I feel like the use of this technology being able to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is not needed in anyway.

I feel this way because in the artical it stated that "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored... Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor" (Dr. Huang). That could be useful, the computer notices that the students are bored and some confused, and then it changes to now the students that were bored and confused, now are amused and understand it much better. But the normal teacher that we have already can do that to.

As an example a teacher notice when students are bored, and then swich it up a little so keep things somewhat fresh, and when students get confused, the teacher will do the exact same things, swich some of the lesson up and explain it more. Just like the computer.

As somewhat of a side note, it also feels more natural to be taught by a human. Because its someone who thinks the way you do, understandes you better because they have been through everthing school wise as you. If I had a choise to be taught by a computer or a teacher, I would pick the teacher because a computer might know everything there is to know, but it would make me feel in a way, safer, because I would be talking to a human, something everyone is used to doing.

Overall, I state that it is not valuable because the teacher can almost do the exact same thing as the computer. Yes, teachers maybe not be able to tell that you are 65% bored and 35% confused, but do we really need a computer to tell us this information, because I feel like it would be a waste of money and time, if its something humans can already do and have been doing much longer than any computer has, humans are not as exact as a computer, but we can help out a student, and recognize that the student is confused or bored, and much more. We can help the student, just like a computer.