A while back I wrote a post that ended with this graf:

Calls for efficiency in education are fine, and talk about affordability and social justice is critical. But by the time that teaching — one of the hardest jobs to automate — is significantly automated we will be at the end of the robo-revolution, not the beginning. And if we really think that’s the case, what we’re teaching students now seems a much more pressing issue than how we’ll teach them years from now. What we need above all else is not an education that is powered by automation, but an education that is a response to it.

Today, via Quartz, comes a decent visual to show what I mean. I’ve drawn up my own annotations here, but click the link to explore on your own:

The vertical axis is pay and the horizontal axis is “likelihood of being automated”.  As you can see, the likelihood of teaching being automated before computer programming is pretty low.

Now consider that we are trying to save money on preparing the future programmers and benefits managers of the world by attempting to automate teaching. What’s wrong with this plan?