Ionatan wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 3:05 pm
Níall Beag wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2019 8:15 pmI haven't seen a single report or academic paper discussing any significant change in the sales of Irish learning materials or the sign-ups to Irish courses. To me, that kind of says it's pretty much inconsequential.
That's not an unreasonable point, but I wouldn't totally write it off on those grounds alone because, apparently, only a small minority of users are actually in Ireland, so we might not see any significant report in the UK detailing such impact
Erm.... you know that Ireland is not the UK, right...?
Leaving that aside, I recently did a masters in Computer-Assisted Language Learning, so I'm not talking about reports in the mainstream press -- I'm talking about specialist publications. Even taking into account the slow pace of research and publishing, I personally believe that the academic community couldn't fail to notice any effects given Duolingo's sheer scale.
What do people finishing Duolingo Irish do? If even 1% of Duolingo's Irish students bought an intermediate-level book or CD course, there would be record sales. That we haven't heard of these record sales tells me it hasn't happened.
The Irish Times wrote:An independent study conducted by the City University of New York has shown that 34 hours of Duolingo are equivalent to a full university semester of language education
That's... questionable.
The paper in question was commissioned by Duolingo themselves, and was not published in an academic journal, so was not subject to peer review.
The two researchers named on the paper are lecturers in economics and statistics respectively -- neither has any specific qualification for assessing language-learning tools. My understanding was that it was done as a private consultation by the researchers in question (only one of whom worked at CUNY) and not by the university, although I may be wrong about that. They had previously conducted very similar studies for 3 other computer-based language learning products (Rosetta Stone, Auralog and Berlitz).
I find the conclusions dubious on a number of levels.
The study measured language level by the score on a test called WebCAPE, developed in the 1990s, which is used by a lot of US universities as an "advanced placement test" to give students language credit for language learned prior to starting study (the US university system can be baffling -- all "general ed" requirements and whathaveyou). The test isn't pedagogically brilliant as it doesn't directly measure the students' skills as taught, but its score works well enough as a proxy score because scores correspond reasonably well to scores in more rigorous tests.
...
but...
The test mostly consists of short, isolated, individual questions... so Duolingo users are going to be far more comfortable with the test format than your average school leaver coming from classes with longer-form activities, and familiarity with the format and medium of the test usually results in better scores even without a higher base level of skill. Furthermore, the narrow set of skills tested is a lot closer to the skills practised and trained in Duolingo than standard classroom skills -- if you focus only on the skills needed for the test, well, of course you're going to get a better score in the test quicker.
Then of course there's the sample set.
Students entering university are usually under 20... the average age on this study was ~32, and half the participants already had a degree... and a quarter already spoke another language. They were all people who were actively interested in learning a language, when most students in a language beginner's class are reluctant learners -- just there to get their language credit and move on to their major. There's really no valid comparison in there at all.
I personally think we'll be waiting a long time and seeing precious little.