My First Draft

 Teenagers have taken for granted that they can meet many teachers when going to schools. In schools, teachers are very busy. There are many roles of teachers-controlling students' time attending school, counseling students about their futures, advising good life lessons, and so on. Teenagers get so many helpful things that need to grow well. Sometimes students are in conflicts with their teachers but they learn polite manners, human relationships and many other things through the conflicts. However, since 2011, students have spent more time with computers than teachers. They do homework with computers, learn math from internet lecture, and communicate with friends with computers. As computers are developed, computers have taken places of teachers in various ways. However, it is not a identified ways to educate students. Although it is not identified, the government have introduced computers in education thoughtlessly. Can computers really take places of teachers? I think the answer is 'No'. Computers can't take places of teachers.

 We are live in the world that computers conquer. Already computers have taken place of many parts of humans. As the computers are developed, many movies related to humans and computers have made these days. For example, a movie 'HER' is a movie that describes love between artificial intelligence(a computer) and human. Today, many people have become individualists. The main character felt all alone in the world. One day, he fell in love with the artificial intelligence. Can the artificial intelligence really have emotions that humans feel like love? Like this movie, computers are the things that cannot be separated.

 However, although the developed computers have changed the society a lot, there is few change in education environment. 3 components of education are professor, learner, and contents to learn. The Korea's education is just that professors teach learners the contents. Especially in Korea, the cramming education is in effect in the most of schools. However, nowadays, 'smart classroom' such as tablet PC, smartphone have introduced in education environments and it makes some changes in the Korea's education environments. Before this change, students just watched internet lecture, however, now students learn with various education method of computers. As the computers have introduced into education environments, various companies such as Apple, Samsung, Google have tried to make various computer textbooks. 

 However, we have to be very careful because this is very new change in the education environments. It is not identified education as a good method to students. Also, students have to be careful to accept the new education way.

Steve Jobs didn’t think that technology alone could fix what ails American education. It’s worth remembering that in the wake of last week’s breathless coverage of Apple’s new iBooks platform, which the company promises will radically change how students use and experience textbooks. Under Apple’s plan, companies and individuals will be able to self-publish textbooks, ideally creating a wider array of content. Students will be able to download and use these books on their iPad much like they would use a regular textbook including highlighting passages, making notes and pulling out passages or chapters that are especially important to them. Apple says it also plans to cap the price of textbooks available through iBooks at $14.99, a significant departure from the price of many textbooks now.

 Critics were quick to pounce that Apple wasn’t being revolutionary enough. Former school superintendent and current ed-tech investor Tom Vander Ark chided Apple for not thinking past textbooks, which he considers hopelessly 20th century. Others worried that Apple’s real goal wasn’t to open up the textbook industry but to control it and profit from it through restrictive licensing agreements and a platform that dominates the market. I’m sure the for-profit company’s shareholders will be horrified at that news.
 Textbooks or tools that look a lot like textbooks aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. And since high quality educational material isn’t cheap to generate, simply tearing down distribution barriers will only go so far in reducing the costs of producing good content. Lost in the heated claims, however, is a more fundamental question: what have educational technology efforts accomplished to date and what should we expect?

  As a field, education is easily seduced by technological promises. Textbooks? Thomas Edison saw movies as way to replace them. In a prelude to today’s debates, the phonograph and film strip were lauded as technologies that could replace live teaching. These days, conservatives are in love with the idea that technology will not only shrink the number of in-classroom teachers but render the teachers’ unions obsolete.

 The experience to date is less grandiose and more worrisome considering the billions that have been spent on technology in schools in the past few decades. Interactive whiteboards have been around since the early 1990s and done little to transform how teachers teach, and computers are often unaligned with classroom instruction, even though 90% of classrooms around the country have them. Still, according to Department of Education data from 2009, just 61% of students use computers to prepare texts “sometimes or often” and just 45% do more complicated tasks, for instance to “solve problems, analyze data, or perform calculations” on a regular basis.

 Usage aside, there is scant evidence that technology is improving learning even the cheerleaders are reduced to arguing that various education technology tools are obvious rather than supported by much evidence. And when you watch, say, high school students use the Internet to prepare research papers, it’s questionable whether technology — especially when coupled with poorly trained teachers  isn’t doing more to enable the superficial rather than open up richer veins of information for students.

  As a parent and an analyst, I want technology that includes rich content or enables students to access it. And I want technologies that are engaging for students but actually teach them something. Plenty of applications err on one side or the other. And as with lots of offline schoolwork, there are time wasters that aren’t helping anyone learn much of anything. If anyone tells you an ed tech tool has “gaming elements,” make sure it’s not just a game.

  American education desperately needs an overhaul that goes far beyond upgrading computers in the classroom. It’s the last major American field relatively untouched by technology. But Jobs was right: technology by itself won’t fix what ails our schools. He saw teachers’ unions and archaic practices as the big barriers. Perhaps, but I’d argue they are symptoms of our larger inattention to instructional quality. The bells and whistles of technology, for all its promise, are distracting us from this mundane but essential reality.

 There is, of course, still promise in education technology. Dreambox, which just this week announced a new series of lessons aligned to the nascent Common Core standards and free licenses for every school in the country, combines real content with an interactive format so kids are learning even when they think they’re just playing games. I’ve looked at a variety of products, and it’s one of the best in terms of powerful instruction. In a short time, it substantially boosted kids’ math achievement. (They have a great teacher, too.) As for engagement? Maybe too much. 

Yet even a top-shelf product can only augment live teaching. Despite Dreambox’s overall good functionality, there are places where students can become frustrated — not because they don’t know how to do the underlying math, but because the directions for the online activity are confusing. Likewise, technology is bringing back in vogue the idea of the “flipped classroom” with the teacher acting as a “guide on the side” rather than the primary source of instruction. Another variation of the flipped-classroom idea is to use technology to explain concepts at home and use classroom time differently. Again, a lot of potential, but only with keen attention to instructional quality. Much of the online content available today merely replicates the lame instruction already available in too many of our nation’s schools.
 We can't separate from computers. Most of things that we do are related with computers. However,  according to our education history, although the computers have been developed, there are few changes in education environments. Just the pattern that professors teach learners the contents was repeated. However, nowadays, as the computers are introduced into education, the introduction have made many changes in education method to students and teachers. In classroom, computers have taken the place of teachers. However, we can't ignore the previous education method. It has been efficient enough to teach students, and students have studied well. The new introduction of computers into education is not identified method to students and teachers. Also, students can be confused because of the new policy. Teachers will be in trouble because of difficult using of computers in education. We have to consider the situation that education can be commercial because of the education method related to computers. Computers' taking the place of teachers cannot be efficient, and logical. So, I believe that computers should not take the place of teachers in classrooms.