and accountability.

The author speaks about placing a robot in a classroom of 18-24 month old toddlers. I do not agree that will be beneficial to the children’s wants and needs. Since toddlers get into everything and anything and are very active, they require a lot of attention. Not only each child is treated as an individual and learns at their own pace. For Example, some children are more advanced then others. Therefore, how can a robot plan an activity or know the next milestone that child needs to meet? Or What goals is the robot capable of setting for that one individual child? For children with a delay, learning disability, or have an IEP how will the robot follow the child’s written plan? In early childhood toddlers learn from hands on self help skills such as hand-washing, putting shoes on their feet, or pouring milk from pitcher to a cup. With a robot not capable of doing hand over hand with a child to help them with something they are trying to succeed the child will lose the loss of human contact. Will the robot be able to help with these skills that are needed for these young children to learn as they grow?

In the Early Childhood field children are monitored and assessed as individuals. All teachers are to write down evidence on a child about what they see the child do visually. Based on all evidence, teachers are to use an assessment program to score, to see if the child falls in their age range developmentally. This help teachers plan for the children that are possibly delayed in certain developmental areas. For Example, if a child is to score low using their physical abilities such as fine motor skills which are using the small muscles in theirs hands an fingers, the teacher would try to plan more activities such as color cube sorting using tweezers or something simple like sitting down and cutting with scissors. These are things a robot may not be capable of doing being in a classroom with young children.

Some children have some setbacks such as a learning delay, behavioral issues or even autism. These children are more likely to have an IEP (Individual Evaluation Plan). These children are tested by a school department and diagnosed with their diagnosis. When this happens there is a special plan put in place for their Intervention worker, school department and their current teachers to communicate and all follow together to help the child reach their next steps.

By reading the topic before reading the essay, I thought maybe there is information provided that will help me believe Robots will be beneficial in a classroom. Having a robot in a classroom is like having technology. The amount of time children are consuming technology such as tablets and game systems. outside of daycare/school is overrated. Technology is taking over.  I believe putting the two together will eliminate children reading books or even writing. How much will the children be benefitting? Children would not be using the skills the need such as gross motor and fine motor skills.

Social-Emotional development is very important in early childhood. I understand a robot may respond to emotional cues but are not able to feel the actual feeling of being happy or sad. When a child is crying because they are being bullied by another child, will the robot be able to detect that? This is where control and accountability comes in. If there are two that are physical with each other, how can a robot take control and stop that. If one of the children get hurt, who is accountable? Will the robot be able to work through the problems with the children and find a solution? These are things we need to reconsider when we think about having a robot as a teacher in a classroom. Children need to learn how to problem solve and work out things step by step as they grow and I believe a robot will not be very helpful when it comes to these things. Young children often create a special bond with a teacher or another child in the class to where they are comfortable enough to go to, even if its just for a hug. These companions know what it takes to put a smile on that child’s face or know what comforts them. Could a robot teacher be the right companion for a child?

Although, the author supports her view on how a robot interacts as a teacher in a classroom by placing a robot in multiple of classrooms of all ages and sharing the experience. However, As an early childhood educator working with children from 8 weeks to 5 years old I feel a robot will not be able to provide all the skills needed and not just the basic of learning.

Final Draft essay 4

 

What Human Jobs do Robots have?

 

Robots in some states are taking over different human jobs starting at manufacturing to having an office or clerk job. As reading the different sources and starting to read on one job description a robot took over lead to robots taking over other human jobs as well.

Man versus machine: 9 human jobs that have been taken over by robots By Jamie Harris, October 10,2018.

As the news article states Technology has reshaped the workplace and caused some jobs to disappear. The rapid improvements in technology have transformed how we work, and in most cases have made our jobs easier. But It’s having another effect too – removing the need for a human worker altogether (Harris,2018).

A report released in November 2017 by McKinsey Global Institute found that up too 800 million global workers will lose their jobs to new technology by 2030. The findings add to a study carried out by Deloitte, The big Four accountancy firm, and the University of Oxford in 2014, which predicted that 35% of the jobs we do today in the UK could go to robots by 2034. Reading about this report, UK is just as much in risk as the US for robots taking over human jobs.

The 9 jobs that have been taken over by robots are a switchboard operator, bowling alley pinsetter, lift operator, film projectionist, knocker-upper, bridge toll collector, check-out cashier, railway station ticket seller, and factory worker. Because of technological intervention enabling machines to take on the repetitive heavy labor, the number of factory workers in manufacturing has fallen sharply. Only a few human staff members are required to keep an eye on working robots and carry out maintenance. “There not always better” Elon Musk realized robots weren’t always better when he had to bring human workers back when the robots couldn’t keep up with demand after replacing his human workers with robots.

In the news article “Robots are leaving the factory floor and heading for your desk- and your job” By Zoe Corbyn, February 2015, It could be said that the job of a bridge toll collector was invented in San Francisco. In 1968, the Golden Gate Bridge became the worlds first major bridge to start employing people to take tolls. The bridge went electronic in 2013. With the small band of collectors, 17 people were deployed or retired and nine found themselves out of work. The software that did it was a clear cut case of what economists call technological unemployment. License Plate recognition technology took over. Technology can now do many more things that used to be unique to people. Places like taxi sharing companies like UBER is in on the act- its has just announced it will open a robotics research facility to work on building self-driving cars.

Robotics Research Facility is an opening by UBER in Pittsburg to build self-driving cars (John Biggs). Uber Driver-on-Demand service is building a robotics research lab to “kickstart autonomous taxi fleet development”. Sources affiliated with tech crunch tells them that Uber is hiring more then fifty senior scientists from Carnegie Mellon as well as from the National Robotics Engineering Center, a CMU affiliated research entity. Uber will be developing the core technology, the vehicles, and associated infrastructure. They have hired a number of employees and made moves to outfit them with the software.

The upshot of this will be many people losing jobs to software and machines, says Silicon Valley- based futurist Martin Ford, whose book “The rise of the robots”. Ford forecasts significant unemployment and rising inequality unless radical changes are made. Based on past history, standard economic wisdom holds that technology creates as many jobs as it destroys and makes people better off by making goods and services cheaper. Nearly half of almost 2,000 experts recently surveyed by the pew centre said technology will have displaced more jobs than it creates by 2025. “Robots aren’t just in factories threatening blue-collar workers”, Ford says. “It is really now anyone who sits in front of a desk doing any kind of job that involves manipulating information- especially if it is more routine and formulaic”. For an example Ford cites New York based startup work fusion, which sells software to businesses to automate big projects that would previously have been done by office workers, such as updating company records or extracting specific information from internet websites. The software divides the job into micro-tasks, automates the repetitive bit then recruits freelance workers through crowdfunding platforms for tasks that require thinking. “As the freelance workers do their jobs they are, in effect, training the system to replace them. That’s a pretty good preview of what the future looks like”.

Routine jobs such as payroll clerk(cognitive) and assembly line workers(manual) are most dramatically falling away as for non-routine jobs such as financial analyst(cognitive) and chambermaid(manual) are not so simple and are repetitive in ways that can be easily programmed have held up better. These are skills that are most affected and are categorized by routine or non-routine or whether they are cognitive or manual. There are robots that are now programmed to do some non-routine manual tasks and have skills such as medical diagnosis and legal analysis.

In the United States there are many people and families living and trying to survive with no job due to many reasons such as no childcare for their children to work or even a disability to people that do work at minimum wage just to make ends meet. It is difficult now with the economy we live in to survive day by day, just imagine if robots fully took over all human jobs they poverty people will be living in. Job loss predictions were at high risk as there were an earlier study of the US, which has more manufacturing, suggested 47% of jobs were at risk because of automation. Peoples jobs that involve three types of tasks- originality, social intelligence and interacting with complex objects in unstructured environments were less likely to become automated because them tasks come naturally to us but is hard for robots. Low skilled and office jobs such as sales and services, bank and post office clerks, manufacturing and telemarketers were either most at risk or at the highest risks.

In 2010 researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, programmed a robot to fold a pile of towels. The robot costs $400,000, 25 minutes a towel, with the most time spent working out how to grasp it. With that being said I do not agree with robots taking over human jobs. The society is letting go their employees to replace them with one $400,000 robot. The money being spent for one robot is enough to pay their employers for the upcoming years at a company guaranteeing a job to be done as for a robot will work at its own pace and may not be able to multi task like human. Is it really worth letting go of human workers and leaving them with no job?

 

 

REFERENCES

 

(Harris, 2018) http://home.bt.com/tech-gadgets/future-tech/9-jobs-overtaken-by-robots-11364003046052

(Corbyn, 2015) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/09/robots-manual-jobs-now-people-skills-take-over-your-job

(Biggs, n.d.)https://techcrunch.com/2015/02/02/uber-opening-robotics-research-facility-in-pittsburgh-to-build-self-driving-cars/

Robot Teachers Thesis Statements

  • Robots hijacked a humans job as a teacher.
  • 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 can not inspire young minds.
  • In all education teachers possess crucial skills that robots have not yet perfected.
  • There are number of tasks to be completed outside the realm of teaching that robots do not have the ability to replace teachers.
  • Robots are unable to be outstanding teachers because machines lack the quality of empathy.
  • Technology has not been created to decipher the emotional or mental state of human beings.
  • In no way, shape, or form are robots inspirational.
  • Robots are detached and passionless.
  • Robots may be teaching all students across the world, lowering the quality of an educational experience one day at a time.

Rough Draft essay 4

What Human Jobs do Robots have?

 

Man versus machine: 9 human jobs that have been taken over by robots By Jamie Harris, October 10,2018.

As the news article states Technology has reshaped the workplace and caused some jobs to disappear. The rapid improvements in technology have transformed how we work, and in most cases have made our jobs easier. But It’s having another effect too – removing the need for a human worker altogether (Harris,2018).

A report released in November 2017 by McKinsey Global Institute found that up too 800 million global workers will lose their jobs to new technology by 2030. The findings add to a study carried out by Deloitte, The big Four accountancy firm, and the University of Oxford in 2014, which predicted that 35% of the jobs we do today in the UK could go to robots by 2034.

The 9 jobs that have been taken over by robots are a switchboard operator, bowling alley pinsetter, lift operator, film projectionist, knocker-upper, bridge toll collector, check-out cashier, railway station ticket seller, and factory worker. Because of technological intervention enabling machines to take on the repetitive heavy labor, the number of factory workers in manufacturing has fallen sharply. Only a few human staff members are required to keep an eye on working robots and carry out maintenance. “There not always better” Elon Musk realized robots weren’t always better when he had to bring human workers back when the robots couldn’t keep up with demand after replacing his human workers with robots.

In the news article “Robots are leaving the factory floor and heading for your desk- and your job” By Zoe Corbyn, February 2015, It could be said that the job of a bridge toll collector was invented in San Francisco. In 1968, the Golden Gate Bridge became the worlds first major bridge to start employing people to take tolls. The bridge went electronic in 2013. With the small band of collectors, 17 people were deployed or retired and nine found themselves out of work. The software that did it was a clear cut case of what economists call technological unemployment. License Plate recognition technology took over. Technology can now do many more things that used to be unique to people. Places like taxi sharing companies like UBER is in on the act- its has just announced it will open a robotics research facility to work on building self-driving cars.

Robotics Research Facility is an opening by UBER in Pittsburg to build self-driving cars (John Biggs). Uber Driver-on-Demand service is building a robotics research lab to “kickstart autonomous taxi fleet development”. Sources affiliated with tech crunch tells them that Uber is hiring more then fifty senior scientists from Carnegie Mellon as well as from the National Robotics Engineering Center, a CMU affiliated research entity. Uber will be developing the core technology, the vehicles, and associated infrastructure. They have hired a number of employees and made moves to outfit them with the software.

The upshot of this will be many people losing jobs to software and machines, says Silicon Valley- based futurist Martin Ford, whose book “The rise of the robots”. Ford forecasts significant unemployment and rising inequality unless radical changes are made. Based on past history, standard economic wisdom holds that technology creates as many jobs as it destroys and makes people better off by making goods and services cheaper. Nearly half of almost 2,000 experts recently surveyed by the pew centre said technology will have displaced more jobs than it creates by 2025. “Robots aren’t just in factories threatening blue-collar workers”, Ford says. “It is really now anyone who sits in front of a desk doing any kind of job that involves manipulating information- especially if it is more routine and formulaic”. For an example Ford cites New York based startup work fusion, which sells software to businesses to automate big projects that would previously have been done by office workers, such as updating company records or extracting specific information from internet websites. The software divides the job into micro-tasks, automates the repetitive bit then recruits freelance workers through crowdfunding platforms for tasks that require thinking. “As the freelance workers do their jobs they are, in effect, training the system to replace them. That’s a pretty good preview of what the future looks like”.

Routine jobs such as payroll clerk(cognitive) and assembly line workers(manual) are most dramatically falling away as for non routine jobs such as financial analyst(cognitive) and chambermaid(manual) are not so simple and are repetitive in ways that can be easily programmed have held up better. These are skills that are most affected and are categorized by routine or non routine or whether they are cognitive or manual. There are robots that are now programmed to do some non routine manual tasks and have skills such as medical diagnosis and legal analysis.

Job loss predictions were at high risk as there were an earlier study of the US, which has more manufacturing, suggested 47% of jobs were at risk because of automation. Peoples jobs that involve three types of tasks- originality, social intelligence and interacting with complex objects in unstructured environments were less likely to become automated because them tasks come naturally to us but is hard for robots. Low skilled and office jobs such as sales and services, bank and post office clerks, manufacturing and telemarketers were either most at risk or at the highest risks.

In 2010 researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, programmed a robot to fold a pile of towels. The robot costs $400,000, 25 minutes a towel, with the most time spent working out how to grasp it. With that being said I do not agree with robots taking over human jobs. The society is letting go their employees to replace them with one $400,000 robot. The money being spent for one robot is enough to pay their employers for the upcoming years at a company guaranteeing a job to be done as for a robot will work at its own pace and may not be able to multi task like human. Is it really worth letting go of human workers and leaving them with no job?

 

 

REFERENCES

 

(Harris, 2018) http://home.bt.com/tech-gadgets/future-tech/9-jobs-overtaken-by-robots-11364003046052

(Corbyn, 2015) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/09/robots-manual-jobs-now-people-skills-take-over-your-job

(Biggs, n.d.)https://techcrunch.com/2015/02/02/uber-opening-robotics-research-facility-in-pittsburgh-to-build-self-driving-cars/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Final Draft Should We Welcome Robot Teachers

In “Should we welcome Robot Teachers?” Amanda J.C Sharkey explains and talks about the many/different ways how robots would interact in a classroom. Sharkey discusses current uses of robots in classrooms that are reviewed and used to characterize four scenarios: 1) Robot as classroom teacher, 2) Robot as companion and peer, 3) Robot as care-eliciting companion, and 4) telepresence robot teacher, as well as main ethical concerns such as privacy; attachment, deception, and loss of human contact; and control and accountability.

The author speaks about placing a robot in a classroom of 18-24 month old toddlers. I do not agree that will be beneficial to the children’s wants and needs. Since toddlers get into everything and anything and are very active, they require a lot of attention. Not only each child is treated as an individual and learns at their own pace. For Example, some children are more advanced then others. Therefore, how can a robot plan an activity or know the next milestone that child needs to meet? Or What goals is the robot capable of setting for that one individual child? For children with a delay, learning disability, or have an IEP how will the robot follow the child’s written plan? In early childhood toddlers learn from hands on self help skills such as hand-washing, putting shoes on their feet, or pouring milk from pitcher to a cup. With a robot not capable of doing hand over hand with a child to help them with something they are trying to succeed the child will lose the loss of human contact. Will the robot be able to help with these skills that are needed for these young children to learn as they grow?

In the Early Childhood field children are monitored and assessed as individuals. All teachers are to write down evidence on a child about what they see the child do visually. Based on all evidence, teachers are to use an assessment program to score, to see if the child falls in their age range developmentally. This help teachers plan for the children that are possibly delayed in certain developmental areas. For Example, if a child is to score low using their physical abilities such as fine motor skills which are using the small muscles in theirs hands an fingers, the teacher would try to plan more activities such as color cube sorting using tweezers or something simple like sitting down and cutting with scissors. These are things a robot may not be capable of doing being in a classroom with young children.

Some children have some setbacks such as a learning delay, behavioral issues or even autism. These children are more likely to have an IEP (Individual Evaluation Plan). These children are tested by a school department and diagnosed with their diagnosis. When this happens there is a special plan put in place for their Intervention worker, school department and their current teachers to communicate and all follow together to help the child reach their next steps.

By reading the topic before reading the essay, I thought maybe there is information provided that will help me believe Robots will be beneficial in a classroom. Having a robot in a classroom is like having technology. The amount of time children are consuming technology such as tablets and game systems. outside of daycare/school is overrated. Technology is taking over.  I believe putting the two together will eliminate children reading books or even writing. How much will the children be benefitting? Children would not be using the skills the need such as gross motor and fine motor skills.

Social-Emotional development is very important in early childhood. I understand a robot may respond to emotional cues but are not able to feel the actual feeling of being happy or sad. When a child is crying because they are being bullied by another child, will the robot be able to detect that? This is where control and accountability comes in. If there are two that are physical with each other, how can a robot take control and stop that. If one of the children get hurt, who is accountable? Will the robot be able to work through the problems with the children and find a solution? These are things we need to reconsider when we think about having a robot as a teacher in a classroom. Children need to learn how to problem solve and work out things step by step as they grow and I believe a robot will not be very helpful when it comes to these things. Young children often create a special bond with a teacher or another child in the class to where they are comfortable enough to go to, even if its just for a hug. These companions know what it takes to put a smile on that child’s face or know what comforts them. Could a robot teacher be the right companion for a child?

Although, the author supports her view on how a robot interacts as a teacher in a classroom by placing a robot in multiple of classrooms of all ages and sharing the experience. However, As an early childhood educator working with children from 8 weeks to 5 years old I feel a robot will not be able to provide all the skills needed and not just the basic of learning.

The use of Robots with Autistic Children

The use of Robots with Autistic Children

As Andrew Williams states in his article “Robots help teach STEM concepts to students with Autism” As schools around the world look for ways to better teach science, technology, engineering, and math to students, many teachers are finding that robots can help teach STEM concepts to children with autism because of their physical nature”

Amelia Moody, an associate professor at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, said” “she believes robots are a very useful tool to keep children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) more engaged” Amelia states “We use cosmos to teach behaviors, emotions, and review calming strategies”. Cozmo is a real-life robot with a one-of-a-kind personality. Cozmo can recognize people and pets. To recognize faces and peoples name cozmo has an advanced facial recognition software. Cozmos explore mode allows you to guide him through an environment by using a smart device. Cozmo plays three games using his power cubes, 1) memory match, 2) keep away, and 3) quick tap. After playing the three games, you will unlock other mini games. Cozmo is ran using a smart device, Which I believe Autistic children should do more hands-on learning then technology.

“Some humanoid robots, like the NAO or Milo, are also specifically designed by researchers to meet the needs of children with ASD” moody said. “For example, they have decreased facial features and human traits in an effort to bridge the gap between people and robots. These robots engage learners in communication and social skills” moody stated.

NAO is a humanoid robot created by soft bank robotics. NAO is a tremendous program and has become a standard in education and research. NAO has 25 degrees of freedom which enable him to move and adapt to his environment. NAO had 7 touch sensors that are located on the head, hands, feet, sonars and an inertial unit to perceive his environment and locate himself in space. There are 4 directional microphones and speakers for NAO to interact with humans. NAO has speech recognition and has the ability to speak in 20 different languages (English, French, Spanish, German, Russian etc.). There at two 2D cameras for NAO to recognize shapes, objects, and even people. NAO has constantly evolved since the beginning of his adventure in 2006 and the 6th version, launched in 2018, integrates a new CPU which enhances his performances. With NAO you can design attractive and flexible curriculums according to the potential, progress and ability of each learner. NAO reinforces learning of STEM knowledge. NAO establishes an effective learning approach for special education.

Milo is a robot to help learners with ASD to practice their communication and social skills. Individuals with ASD learn to tune in with emotions, express empathy, act more appropriately in social situations, become self-motivated, an generalize in the population. Milo verbally delivers lessons to his learners. As Milo speaks there are symbols that are displayed on his chest screen to help the learner better understand what he is saying. Throughout the lessons the learner will watch four to five second video clips on the student tablet. These videos show learners the correct and incorrect way of the skills and behaviors milo is teaching. The learner will then be asked simple “yes” or “no” questions to determine if the behaviors in the video are right or wrong.

Robots are consistent and predictable. Joby Otero, chief product officer at ozobot, said he believes robots are “even more beneficial then tablets”. Oteros reason is that robots provide “physical engagement that can connect students to the rest of the world”, which is “more stimulating then screens” “Social expectations like making eye contact can be tricky for children with ASD” said Otero. Otero also states the robot system is “easy for all students to learn with and more engaging than traditional techniques, resulting in better learning retention”.

Other robots that are more likely to enter a classroom are Bee-Bot and Pro-Bot (by terrapin Software), Ozobot (by Evollve), Buzzbots, and Lego Mindstorms robots (by LEGO).

 

 

 

(Williams, 2018)https://www.roboticsbusinessreview.com/consumer/robots-help-teach-stem-to-students-with-autism/

(Moody) “she believes robots are a very useful tool to keep children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) more engaged”, “We use cosmos to teach behaviors, emotions, and review calming strategies”, “Some humanoid robots, like the NAO or Milo, are also specifically designed by researchers to meet the needs of children with ASD”, “For example, they have decreased facial features and human traits in an effort to bridge the gap between people and robots. These robots engage learners in communication and social skills”

https://www.softbankrobotics.com/emea/en/robots/nao

https://robots4autism.com/milo/

(Otero) “even more beneficial then tablets”, “physical engagement that can connect students to the rest of the world”, which is “more stimulating then screens” “Social expectations like making eye contact can be tricky for children with ASD”, “easy for all students to learn with and more engaging than traditional techniques, resulting in better learning retention”.

Should we welcome robot teachers?

In “Should we welcome Robot Teachers?” Amanda J.C Sharkey explains and talks about the many/different ways how robots would interact in a classroom.

The author speaks about placing a robot in a classroom of 18-24 month old toddlers. I do not agree that will be beneficial to the children’s wants and needs. Since toddlers get into everything and anything and are very active, they require a lot of attention. Not only each child is treated as an individual and learns at their own pace. For Example, some children are more advanced then others. Therefore, how can a robot plan an activity or know the next milestone that child needs to meet? Or What goals is the robot capable of setting for that one individual child? For children with a delay, learning disability, or have an IEP how will the robot follow the child’s written plan?. In early childhood toddlers learn from hands on self help skills such as hand-washing, putting shoes on their feet, or pouring milk from pitcher to a cup. Will the robot be able to help with these skills that are needed for these young children to learn as they grow?

By reading the topic before reading the essay, I thought maybe there is information provided that will help me believe Robots will be beneficial in a classroom. Having a robot in a classroom is like having technology. The amount of time children are consuming technology such as tablets and game systems. outside of daycare/school is overrated. Technology is taking over.  I believe putting the two together will eliminate children reading books or even writing. How much will the children be benefitting? Children would not be using the skills the need such as gross motor and fine motor skills.

Social-Emotional development is very important in early childhood. I understand a robot may respond to emotional cues. But can a robot explain the meanings behind being sad or happy? When a child is crying because they are being bullied by another child, will the robot be able to detect that? Will the robot be able to work through the problems with the children and find a solution? These are things we need to reconsider when we think about having a robot as a teacher in a classroom. Children need to learn how to problem solve and work out things step by step as they grow and I believe a robot will not be very helpful when it comes to these things.

Although, the author supports her view on how a robot interacts as a teacher in a classroom by placing a robot in multiple of classrooms of all ages and sharing the experience. However, As an early childhood educator working with children from 8 weeks to 5 years old I feel a robot will not be able to provide all the skills needed and not just the basic of learning.