Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
A new technology, known as the Facial Action Coding System, was developed by Doctor Paul Eckman. This system attempts to decipher human emotions, which is simply unneeded. The technology detects movement of the 44 muscles in a human face and uses this to label the emotion the person is feeling. In a classroom, this technology is not valuable because humans already calculate emotions more accurately and quickly than the Facial Action Coding System, because common comptuers cannot use the software, and because the system would needlessly waste class time.

First, this technology is completely pointless because humans already calculate emotions quicker and more accurately than the Facial Action Coding System. The only thing the system does it add an extra step to calculating emotions. In the article, it says "you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face."

With the new technology, the computer creates a model of the face, detects movement of muscles on the face, then compares the expression on the face to a neutral face, then after all of that, it finally tells you how the person is feeling.

Why would a person look at a computer to learn what another person is feeling when he or she could do it? This can be applied to the classroom because teachers can tell how their students are responding to a particular lesson. For example, teachers call on students who are not paying attention just to get their attention. Teachers do not need this new technology because they are already great at sensing when a student is confused or bored.

In addition, this technology would be hard to put in classrooms around the United States because it cannot work on a common computer. In the article, it states "your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile." This means that in order to put the Facial Action Coding System into schools nationwide, new computers would be needed which would cost a great amount of money that simply is not worth is. As it is, schools already run tight budgets so the money that is needed for the new technology would take away from other neccessities that schools need. The teachers of schools that have the system would have to be trained on how to use it, not to mention the Technology Department employees. Frankly, the ends do not justify the means in this situation.

Finally, the technology would waste a great amount of class time, for no good reason at all. Multiple times throughout my day at school, teachers cannot figure out how to turn on the Smartboard or projector to teach a lesson. How would the Facial Action Coding System be any different? Teachers struggle to use simple technology like Smartboards or projectors, so using the Facial Action Coding System would just be asking for more problems. The amount of class time that would be wasted trying to set up the system would be ridiculous. As is, my teacher teach until the bell rings, and any wasted time would be time wasted that could be used for teaching.

Although the Facial Action Coding System is a cool new technology, it would not be valuable to classrooms. This technology is pointless because humans already can calculate emotions base on facial expressions. In addition, the system would be hard to implement into classrooms nationwide because the system cannot work on a common computer. Finally, class time would be needlessly wasted. Simply put, the classroom is better off without the Facial Action Coding System.

Score: 5