If you define the model arbitrarily, I agree, but it you build a model based on observed data, you are much better off.
Choosing thin crash test dummies is an arbitrary decision. Measuring sets of real people and building crash test dummies around them is not. Unfortunately, it would also cause the costs of testing to skyrocket because you don't get two tries for a larger and a smaller person in one car.
Tackling education can follow the latter model, but just like any process, the real risk is that the end goal becomes following the process and not accomplishing what the process is trying to achieve. A sufficiently complicated model could, in theory, address that, but I think trying to turn educators in robots will have far more negative effects because that will impact the best teachers the most.
Choosing thin crash test dummies is an arbitrary decision. Measuring sets of real people and building crash test dummies around them is not. Unfortunately, it would also cause the costs of testing to skyrocket because you don't get two tries for a larger and a smaller person in one car.
Tackling education can follow the latter model, but just like any process, the real risk is that the end goal becomes following the process and not accomplishing what the process is trying to achieve. A sufficiently complicated model could, in theory, address that, but I think trying to turn educators in robots will have far more negative effects because that will impact the best teachers the most.