frenkeld
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 6944 days ago
2042 posts - 2719 votes 
Speaks: Russian*, English
Studies: German
| Message 129 of 430 27 April 2008 at 3:20pm | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
Yes, we do care about the time to achieve the "outcome".
My answer was to Leospejo in other context.
He said that different methods are different.... Yes, different methods are different, but the outcome it isn't different. We are referring to meaningful differences regarding the outcome.
This outcome is native or near native fluency and that includes time to achieve the results. |
|
|
So, is your statement then that any sensible method will allow you to achieve advanced fluency, but different methods may require different time to achieve that fluency?
Or is your statement that any sensible method will allow you to achieve advanced fluency and will do so in roughly the same time as any other sensible method?
Edited by frenkeld on 27 April 2008 at 3:21pm
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Goindol
Senior Member
United States
Joined 6075 days ago
165 posts - 203 votes
| Message 130 of 430 27 April 2008 at 3:33pm | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
Goindol wrote:
Is it me, or is there a double standard for scientific rigour in the quoted post? |
|
|
If you have any evidence in favor of H1, let us know. Please
|
|
|
But as you said yourself, "This is not a professional forum, it's an open forum."?
Since you care so deeply about quantifying results, why don't you organise a RCT study and report back to us?
1 person has voted this message useful
|
slucido
Bilingual Diglot
Senior Member
Spain
https://goo.gl/126Yv
Joined 6676 days ago
1296 posts - 1781 votes
4 sounds
Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan*
Studies: English
| Message 131 of 430 27 April 2008 at 3:49pm | IP Logged |
frenkeld wrote:
slucido wrote:
Yes, we do care about the time to achieve the "outcome".
My answer was to Leospejo in other context.
He said that different methods are different.... Yes, different methods are different, but the outcome it isn't different. We are referring to meaningful differences regarding the outcome.
This outcome is native or near native fluency and that includes time to achieve the results. |
|
|
So, is your statement then that any sensible method will allow you to achieve advanced fluency, but different methods may require different time to achieve that fluency?
Or is your statement that any sensible method will allow you to achieve advanced fluency and will do so in roughly the same time as any other sensible method?
|
|
|
I am saying what I am saying and what I am saying is what I have been saying and I don't want to say anything else that what I want to say and it has been said.
I think it's crystal clear.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
slucido
Bilingual Diglot
Senior Member
Spain
https://goo.gl/126Yv
Joined 6676 days ago
1296 posts - 1781 votes
4 sounds
Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan*
Studies: English
| Message 132 of 430 27 April 2008 at 3:51pm | IP Logged |
Goindol wrote:
slucido wrote:
Goindol wrote:
Is it me, or is there a double standard for scientific rigour in the quoted post? |
|
|
If you have any evidence in favor of H1, let us know. Please
|
|
|
But as you said yourself, "This is not a professional forum, it's an open forum."?
Since you care so deeply about quantifying results, why don't you organise a RCT study and report back to us? |
|
|
This isn't a professional forum, but I think we will be very happy if you give us evidence in favor H1, even it's not your own investigation.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Goindol
Senior Member
United States
Joined 6075 days ago
165 posts - 203 votes
| Message 133 of 430 27 April 2008 at 3:53pm | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
Goindol wrote:
slucido wrote:
Goindol wrote:
Is it me, or is there a double standard for scientific rigour in the quoted post? |
|
|
If you have any evidence in favor of H1, let us know. Please
|
|
|
But as you said yourself, "This is not a professional forum, it's an open forum."?
Since you care so deeply about quantifying results, why don't you organise a RCT study and report back to us? |
|
|
This isn't a professional forum, but I think we will be very happy if you give us evidence in favor H1, even it's not your own investigation.
|
|
|
So you're volunteering to run a study, then? Cheers!
1 person has voted this message useful
|
frenkeld
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 6944 days ago
2042 posts - 2719 votes
Speaks: Russian*, English
Studies: German
| Message 134 of 430 27 April 2008 at 5:15pm | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
frenkeld wrote:
So, is your statement then that any sensible method will allow you to achieve advanced fluency, but different methods may require different time to achieve that fluency?
Or is your statement that any sensible method will allow you to achieve advanced fluency and will do so in roughly the same time as any other sensible method?
|
|
|
I am saying what I am saying and what I am saying is what I have been saying and I don't want to say anything else that what I want to say and it has been said.
I think it's crystal clear. |
|
|
I wouldn't be asking it if it was clear to me - I really am confused about which of the two statements you are making.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
BGreco
Senior Member
Joined 6394 days ago
211 posts - 222 votes
3 sounds
Speaks: English*
Studies: French, Spanish
| Message 135 of 430 27 April 2008 at 5:24pm | IP Logged |
slucido must be trolling. There's no way this can be a serious thread.
You're saying that if I spend enough time trying to read cereal boxes in Chinese that I'll learn it...it's ridiculous
1 person has voted this message useful
|
edwin
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
towerofconfusi&Registered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 6465 days ago
160 posts - 183 votes
9 sounds
Speaks: Cantonese*, English, Mandarin
Studies: French, Spanish, Portuguese
| Message 136 of 430 27 April 2008 at 5:53pm | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
Finally, we have this article:
Lessons learned from fifty years of theory and practice in government language teaching
http://digital.georgetown.edu/gurt/1999/gurt_1999_07.pdf
"Lesson 3. There is no “one right way” to teach (or learn) languages, nor is there a single “right” syllabus.
Students at FSI and in other government language
training programs have learned and still do learn languages successfully
from syllabi based on audio-lingual practice of grammatical patterns, linguistic
functions, social situations, task-based learning, community language learning,
the silent way, and combinations of these and other approaches. Spolsky (1989:
383) writes, “Any intelligent and disinterested observer knows that there are
many ways to learn languages and many ways to teach them, and that some ways
work with some students in some circumstances and fail with others.” This
matches our experience precisely.
It is also clear, as many have reported, that learners’ needs change over
time—sometimes rapidly.
Lesson 4. Time on task and the intensity of the learning experience appear
crucial.
...
Learning a language also cannot be done in a short time."
|
|
|
It seems that what slucido said has been supported by findings from FSI. Or is he saying something different?
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Language Learning Forum : Learning Techniques, Methods & Strategies
Printable version
