Page 11 of 11

Re: We haven't got up to 'yes" yet!

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 7:38 pm
by Chupito
I got a kick out of my Duolingo lesson today:

Image

Re: We haven't got up to 'yes" yet!

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 9:24 pm
by Cainntear
zenmonkey wrote:Learning strategies are, or should be, highly individual.

Are, definitely; should be, not convinced. I believe that in any activity of strategy, there's all the stuff we do to enable learning to happen, and that's where the individual differences come it. But once we've enabled the learning to happen, there's a core of cognitive processes
that I believe we all share.
I believe that the closer the teaching gets to the core cognitive process of learning, the more universal the teaching becomes.
If the teacher "pre-digests" the teaching input right, there's less of the superficial stuff that we need to do to work the material into a form we can learn.

Re: We haven't got up to 'yes" yet!

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 9:46 pm
by zenmonkey
Cainntear wrote:
zenmonkey wrote:Learning strategies are, or should be, highly individual.

Are, definitely; should be, not convinced. I believe that in any activity of strategy, there's all the stuff we do to enable learning to happen, and that's where the individual differences come it. But once we've enabled the learning to happen, there's a core of cognitive processes
that I believe we all share.
I believe that the closer the teaching gets to the core cognitive process of learning, the more universal the teaching becomes.
If the teacher "pre-digests" the teaching input right, there's less of the superficial stuff that we need to do to work the material into a form we can learn.


But our past language history, our strengths and weaknesses, our goals, the material we enjoy, the external pressures we face, etc... tend to be different.

Consciously or unconsciously, a good teacher takes those elements into consideration and "pre-digests" the student parameters, too. That's what I'm talking about when I consider learning strategies being individual. This is perhaps more valid on a one on one case or when we talk of self-study and not group learning.

Re: We haven't got up to 'yes" yet!

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:16 pm
by Cainntear
(Quoting out of order on purpose)
zenmonkey wrote:But our past language history,

Language history determines what has to be taught, not how to teach it.
If I've learned German and am now learning Russian, I don't need to learn the new concept of "declensions" -- just the specific forms and uses of them in Russian.
the material we enjoy

That's what again -- you can do almost exactly the same tasks with a sci-fi novel as a history book.
our goals

Again, that's what -- what specific vocab (including phrases) we need to cover in the course.
It can have an influence on teaching techniques in extreme cases (e.g. "speaking at a conference in 1 month") but in the general case, the teacher will mostly make changes in ordering of material and do what they've found works.
our strengths and weaknesses

In a sense, this is a what as well -- if the weakness makes learning language difficult, you've got to teach the weakness away before you can fully teach the language.

I stand by my belief that we all learn the same, and that a focus on the superficial differences between learners rather than the deeper similarities is one of the reasons that language teaching keep changing but rarely improves between generations.

Re: We haven't got up to 'yes" yet!

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:00 pm
by zenmonkey
Cainntear wrote:(Quoting out of order on purpose)

I don't think I've stated anything opposing the idea that most people learn with deep similarities.

When I wrote about using different learning strategies, I'd include the "what and how" together. Concretely, learning two opaque languages, for me, the amount of effort I am focusing on pronunciation and learning to hear the languages are quite different. The methods I use in one language to train my ear to get a 1/3 of the register I am missing are specific to my language past and that L2 differences, simply because for one I have little to no issues in pronouncing the sounds of the other L2 language. You can call that the "what" or "how", but my overall learning strategy is different versus someone that has already spent time with that language family.

You clearly gave an example of how some people enjoy intellectual puzzles and others dislike artificial redundancy. I consider that enjoyment in one important factor that influences adherence. I agreed with you that these differences in preference exist. I also consider the positive or negative responsiveness to gamification or other learning methods to be factors on what methods drive adherence.