Another blogger setting out to learn Chinese in 3 months

[bluetortilla]

 

Similarly, people who achieve success using their own patented pay-to-read theories: is it really their theory that helped them learn something new a bit faster than most people, or are they (a) naturally gifted at learning or (b) learning their 3rd language/skill so they already have experience in how to learn.

 

All great points! I'm sure all of those have been in the back our minds. I think I'll watch The Wizard of Oz again- you know, the 'you had it within you all along' part.

 

'and what would you do with the really big money?' 

[Guest realmayo]

Most of #118 would argue against reading about learning methods here. We could go home then.

 

You would be correct if here

(a) you had to pay to read the methods

(b) they were written by just one person

( c) those methods weren't discussed by other people.

 

But given all three of those are not the case here, ....

[Lu]

Generally I agree that it's unlikely that someone finds a Revolutionary New Method to make anyone run as fast as Usain Bolt/learn Chinese in three months. But at the same time, there clearly are different learning methods, some of those are better than others, and all of them have been discovered by someone who put time and effort into making that discovery. I don't think there is any objection in principal to someone wanting to be paid to explain their learning methods, any more than there is against someone wanting to be paid for discovering a new way of growing apples or mining coal. Of course not all methods will be worth the money for everyone, either because they're not that good, or because they don't fit certain people, but the principle I think is not a problem.

[querido]

If hosts were permanent I would probably regret it. Not sure that would be worse than a thousand cuts, though.

[Guest realmayo]

don't think there is any objection in principal to someone wanting to be paid to explain their learning methods

 

But if those methods don't appear to be worth spending much money on, there's no objection in principal to people feeling free to say so, right?

 

My bag of Yogic berries might actually make you run faster. Wanna buy them? 

[bluetortilla]

 

 

 I don't think there is any objection in principal to someone wanting to be paid to explain their learning methods, any more than there is against someone wanting to be paid for discovering a new way of growing apples or mining coal.

 

Methodology isn't usually sold as such. It's usually incorporated into the text and explained thoroughly in the teacher's manual. As for methodology and research, well, that's another path. Usually there's a fee to pay for access to published papers on the Net, right? On the other hand published journals in libraries are free to browse and copy. Obviously, people are paid salaries to conduct research, develop methodology, and publish those results, along with the applied results in textbooks. Textbooks usually have a blurb about their methods in the preface. 

 

I think that's how it works. I suppose you can patent anything but sooner or later someone will make something just a wee bit different than yours and call it something else. The most successful patents in teaching would probably be 'new lip-synching technology' or something like that. The thing is, whether it's the Berlitz Method, Linguaphone, or Rosetta Stone, the theory and methods used are common knowledge amongst linguists and teachers (of foreign languages). What is sad is that many people don't realize the amount of information available to them for free. But the language giants I mention are at least well known and have reputations (kind of like Perrier has a reputation for being a type of sparkling water in a green bottle); if you mean someone like Scott, well, as I said before I think the web page says it all. It's not that it's only objectionable, I don't see that it's even ethical. Get a real job, please. But there's tons of that appola on Web, and he probably does not feel too guilty for selling his secrets for his life. What's the harm in that? Right? I think happiness is worth at least $20, don't you? Things do get too ludicrous at times. : D  Seriously- you know that Scott also is selling techniques on how to quit procrastinating and that kind of stuff too, right? Life coach stuff. I guess it all depends on one's bar level when it comes to objectionability. My bar is pretty snobbish.

 

To me, yes, I think it is objectionable for someone wanting money to explain their learning methods. Would you want to pay me money to know my learning methods? I would definitely say your money is not good here. Now, if someone has really researched an authoritative book or paper(s) and publishes through proper channels (a professional publication iow) than that's a whole different story. Ultimately, this sort of work will be published from the teaching end, not the learning end (at least I don't own nor have I seen any books on how to learn Chinese) and will commonly be found in the body of TESOL (but applicable to other languages too of course). Alternatively, the learning method(s) will already be applied in the context of the textbook being studied. And, please everyone DO support textbooks by buying them. But find out first if you're likely to like them or not. Many professional teachers and researchers work very hard over many years developing their textbooks. I for one have gratitude for their discipline and diligence. I sure don't want to financially reward some kid for explaining to me how he whizzed through college getting A's and scoring lots of dates at the same time. (Well, he didn't exactly say that- or what college he graduated from either- and sorry about the 'kid' remark if you're in your 20's, but you know...)

 

But a tutor is fine, right? I've tutored tons of students for TOEIC and TOEFL and the like. That's teaching them how to learn I guess. More accurately, I developed strategies that worked well for most of my students, and the more independent students added their own strategies or replaced mine with their own. In any case, it worked well. But that is a very narrow discipline of coaching to pass specific tests in order to achieve specific goals like getting into a university. It had almost nothing to do with an overall discipline and genuine appreciation for the Arts and Sciences in a "holistic" way. I don't believe that anyone can tell us how to proceed on that journey.

[Gharial]

Absolutely. And if I was in the remotest of locations learning a language that had never been recorded before, I would (after learning some survival nouns and verbs) try first to figure out the syntax. And that would be really hard! By immersion I didn't mean not using texts and such, I just mean devoting most of your waking life either learning, using, or communicating in the target language. And no matter how hard I stare at a character, I'm not going to know what it means until I cross-reference it to something else that I already know.

 

HALOing? lol

 

 

 

High Altitude-Low Opening (make of that what you will ).

 

Again though, why all the rush, and why the (mistaken) belief that a good text (which can be of speech) won't be sufficiently immersive, somehow doesn't count as immersion? It's all language, but the good textbook has more than back-of-a-beermat explanations.

 

To give an example, on the last BL-related thread I picked up on the grammar mistakes that a school that interview-assessed him towards the end of his mission had pointed out. Admittedly, the mistakes weren't that serious, but the text I suggested there dealt clearly with all of them, and why the apparent aversion to learning things right (through "formal" media)? Plus mistakes can start to add up, compound things, possibly "fossilize", and so on. (The apologists will however say that that anyone can make those sorts of mistakes, even after years, and on and on it goes). If the interview were anything like BL's others, I'm sure there was a lot more they could've picked up on or been critical of (I wonder if he went in claiming the higher level, or just wisely and meekly implored-confided "I've only been learning for 3 months so please go easy on me").

 

So yes, I have a slight issue with arguably quite unnecessary (i.e. what could've been avoidable) remedial education LOL. Haste makes waste. Try harder to get it right the first time, in other words!

[bluetortilla]

 

 

Again though, why all the rush, and why the (mistaken) belief that a good text won't be sufficiently immersive, somehow doesn't count as immersion?...Haste makes waste. Try harder to get it right the first time, in other words!

 

I couldn't agree more. And I have all the underlined, earmarked, and annotated texts to prove it. Take your time with the simple things, the fundamentals- this isn't a race. You don't have to study all aspects of Chinese all at the same time either (boy that's an understatement in extreme). Set goals and follow through. It's a daily discipline but it shouldn't be an overwhelming one. This isn't sword fighting or kung fu after all. Above all if it's not fun and rewarding why even do it?

The only thing that I'm in a huge rush on is the HSK. I may not make my goal for September registration but I'm sure gonna try. I don't conflate that with learning the living language though: it's a credential I need in a plan that is linear in time, nothing 'dire'. BUT- fast as I'm trying to go for that 60% pass rate, I am learning tons of vocabulary and increasing my reading comprehension dramatically along the way (and I know all the great texts now too in case anyone's interested). Since I'm holed up studying all the time (by choice), so are my speaking skills. But you know, 普通话 isn't going anywhere in the meantime.

 

I get the HALO thing now. I don't think I could ever do MAHO much less a HALO.

[Gharial]

Since I'm holed up studying all the time (by choice), so are my speaking skills.

 

 

You know what you need? The Dreamcatcher method. Inspired by the awful Stephen King movie, this will have you talking to yourself like a deranged Damian Lewis in no time, and includes patented revolutionary new SRS (Screeching Rabid Sh*tweasel) technology to keep you on your toes even when you're on the loo. Catch your own little part of the Dream today! Only $39.99, plus $250 SRS P&P.

[Lu]

Would you want to pay me money to know my learning methods?

Personally, no, I wouldn't, because I already have my own :-) But how is tutoring that different? If someone notices that your students do well at what you teach them, and suggests you put your strategies in a book so that more students can get to know them and learn from them, I don't think that would be wrong, or that you would be wrong to receive money for it. Even if it isn't a New, Improved, Patented method.

 

Whether anyone ought to pay for it, well that's entirely up to them. If you can find the same information for free somewhere on the net, or if you don't think the method is useful for you, or if you already know another method that is not that different, then of course it would make sense not to pay money for it. But as you mention, many people don't know how much stuff is already available to them for free, and they prefer paying for it over spending time trying to find the free stuff. Which is up to them, imo.

 

Now if someone intentionally sets out to sell baked air, so to speak, or plagiarises someone else, or doesn't really set out to explain anything helpful, then that I agree is immoral, because that person is not selling what they say they're selling (ie a method to learn stuff). I haven't looked into the methods of the various Learn Chinese Fast types (because I'm not really interested), so don't know if that is what some of them are doing.

[Guest realmayo]

To me, yes, I think it is objectionable for someone wanting money to explain their learning methods

 

Not only that, but can you think of any such language learning methods that actually are sold? I can't think of any.

Graded readers: you're not paying for the 'method' of graded reading, you're paying for the selection of appropriate-level texts, and their publication.

Remembering the Hanzi: you're not paying for the idea (character = components +story), you're paying for the character breakdowns and stories, as well as their publication.

Pimsleur: again, it's not the idea you're paying for but the structuring and the recording of the audio.

[bluetortilla]

 

 

 If someone notices that your students do well at what you teach them, and suggests you put your strategies in a book so that more students can get to know them and learn from them, I don't think that would be wrong, or that you would be wrong to receive money for it.

 

Actually, there are a lot of strategy books on the market, mostly for tests. I own a couple myself for the HSK. But they tend to be more explanatory as to the types of problems common to tests than to actually giving concrete instructions on how to analyze problems in your mind (or how to sharpen your pencil!). And there's nothing wrong with these sorts of books, nothing at all. I think I prefer the straight out taking tests from past years method myself, but whatever works for the individual.

I guess I see the fact that there are no (aside from test preps) 'how to study' books on the market (none that I know of anyway, at least nothing reputable or useful since most 'students' presumably already know 'how to study') that leads me to conclude that objectionably or not, there's no demand for selling learning methods. There are a lot of academic and pedagogical works out there, but they would be of little interest to the student I think. We don't get a lecture on how to strategicallypractice piano after all, we just practice scales or whatever and learn as we learn. Some, like me, never get it.

As we know, most language texts either fall into the grammar or communicative category, along with the so-called readers. That's what sells and what works. I doubt that most students are willing to risk investing their valuable time and money on some ebooks from an obscure web page. In all my years of teaching I (humbly to be sure) add that I have been praised many many times but I have never been asked to collaborate on a book. And if I were asked, I would want to be sure that the text was legit, above-board, and professional (preferably tested before release). I wouldn't want my name associated with a with a text I wasn't happy with, and more importantly I wouldn't want to let students down. I agree that many of my teaching strategies (easily converted into learning strategy) are valuable, but I seriously doubt they're unique enough to warrant publication on their own. Everything I do can be directly traced to various TESOL methods developed over the last 50 years with a dash of 'me' mixed in, which can't be replicated anyway.

Writing a text is serious business and I would take it very seriously indeed. Writing a self-help ebook on how to study less and get higher grades to me is just trash (if you sell it, not if it's free), not worth the pixels so to speak. I think that's the issue here- not whether advice on how to study is valuable or not (all of us here now it is or we wouldn't be here) but the effort and professionalism that goes into making a book worth buying. For me, a book is an investment. And a good book becomes treasured. I choose as wisely as I can. Isn't advice on how to study best when given freely? Education is the best thing we have and a good education that is also free is the best because anyone can access it.

[bluetortilla]

 

 

You know what you need? The Dreamcatcher method.

 

Ah, so now we're even gonna make a buck off the beliefs of indigenous peoples. Maybe the Tourism Authority in Yunnan should get in on that gig. How about the 'Language Elixir Pu'er Blend Guaranteed'? Bona fide hand picked by Baoshan hill tribes. Good for all tonal languages.

 

Sorry, it's easy to be exceedingly cynical toward 'ethnic tourism' in Yunnan.

[bluetortilla]

 

Not only that, but can you think of any such language learning methods that actually are sold? I can't think of any.

Graded readers: you're not paying for the 'method' of graded reading, you're paying for the selection of appropriate-level texts, and their publication.

Remembering the Hanzi: you're not paying for the idea (character = components +story), you're paying for the character breakdowns and stories, as well as their publication.

Pimsleur: again, it's not the idea you're paying for but the structuring and the recording of the audio.

 

 

In other words you get what you pay for and in these cases you're paying for a lot of hard exhaustive work. 

[Gharial]

Sorry, it's easy to be exceedingly cynical toward 'ethnic tourism' in Yunnan.

 

 

It's even easier to be cynical about individual language-learning methods though!

[tysond]

I think the tone of this discussion has unfortunately turned into disrespectful ranting.

However, I do believe I got one valuable insight from the discussion.

 

Despite spending 10 years in the modern university system, learning, teaching, tutoring, researching and publishing, nobody taught me how to learn as an actual methodology. 

I developed a lot of techniques myself, and other students passed along tips. Never really understood why.

The insight is -- maybe that's because teachers, on the whole, aren't really that interested in self-learning.  It's a process they play no part in, actually it kind of goes against their business/funding model.  I heard that some of the private colleges focused on study and exam techniques a lot more, but I couldn't afford to go there.

I guess in the regular learning topics, it's no big deal, because most people seem to reach their goals (or maybe the passing grade and expectations are lowered to meet the average progress of students, or just mark on the curve).  So there's no real need to push for maximum learning efficiency.  Learners will develop their own techniques over time, some better than others.  

 

But for language learning, the bar is really high.  Native level language skills take more hours of study and practice than a degree (talk to a Chinese major who came to China on their experience with this).  People (not here, but in general) seem to routinely fail to meet their language learning goals (probably more often than they fail to meet their weight loss or fitness goals!).  So language is a really interesting corner case for learning.

 

Since learning Chinese, I have learned more about how to learn than I ever figured out before.

So that's why I am very interested in people who try to maximize their learning process, who are trying new (or old) technology and techniques, and in neuroplasticity and other science related to learning.  Learning is quite complex and I believe we are a long way from using the best possible techniques.  

I read Scott's blog, newsletter and free book and found a number of useful techniques that i incorporated into my study routine.

[Guest realmayo]

I read Scott's blog, newsletter and free book and found a number of useful techniques that i incorporated into my study routine.

 

Can I ask why you didn't buy one of his books?

[Gharial]

Isn't language learning ultimately just encountering and increasingly recognizing, whether consciously or unconsciously, linguistic facts (facts both natural and man-made)? Whether through examples alone or with explanations added ("natural" versus "a bit more cognitive"). To make out that it is or has to be a whole lot more is IMHO just adding theory where none may be needed or becomes superfluous to "the facts".

[Baron]

@bluetortilla

 

"To me, yes, I think it is objectionable for someone wanting money to explain their learning methods. Would you want to pay me money to know my learning methods? I would definitely say your money is not good here. Now, if someone has really researched an authoritative book or paper(s) and publishes through proper channels (a professional publication iow) than that's a whole different story. Ultimately, this sort of work will be published from the teaching end, not the learning end (at least I don't own nor have I seen any books on how to learn Chinese) and will commonly be found in the body of TESOL (but applicable to other languages too of course). Alternatively, the learning method(s) will already be applied in the context of the textbook being studied. And, please everyone DO support textbooks by buying them. But find out first if you're likely to like them or not. Many professional teachers and researchers work very hard over many years developing their textbooks. I for one have gratitude for their discipline and diligence. I sure don't want to financially reward some kid for explaining to me how he whizzed through college getting A's and scoring lots of dates at the same time. (Well, he didn't exactly say that- or what college he graduated from either- and sorry about the 'kid' remark if you're in your 20's, but you know...)"

 

You object to the idea of paying for publications about learning methods, yet textbooks are based on certain learning methods (e.g. PPP, the old TEFL chestnut). Aren't 'learning methods' for languages just another term for applied linguistics? 

 

And why is a book published through the 'proper channels' better than self publishing? It sounds very reminiscent of the argument that only true journalists can deliver news, and that bloggers and twitter users should be ignored. Many many textbooks books are written by those who have the right connections to academia, not on a wider objective merit system.

 

And.. what if the 'whizz kid' gets something right? Surely you know examples of popular methodologies that have since gone out of favour. Were you sceptical of SRS when you first heard it?

 

And what's about the comment about 'scoring lots of dates'? Accelerated learning = hedonistic kid who feels it's appropriate to pepper his non-fiction with irrelevant anecdotes?

[bluetortilla]

 

 

I think the tone of this discussion has unfortunately turned into disrespectful ranting.

 

With all due respects Tysond, I don't feel there's too much ranting going on here. At least not in the sense of grumbling with no real purpose. Yes, there has been some irreverent sardonic remarks on my part off the topic. Sorry. I love the truth, it's the only thing that matters. When I see things I feel are exploitive or deceptive, I have a tendency towards smartalekism. It's a bad habit I admit.

 

Mind you, the tone here toward Scott was quite positive until the link to his books was posted. I don't know if you've seen that page. That's a dividing line- for myself, I can't accept criticism of that sort of marketing as disrespectful. Indeed, I feel I'd like to warn people away from such things, only there's way too much of it.

 

I don't think most people here have not thought (a lot!) about the techniques and strategies they use for learning. Personally, I would beg to differ that teachers don't pay much attention to a 'methodology of learning'; I think most of us are greatly concerned about that all semester long. I know I am. "What's the best way to learn English?" is the question I'm asked most and the most difficult to answer. Because it depends on the individual. So I try to make lists of many ways to learn and hand them out. Maybe top rated schools really do teach students how to learn languages more effectively. As you say, documentation of learning methodology is sparse (of course acquisition studies are ample as teaching assessments). But I'm afraid to say I think the main burden is on the learner. Now if that changes with advances in education, believe me, I'm all for it.

 

The aural/oral aspects of language learning are confounding. Rarely does someone learn a second language to a point where they are indistinguishable to a native speaker. I can't even imagine what that's like in a third and fourth language (well actually Chinese is my third language and the spoken part is not going well at all). If you go with Chomsky, and I do, then grammar is universal and that aspect need not be fretted about so much. But the physical aspects of producing sounds that must be within a definite range of pitch and intonation in an expected and anticipated syntax composed of vocabulary and phrases appropriate to each particular construction- and pulling this off in a second or two- it's just a skill that I do not believe humans are in general capable of achieving very easily. We can learn to speak a second and third language, but nearly all of us will retain an accent, some more than others. There are the exceptions of course. I do believe that most people can indeed become 'good' speakers, and I have my own strategies for that, but I would like to hear others' too. Don't government spies get trained to speak exactly like a native speaker? How do they do it? Sheer mimicry of phrases? I know the actress Gong Li spoke all her lines in English in one movie without understanding a single word of what she was saying (well she knew in Chinese, she was using mimicry). She had an accent though, and the funny thing is she had a Japanese accent, as she was playing a Japanese woman in the movie!