Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The Facial Active Coding System is a very new and innovative technology that has a variety of applications, and a large support for the advancement of it. However, there are some uses that have been mentioned that I fel wouldn't be extremely useful. One of these is the use of this technology in the classroom. While the Facial Action Coding System has alot going for it, the technology has small value when it comes to classroom use. Let's take a look at the aspects that make this technology both not valuable and valuable in the classroom. We'll start by looking at what benefits would come with the use of this technology in schools.

While the Facial Action Coding System isn't, in my opinion, extremely practical for classroom activities, it can still play some role in classroom use. For example, the text states that - according to Professor Thomas Huang, the innovator behind this technolgy - the technology can be used to tell if a student doing work on a computer is confused or understanding, which would help to ensure that a teacher is readily available to assist the student. In addition, Huang goes on to say that this technology can change lesson material on-the-spot if a student doesn't show interest or progress. Thirdly, the text implies that a computer program can work much more like a human instructor if it is able to detect a student's emotion. These are the main positive uses the author gives in regards to education, but I feel that these reasons aren't all they say.

While the uses in the previous paragraph make the technology seem very useful, I feel that these aren't problems in today's education system - and most certainly do not need to be handed over to a computer. For example, while the text says that this technology can make computer-based lessons more like being taught by a human instructor, I feel that a physical instructor is still always needed. There will always be a problem that even a computer can't solve, so I feel that trying to find more ways to slowly downsize the amount of teachers isn't a truly valid reason for using this technology. In addition, the text says that the program could tell if a student was becoming confused or bored, and alter lessons based on what it detects. I feel that this is also an invalid claim, as technology as new as this will be far from perfect. Imagine if a student were to not react in any way, but the software incorrectly detects them as being confused. The learning program will then switch to a reteaching section, and the student will be forced to do an activity that isn't neccessary to their success. These are just a handful of reasons why this software is not practical, but there are multiple other reasons against this technology that aren't countered in the argument.

There are many reasons that I feel this technology should not be implemented in school that aren't countered in the article. For example, because the technology is so new and so powerful, one could only imagine the cost of it. At the end of the day, the shear amount of money poured into these programs will never be paid back by reduction of teachers - and school systems will most likely never get their money's worth of the implementation. In addition, I feel that because of the price, there would be very few school corporations willing to implement it - and the few that do will face limited support because of how few sales would be. Thirdly, I feel that this technology is not worthwhile to the field of education because of technology's rapid growth. I feel that by the time this technology would become even semi-standardized, technology will have already moved on passed facial recognition, and wouldn't seem to be as innovative as it does now, at the early stage of it's life. While there are many other reasons why this technology isn't worthwhile in schools, I feel that these are the most significant.

In conclusion, you can now see both the benefits and drawbacks of using Facial Action Coding System in schools. While the technology as a whole yields a very great future application-wise, I cannot see any practical purpose of any educational system implementing it. It is costly, still in the early stages of its life, and no matter how hard inventors try - computers and artificial intelligence (for the timebeing) will never be capable of the same mental abilities that are possesed by an actual human being. As the old saying goes, if it isn't broke, don't attempt to fix it.

Score: 4