Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Best Method or More Time ?

 Language Learning Forum : Learning Techniques, Methods & Strategies Post Reply
430 messages over 54 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 46 ... 53 54 Next >>
ChrisWebb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6060 days ago
181 posts - 190 votes 
Speaks: English*
Studies: Korean

 
 Message 361 of 430
06 May 2008 at 6:33am | IP Logged 
CaitO'Ceallaigh wrote:
Goindol wrote:
CaitO'Ceallaigh, I fear that we're heading down a monstrous slope of semantics, which I do not enjoy, probably because I am not very good at it.

But it seems to me that a reasonable definition of the quality of a language course would largely depend on some combination of effective results and enjoyability. Do you disagree?

It seems ridiculous to me that if we were to transfer this argument to another endeavor, such as tennis, and say that all one needs is INPUT (having balls coming in one's direction) + OUTPUT (swinging at the ball) + TIME (lots of practice), one method of instruction is as good as another.


Who said they're as good as one another? No good tennis coach is going to coach his or her athletes in exactly the same way. Every person has his or her own unique needs. Good coaches recognize this.

We have to be our own coaches, and recognize that there is no one cookie cutter way to learn a language. The END.



The problem with your point is that it does in fact fail to recognise that although a coach will construct an individual training course he will in fact do so out of a range of programs that have proven effective in general. The fact that a coach varies training programs per athlete is hardly evidence that he considers all possible training programs to be equally effective. If anything sports coaching is in fact the perfect example of the point you deny, there may be no universal best method but very plainly that does not mean that all methods are equally efficient.
1 person has voted this message useful



slucido
Bilingual Diglot
Senior Member
Spain
https://goo.gl/126Yv
Joined 6472 days ago
1296 posts - 1781 votes 
4 sounds
Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan*
Studies: English

 
 Message 362 of 430
06 May 2008 at 6:38am | IP Logged 
ChrisWebb wrote:

The problem with your point is that it does in fact fail to recognise that although a coach will construct an individual training course he will in fact do so out of a range of programs that have proven effective in general. The fact that a coach varies training programs per athlete is hardly evidence that he considers all possible training programs to be equally effective. If anything sports coaching is in fact the perfect example of the point you deny, there may be no universal best method but very plainly that does not mean that all methods are equally efficient.


Katie has only given you an analogy. There aren't perfect analogies, even your 1,000 miles one.






Edited by slucido on 06 May 2008 at 7:47am
1 person has voted this message useful



ChrisWebb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6060 days ago
181 posts - 190 votes 
Speaks: English*
Studies: Korean

 
 Message 363 of 430
06 May 2008 at 6:59am | IP Logged 
slucido wrote:
About goals:

My goal is learning languages to a native or near native level. I am talking about that from the very beginning.

About methods:

I understand some of your concerns about methods. If your goal is learning history, medicine, philosophy ...you have good techniques and objetive scientific evidence.

For example:

spaced repetion, visual imaginery, elaborative interrogation, keyword technique, mind maps, summaries...are objetively good.

You always have subjetive component, but those are 'best techniques' for learners.

If you have a examination tomorrow, this techniques are the best for the average learner.

You can fit some of this techniques to your language learning goals, for example,

-keyword is better than learning by rote.

-Spaced repetition is better than overlearning.


If you have a vocabulary examination tomorrow, it's usually better to use keyword and overlearning.

If you have this examination in 6 months, it's usually bette to use keyword and spaced repetion.

That's not absolutly true, but I hope here we agree, because we have enough good OBJECTIVE evidence.

Here, the problem is our language learning goal. We are talking about mastering a language.

It's not enough to learn vocabulary and sentences, we need fixing them to a REFLEX level. It's with this long term goal where the methods and techniques decrease their evidence and MOTIVATION and TIME become the strongest factors.

Maybe keyword is better at the beginning, but later it's efficiency decrease dramatically. So, this keyword technique it's useful at basic stages, because you feel GOOD and improve your MOTIVATION.

BUT...in spite of this objetive evidence, a lot of people feel that keyword technique is nonsense and you need learning vocabulary by context from the first step...

Here we have OBJECTIVE evidence ruled out by SUBJETIVE motivations.

I think SUBJETIVE reasons are the most important in learning languages.



Whether you are talking of mastering a language is actually quite irrelevent to the point, you still need to go through the beginner stage either way. Or are you suggesting there is some way you can jump straight to intermediate.
1 person has voted this message useful



slucido
Bilingual Diglot
Senior Member
Spain
https://goo.gl/126Yv
Joined 6472 days ago
1296 posts - 1781 votes 
4 sounds
Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan*
Studies: English

 
 Message 364 of 430
06 May 2008 at 7:18am | IP Logged 
ChrisWebb wrote:

Whether you are talking of mastering a language is actually quite irrelevent to the point, you still need to go through the beginner stage either way. Or are you suggesting there is some way you can jump straight to intermediate.


I am reading your answers again (Frenkle, Reineke and you) and I have found you don't give clear examples. You talk about best methods, best designed methods, clear differences in efficiency, walking versus cars, but you don't give us concrete examples. We need to go to the ground, because it's meaningless to talk about angels ( or sports, 1,000 miles, cars, planes or ice-cream...).

As I said in the other message, I only can find two OBJETIVE learning techniques which we can apply to learning languages:

-Mnemonics (Keyword, visual imaginery, diglot weave, GMS...)

-Distributed practice (or spaced repetion).

Do you agree?

I think Goindol and Mcjon01 agree about this two points.

Do you know any other OBJETIVE good technique?


Objetive evidence means Scientific evidence.

If you disagree, if you don't find any OBJETIVE good technique, what we are talking about?





Edited by slucido on 06 May 2008 at 7:41am
1 person has voted this message useful



ChrisWebb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6060 days ago
181 posts - 190 votes 
Speaks: English*
Studies: Korean

 
 Message 365 of 430
06 May 2008 at 7:58am | IP Logged 
slucido wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:

Whether you are talking of mastering a language is actually quite irrelevent to the point, you still need to go through the beginner stage either way. Or are you suggesting there is some way you can jump straight to intermediate.


I am reading your answers again (Frenkle, Reineke and you) and I have found you don't give clear examples. You talk about best methods, best designed methods, clear differences in efficiency, walking versus cars, but you don't give us concrete examples. We need to go to the ground, because it's meaningless to talk about angels ( or sports, 1,000 miles, cars, planes or ice-cream...).

As I said in the other message, I only can find two OBJETIVE learning techniques which we can apply to learning languages:

-Mnemonics (Keyword, visual imaginery, diglot weave, GMS...)

-Distributed practice (or spaced repetion).

Do you agree?

I think Goindol and Mcjon01 agree about this two points.

Do you know any other OBJETIVE good technique?


Objetive evidence means Scientific evidence.

If you disagree, if you don't find any OBJETIVE good technique, what we are talking about?





I'd firstly note that a number of testimonies of real experiences learning languages with differing methods do exist in this thread. I'd also note that even if that were not so you are now attempting to prove your point fallaciously, your assumption appears to be that if no one can produce scientific evidence of efficiency difference between methods you somehow win by default yet anyone who has attended a logic 101 course will of course be aware that the absence of evidence is in no way the evidence of absence. As far as scientific evidence goes, it would presumably be in the form of studies using human beings which would allow you to play the 'psychological' card to cast doubt on their results anyway. Naturally this makes me less than interested in doing the work to dig studies up.

Edited by ChrisWebb on 06 May 2008 at 8:34am
1 person has voted this message useful



slucido
Bilingual Diglot
Senior Member
Spain
https://goo.gl/126Yv
Joined 6472 days ago
1296 posts - 1781 votes 
4 sounds
Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan*
Studies: English

 
 Message 366 of 430
06 May 2008 at 8:55am | IP Logged 
ChrisWebb wrote:

I'd firstly note that a number of testimonies of real experiences learning languages with differing methods do exist in this thread. I'd also note that even if that were not so you are now attempting to prove your point fallaciously, your assumption appears to be that if no one can produce scientific evidence of efficiency difference between methods you somehow win by default yet anyone who has attended a logic 101 course will of course be aware that the absence of evidence is in no way the evidence of absence. As far as scientific evidence goes, it would presumably be in the form of studies using human beings which would allow you to play the 'psychological' card to cast doubt on their results anyway. Naturally this makes me less than interested in doing the work to dig studies up.


Here you can find a huge amount of contradictory anecdotes and testimonies. However testimonies and anecdotes are good for biased marketers, not for our discussion.

My question is easy:

I only can find two OBJECTIVE learning techniques which we can apply to learning languages:

-Mnemonics (Keyword, visual imagery, diglot weave, GMS...)

-Distributed practice (or spaced repetition).

Do you agree?

Do you know any other OBJECTIVE good technique? What technique?


Objective evidence means Scientific evidence.

Please, I am giving you two OBJECTIVE good techniques. I am helping you.

If you disagree, if you don't find any OBJECTIVE good technique to discuss, what we are talking about? About sports, 1,000 miles and ice-cream? About SUBJECTIVE feelings?








Edited by slucido on 06 May 2008 at 8:58am
1 person has voted this message useful



frenkeld
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 6740 days ago
2042 posts - 2719 votes 
Speaks: Russian*, English
Studies: German

 
 Message 367 of 430
06 May 2008 at 9:02am | IP Logged 
slucido wrote:
Do you know any other OBJECTIVE good technique?


- Graded input
- Repetition of graded input
- Grammar exercises (also a form of repetition)


Edited by frenkeld on 06 May 2008 at 10:34am
1 person has voted this message useful



frenkeld
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 6740 days ago
2042 posts - 2719 votes 
Speaks: Russian*, English
Studies: German

 
 Message 368 of 430
06 May 2008 at 9:21am | IP Logged 
slucido wrote:
You talk about best methods ...


I would never be one to talk about the "best method". My philosophy of method selection is based on just two principles:

Principle 1. Don't do anything egregiously stupid.
Principle 2. If you insist on doing something stupid, be clear that this is what you are doing.

Principle 2 implies avoiding excessive theorizing to justify one's stupid actions. Something simple, like, "I know it's stupid, but I am going to do it anyway", is enough of a justification.


Edited by frenkeld on 06 May 2008 at 10:50am


1 person has voted this message useful



This discussion contains 430 messages over 54 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 2.4375 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.