Rosetta Stone

[Julie of KY]

After reading the thread about foreign language requirements for college, I'm now concerned.

 

What's wrong with Rosetta Stone? I know it doesn't teach everything, but what it does teach does it do a reasonable job?

 

For my oldest, non-language kid, I plan on using Rosetta Stone as something to essentially fulfill a requirement - he'll never be a foreign language buff - all math geek.

 

My daughter who is seven is wanting to learn Spanish and I was thinking of starting her on Rosetta Stone. This seems like a good place to start since I know no Spanish. Will it mess her up later in life if we do some Rosetta Stone? I'm not starting Latin with her until she can read English which is going slowly since she is dyslexic.

 

What are the strengths and weaknesses of Rosetta Stone? Can it be high school languge credit for a minimum?

[Kates]

As a language teacher...Rosetta Stone isn't designed to actually teach the language - it's designed to get someone conversational quickly. It was originally made for people like Peace Corps and military, or international businessmen, who need to be able to basically converse but don't need to know the full language. They then found out there was a homeschool market of kids who need to take a language mixed with parents who can't/don't want to teach it, and as they have an incredible marketing dept...they came on the scene as a homeschool "curriculum".

 

RS is fine if all you're looking for is exposure to the language with the basics of conversation. (IMO, for that price it had better wash my car and mop my kitchen, but that's me. :glare:) For high school, I'd recommend something more along the line of Auralog Tell Me More - it's set up similar to RS, but it teaches the full language (including grammar, syntax, etc.) in a multi-sensory way - and it's about 1/3 the price (around $250 for levels 1-7, rather than $250 for level 1). You can have up to 7 users on the same program, so you can use it for each of your kids as they're ready.

 

Several times a year, it's also up to half off the retail price at Homeschool Buyer's Co Op (http://www.homeschoolbuyersco-op.org/index.php?). You can sign up for newsletters and they'll let you know when the discount is available. I would think it would be coming up soon.

 

For your daughter, I would recommend something a little gentler - just play with vocab, listen to songs, play short DVDs that she knows (like her fave cartoons, etc.) in Spanish (using the language setup area on the DVD). I wouldn't get into anything that gives grammar rules until she's at least 10 or so. There are lots of programs at Rainbow Resource and Timberdoodle that will help you make this into more of a game. Some of the activities in RS might be fun for her, but IMO you can do the same thing with the setup program on your DVD player and a favorite DVD, for a lot less money.

 

Hope that helps :)

Edited November 9, 2010 by Kates

[Jane in NC]

After reading the thread about foreign language requirements for college, I'm now concerned.

 

What's wrong with Rosetta Stone? I know it doesn't teach everything, but what it does teach does it do a reasonable job?

 

For my oldest, non-language kid, I plan on using Rosetta Stone as something to essentially fulfill a requirement - he'll never be a foreign language buff - all math geek.

 

 

 

Hmmm...just a note from one Math geek married to another Math geek. My husband was a Math major/German minor in undergrad. I took two years of German in college (after studying Latin in high school). The graduate school we attended had a foreign language requirement for a master's degree in Mathematics. Neither my husband nor I had to take any language courses or tests since two years of undergraduate language fulfilled the requirement.

 

I think that dismissing foreign language for a Math/Science oriented person is a mistake, particularly in the new global economy.

 

About Rosetta Stone: we never used it but I had my son take a look at it while we were attending a homeschool conference. He was thirteen at the time and was less than impressed. He had been doing Latin and was thus accustomed to grammar work, not just vocabulary. He felt that Rosetta Stone had a vocabulary/rote emphasis which would not work for him in his French studies. We eventually went with French in Action which I learned with my son.

 

Some people use Rosetta Stone with a grammar supplement. But in general I have not heard of students faring well on placement exams after using Rosetta Stone. Perhaps others can chime in?

[Julie in MN]

We're using Rosetta Stone this year for high school French. I also had an older dd who took French II at home, and French III-IV at public schools, so I have that experience for comparison.

 

One of the reasons I chose RS is that the Hazells of MFW recommend it. Their kids are fluent in Russian and have learned other languages, the family spent years in Bible translation, and I feel they are qualified to give a language recommendation. Also, this year they came out with a lesson plan that outlines how they suggest using RS, including ideas for the "culture" exposure and conversational experiences that need to be added. We use the homeschool version of RS, including the computer program and CDs, but don't use the grammar printouts that Rosetta provides. MFW concluded they were not helpful enough or correlated enough. The computer program still has a variety of tasks, from visual to auditory to writing.

 

RS is an "immersion" program similar to French In Action, Pimsleur, Learnables, and other programs. Similar to learning your first language, you hear the language before you try to write it. You build up a vocabulary before you construct sentences. I think that method works for a lot of people, although a few of us learn more by reading than by listening.

 

The first year of a foreign language is mostly building up a vocabulary and producing the unique sounds, as well as beginning to put together some sentences. Personally I can't see any program failing as long as you do it every single day. Some grammar differences will come up and can be researched online or in a basic French grammar book.

 

The second year of a foreign language requires a lot more grammar, mastery of unusual tenses, etc. I haven't used RS for that yet, but plan to. Again, I trust the recommendations I have received. My older dd did French II at home using various library materials (French In Action, Pimsleur, etc.) and an inexpensive grammar book by Barron's. At the end of the year, I hired a French teacher who was off for the summer to converse with dd and test her skills, and her abilities were pronounced equal to 2nd year French class. So if I find we need it next year, I will get another Barron's grammar workbook.

 

The third year is usually learning to read in the foreign language, so the most important tools will be a simple chapter book in the language (The Little Prince is popular in French) and a good dictionary/reference book. I am not sure whether we'll use RS at this point, but I'm open to it.

 

Just another view,

Julie

[DebbS]

We are also using Rosetta Stone. My son has a good attitude about most subjects with the exception of languages. He does manage to suffer through Rosetta Stone so, for us, it's a way to get through the language requirement with some degree of success. Being able to communicate with Spanish speakers is really what we're aiming for. Honestly, for most students, isn't the ability to communicate the more useful language skill?

[cathmom]

Here is a very detailed review of RS Arabic:

 

http://laura.fo/arabic-language-resources/curriculum-review-rosetta-stone/

 

I don't know who this person is, but she shared this link on SWB's education blog, and I love this review. It points out many of the weaknesses of RS.

 

There are other, much less expensive options. I am a language teacher, and I am anti-RS, as are many other language teachers. Their aggressive marketing may be a contributing factor in language teachers and departments being cut all over America - like America needs LESS language teaching!

 

I think RS could profitably be used a one small supplement of a language program, but at that price, no way!

 

For high school Spanish, try http://www.wor.com/pd-learn-to-speak-spanish-deluxe-10.cfm

[Mom22ns]

We're using RS. Ds really enjoys it and is learning well. Our goal is communication. I don't know how he will do on foreign language placement tests for college, but that isn't a big concern. He won't be a liberal arts major :001_smile:.

[creekland]

Some people use Rosetta Stone with a grammar supplement. But in general I have not heard of students faring well on placement exams after using Rosetta Stone. Perhaps others can chime in?

 

I'll chime in that my oldest did Rosetta Stone Latin American for 4 years and didn't even place out of 1st semester Spanish in college. He was practically right on the line of placing out, but I expected better. One big difference is that the college wanted "Spanish" Spanish (European) and we did Latin American thinking it would be more useful since he wants to work in Central America upon graduation. According to the prof that gave the test, every problem my son missed was due to the difference, but he firmly wouldn't let him test out.

 

However... I still expected more. My middle son is adding a grammar supplement to his Spanish... and that supplement will be European.

[rlugbill]

We use Rosetta Stone for French. I am fluent in French and speak a couple of other languages. I've studied languages and lived abroad.

 

Rosetta Stone has shortcomings, but so do most other methods. Rosetta Stone is also very expensive.

 

To really learn a language, you should go to the country and have a native speaker teach you. Next best would be to hire a tutor who lives in your area who is a native speaker and does an immersion method with you a la Berlitz. Those options are expensive.

 

I think Rosetta Stone is best used in conjunction with other methods so that the shortcomings of the different methods will sort of balance each other out and you will become somewhat proficient, but not fluent in the language. For example, get Rosetta Stone, hire a tutor to talk with the child once in a while, and also listen to some Spanish tapes, go to some Spanish websites, take a group class, etc.

 

Those same language teachers who say Rosetta Stone isn't effective are also turning out students who can't speak the language they have been studying for 4 years. I felt completely ripped off after studying German for 2 years and getting As in high school, then not being really able to speak it when I got to Germany.

 

Rosetta Stone does work somewhat, but there will be gaps and your child will know some Spanish but not be fluent.

[Ester Maria]

I would have to be paid to use RS, not the other way round.

While I don't see it can do any damage, it certainly doesn't teach the language well and doesn't produce adequate literacy. It's an expensive, but relatively worthless toy.

I recommend getting a solid grammar-based program and, if you wish, use RS to play around with the language, though you don't need RS for that, songs and movies do the job just fine. LITERACY, however, is as important element of learning a language as is conversational fluency.

 

RS, however, doesn't lead to conversational fluency either. It leads to a mishmash of "I sort of know something", but not to a concrete knowledge.

[Julie of KY]

Thanks for the replies.

 

For my older son, I'm not sure what the best route for him for high school will be. He's a math geek and I'm not saying that math geeks can't like languages (I do), I just don't see it in him - English is hard enough. My main goals for him are exposure and some conversational skills.

 

For my other kids coming along behind him, I'm sure I will need more - more grammar, literacy, ... everything.

I'd love ideas for both my little ones to learn spanish as well as effective high school level programs (on the starting level of spanish). If my kids take to learning languages, then I'll progress more.

 

[StephanieZ]

Well, I have to say that I have found RS to be helpful for my kids when they are relatively young. Personally, it is working well to build up vocabulary as well as experience listening (auditory fluency?). My 8 yo uses RS for her primary spanish practice. My 11 & 13 yos use Galore Park, but had used RS for several years (not intensively) prior to beginning GP. I think the background with RS definitely makes their subsequent traditional spanish study go more smoothly.

 

My ideal use of RS is probably 15 min/day 5 days a week from ages 6-9, then transition to GP as the primary program at age 10, while keeping on with RS 60-90 min/wk for extra practice.

 

NOTE: I do hire a native spanish speaker as tutor for 30 min/child every other week. She previews any tough concepts or exercises coming up in GP, goes over any questions they have on their GP exercises, & spends time listening/correcting as they read spanish books aloud. I couldn't use GP without her help. However, I *could* use RS easily w/o a tutor.

 

Yes, RS is pricey. But, frankly, I have found it helpful over the long haul as an aid to build vocabulary and fluency.

 

FWIW, my kids' tutors and a friend who is Cuban all consistently praise my dc's accents as near flawless. I do think RS has helped with that just b/c it is so auditory.

[Guest Barb B]

I'll chime in - we use rosetta stone and unlike most of the other replies - I really like it. We use version 3 (LOTS improved over version 2). I do it as well as the kids. That way I can help them when needed. Version 3 does have grammar. Yes, actually lots of grammar. My oldest and I are about to start level 3. I usually disagree with most critics of the program. With rosetta stone we have not only learned vocab., but grammar such as ALL the varying tenses in spanish.

 

For those who are so opposed to RS - what version did you base your judgements on? I used version 2 but switched when version 3 came out - version 3 is GREAT.

 

Barb

Edited November 10, 2010 by Barb B

[G5052]

I'm using it for middle school foreign language with the plan that they'll take a grammar-based class in the same language in high school.

[cathmom]

Even if it were the best thing in the world, it's still expensive and apparently can't be resold, and - unless they've changed the entire program - it lacks cultural specification and does not focus on what is particularly confusing/complicated in each particular language.

[chirowife]

I bought version 3 latin american spanish for my daughters. Neither one liked it. I tried to force my oldest (11) to use it but she hated it. She did not like the pictures and they way it taught. I called the company and I was able to return it for a full refund! So I would say it is worth a try because they guarantee the product and there was no problem returning it after 5 months!

I bought a trial of the Pimsleur spanish and we all love it. I also got some workbook for grammar. This seems to be workng for us.

[justamouse]

I just bought First French from Memoria press and am using it for my littles in conjunction with Latin. I also am on the co-op list and wanted Aurolog (sp?) French, but didn't want to wait for the sale.

 

We have RS Spanish and I was underwhelmed. ;) I decided on French this time because though I may not be the best speaker- I can somewhat read it. (I am far from knowing the subtleties of the meanings, though.)

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I'm not sure this is a definitive strike against RS. I had three years of high school French, had straight A grades in languages and had my last French teacher tell my parents that my accent was better than hers (which it was, because she took no effort to not speak with a Georgia accent and thought saying Mercy Buttercups was cute).

 

I managed to validate a year of German (after three years of study and three months living in Germany) but no French at all. I had been in French just months before the validation testing, but hadn't taken German for a year.

 

Rosetta Stone is a tool. It is not equivalent to a full course of instruction by a teacher. But it can be a useful tool none the less. Whether you think it is worthy of the price tag is a different subject. It worked wonderfully for us when we were living in Germany and I wanted my kids to get a jumpstart on the majority language. We had much less success with Japanese while living in Japan (though I have to say I was also less diligent, I had no prior proficiency with Japanese to help them along, and we weren't in daily contact with Japanese speakers as we were when living in Germany).

 

And fwiw, I see RS advertising as one of the few efforts out there to convince people that learning other languages is a worthy subject. Hard to then credit it with cut backs in language instruction in schools.

[In The Great White North]

We have Rosetta Stone for Italian and German. I have to agree with those who said it's fine for middle school and younger but doesn't really cut it (alone) for high school. It's also good as a "lab" component to augment any "normal" program.

 

I also found that the Home-school Supplements weren't really tied to the rest of the program very well. A regular text would be better because it would also have explanations, not just worksheets.

 

Given the number of "whole to parts" discussions about Latin programs, I have to point out that RS is a "whole to parts" program and all of us "parts to whole" people won't like it and our "parts to whole" children won't learn much from it. As a "parts to whole" person, I never stuck with it far enough to see if it ever even got to the "parts." As a sole source of info, it would drive me nuts. Not only am I "parts to whole" but I am also very visual and have to see the words written out to remember them.

 

It does have a few good points though:

 

- my aural, "whole to parts" youngest liked using it. (Of course she did, as E.M. said, it's a toy.) She is now using a "real" text for German and Italian, and begging to quit. Not good. I'm going to have to change something and it will probably include the "toy."

 

- it's very repetitive and she retained a lot of vocabulary from it, even having only completed part of level 1.

 

- her accent is better than her older sister's (who didn't use RS last year)

[cathmom]

And fwiw, I see RS advertising as one of the few efforts out there to convince people that learning other languages is a worthy subject. Hard to then credit it with cut backs in language instruction in schools.

 

The problem is that they are trying to convince you that learning languages can be done through software, specifically their expensive software.

 

Here's the ACTFL newsletter item about it. ACTFL is the American Council of Teachers of Foreign Languages.

 

ACTFL Connection October 15, 2010

Trend Watch: Language Teachers Replaced by Software

Nearly every week, news stories report on schools or districts (especially at the elementary and middle school levels) that have watered down, trimmed or eliminated foreign language programs.

Whether it’s Los Angeles, Wichita, Danbury or Yonkers, the irony of “solving†today’s economic shortfalls by eliminating the very programs most likely to prepare our students to be effective global citizens and be able to compete in the international economy is not lost on language educators.

One new trend warrants even closer scrutiny: School districts replacing foreign language teachers with software. While it is easy to empathize with excruciating budget cuts and staffing decisions, what is impossible to reckon with is the growing "under current" message that, somehow, replacing language teachers with software is not only cheaper, it’s actually better for students. Where does this thinking come from?

Here’s where:

Forget everything you know about language learning: Flash cards, translation, tapes, books. Everything. Except for how you learned your first language. Think about it. As a child, you learned intuitively by experiencing the world around you. You saw something. Let’s say a ball. Your parents told you that it’s a red ball. You repeated the words. Maybe they asked you to catch it. Or throw it back to them. Without realizing it, you realized the object’s name, how to describe it and what the actions are called – all in the context of your surroundings – and without translation. Sites and sounds became words. Words turned into sentences. Sentences evolved into conversations. It’s a natural progression...

Sounds easy enough. What if aggressive advertising is the reason districts and parents are asking, “Do we really need foreign language teachers?†Is this the classroom learning experience that will replace teachers? Can technology and online speaking labs replace teacher interaction? We need to answer the question, "Can online learning and voice recognition really be just as good as a language teacher?"

 

Click the links and listen. Then voice your opinion on this growing trend: in the ACTFL Online Community, within ACTFL Linked In and Facebook pages or by e-mailing ACTFL directly.

 

[Julie of KY]

The problem is that they are trying to convince you that learning languages can be done through software, specifically their expensive software.

QUOTE]

 

One of the problems with life is that too many think everything can be done electronically. You can homeschool your child completely electronically - never talk to them. Why talk to someone if you can text - even if they are in the same room? Our (American) culture wants everything now and digital.

 

I agree that RS is a tool. I'm trying to figure out the pros and cons of the tool aside from the price tag. I need to figure out what's best for my kids. What do I need to add? How much am I willing to spend?

The main thing I'm looking at is how my children learn best and how to accomplish our individual goals.

 

Thanks for all the replies - they've given me lots to think about.

[Guest Barb B]

I agree with the previous posters about the negatives of replacing learning with software. However, when it comes to learning spanish - I am no spanish teacher or even a spanish speaker. Therefore, for us, the learning that rs offers is what we need. We hear it spoken, we get to speak it (in the microphone and to each other), we type it, we read it . . . it offers an encompassing learning experience for those of us who in no way can teach a foriegn language ourselves.

 

Barb

[Brilliant]

The problem is that they are trying to convince you that learning languages can be done through software, specifically their expensive software.

 

Here's the ACTFL newsletter item about it. ACTFL is the American Council of Teachers of Foreign Languages.

 

As my mom always used to say, "Consider the source." What would you expect a council of teachers to say? Councils of teachers also say it should be illegal to teach our children at home, and that we should leave it to the experts.

[ColoradoMom]

We love the Rosetta Stone software - been using it for Japanese for 3 years. With that said - we are switching to German next year and using Tell Me More. Not because I don't like RS, just because we need a change and it looks more interesting.

 

I believe that software can replace just about anything when it comes to learning - as long as the parent and child are engaged in it and don't sit there expecting knowledge to be transferred painlessly into their brains.

 

And as far as RS only teaching conversation - well for our purposes - that's pretty much WHY we are taking a foreign language. I don't believe my son will ever sit around musing over the inner workings of Japanese. :D

 

Conversation is our goal and, I dare say - the goal of MOST people who are learning another language.

[Ester Maria]

With rosetta stone we have not only learned vocab., but grammar such as ALL the varying tenses in spanish.

Really? All? What about subjunctives of the pluperfect? What about subjunctives of the pluperfect in passive? What about syntactically complex Cicero-ish sentences with 4-5 levels of subordination? How about shifting explicit forms into implicit ones and knowing when you're allowed to do that and when not? ;)

 

No, RS doesn't teach all the tenses, let alone all moods and all voices, let alone provide a clear overview of morphosyntax, let alone provide a decent literacy practice.

By using RS you're assuring the level of "I sort of know something" knowledge. You're neither literate neither conversationally fluent, you miss great chunks of grammar and cannot even begin to read remotely complex texts. At best, you're an "advanced beginner".

For those who are so opposed to RS - what version did you base your judgements on?

On fluency in several languages, reading fluency in another several languages, a few academic degrees in related fields (which included thorough studies of all aspects of my language, from morphosyntax to historical linguistics to pedagogy of teaching), years of experience in teaching native- and foreign-language Italian, FIXING RS-LIKE "KNOWLDGE" with more than few people (I should adore RS because I earned quite some money teaching people actual Italian or Hebrew after they tried it), knowing what "knowing a language" means, and so forth. :)

Rosetta Stone is NOT good. I say this as a categorical sentence, yes. It won't harm you (other than, maybe, giving you false confidence and convincing you to buy ridiculously low criteria for what "knowing a language" means), but it won't teach you anything either. If you can get it for free, use it as a fun supplement if you wish - if you're actually paying for it, you're really better off investing that money in a few solid texts and some private lessons. It's not a smart investment even if you have some money to waste. Give it to charity instead, seriously.

Also, it lacks cultural context (a point cathmom brought up earlier too), which is a BIG minus. I don't know a single professor with high academic competences in the field that's pro RS. Most of those people admire the marketing rather than the thing itself - because, really, they managed to sell the whole world lots of dust on the illusion of diamonds.

[LuvingLife]

Rosetta Stone is good for trying to learn how to communicate with someone, or even understand their language. But if you want a really detailed course, then you need to supplement or go try a completely different course that teaches everything about the language.

 

I have Rosetta Stone Spanish level 1 homeschool version, while it is good, you would need to get something to supplement for grammer and things like that.

 

Just my 2 cents.:001_smile:

[Violet Crown]

My daughter who is seven is wanting to learn Spanish and I was thinking of starting her on Rosetta Stone. This seems like a good place to start since I know no Spanish. Will it mess her up later in life if we do some Rosetta Stone?

 

I have a 7-year-old daughter who wanted to learn Spanish (even though I don't) and I considered Rosetta Stone, but decided against it for many of the reasons given here.

 

We use Salsa Spanish, which is absolutely free. Dd7 loves it, begs for it every day, repeats everything she can hear on the videos as she watches, and constantly uses the Spanish she's learning from it. (At lunch today she announced "Me gustan los frijoles y las quesadillas!") We've only started using it this semester, so I can't say that she knows Spanish yet, but it's sure kid-friendly.

 

For grammar, we supplement (slowly & gently) with Spanish For Children.

 

I also try to expose her to actual Spanish-speakers (fortunately our parish is heavily Spanish-speaking). Do you have people at your church or other community who speak Spanish, and would be willing to let your dd try out her Spanish with them?

[cathmom]

deleted

Edited November 10, 2010 by cathmom
monitoring myself for snarkiness

[Guest Barb B]

Ester Maria,

 

This is from the rosetta stone web site as just a sample of topics you learn. (see below) Is it ALL inclusive to call it bilingual - no - is it inclusive enough for us to effecitively communicate to spanish speaking people either verbally or written - yes. It is not just vocabulary but has at least past, future, imperatives, present subjunctive and present perfect verbs. To me that is good for the high school level. If ds wants more then at the university level he can pursue that. To me, this sample (not complete - you learn more then the below list) is what I would expect from a high school education (unless a person was from a bilingual household. Really, I never said that rs was the only thing to use - I was stating why it worked for us. Maybe you shouldn't come across so "know it all". Glad, you are capable of teaching your kids everything there is to learn in a language - as for me I can't and rosetta stone fits our needs and exceeds my expectation of what I want. Maybe you want your kids to read "complex texts" in a foreign language - that is great that you can. That is not my goal.

 

I was asking if those who don't like rosetta stone based their judgements on version 2 or 3 of rosetta stone as there is a big difference. I wasn't questioning your expertise. Glad you had an opportunity to brag in your post. You also talk about not a single professor being pro rs. Well, I would agree. You see my ds is in high school. I am not trying to pretend we are doing anything at the college level. I would hope that a college professor wouldn't use anything high schools use.

Quote below is from the rosetta stone web site:

Sample Topics

 

 

 

Rosetta Stone Homeschool Version 3 Level 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Set helps the student to navigate his or her surroundings while connecting with the world around them by continually building on basic language fundamentals, vocabulary, and conversational skills. The Level 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Set provides instruction in such areas as:

 

• Basic conversational skills
  
• Greetings and introductions
  
• Colors, adjectives, and numbers
  
• Prepositions, definite and indefinite articles
  
• Singular and plural nouns
  
• Family relations, the 5 senses, time of day
  
• Compare and contrast
  
• First and second person pronouns and possessive pronouns
  
• Directions, transportation, and telling time
  
• Past and future tenses, adverbs, and informal imperatives
  
• School subjects, months of the year, and social dialogues
  
• Emotions
  
• Sequencing with First/ Then/ Finally
  
• Ordinal numbers
  
• Spatial relationships
  
• Household items, physical activity, and animals
  
• Present subjunctive and present perfect
  
• What happened? What is wrong? "If...then" sequences
  
• Portions, weights, and measurements
  
• Correct/ incorrect, remember/ forget, no one/ everyone, nothing/ everything
  
• Continents, life milestones, and compass directions
  
• Caring for personal health
  
• The workplace
  
• Traveling abroad
  
• Arranging repairs
  
• Entertainment
  
• Culture
  
• Government
  
• Family and traditions
  

 

Edited November 10, 2010 by Barb B

[Ester Maria]

is it inclusive enough for us to effecitively communicate to spanish speaking people either verbally or written - yes. It is not just vocabulary but has at least past, future, imperatives, present subjunctive and present perfect verbs. To me that is good for the high school level.

But Barb, unless your definition of an effective communication is a "tourist" one (can order a coffee, ask for directions, comment on weather and skim the front page of a newspaper), that grammatical content is not enough to effectively communicate with a speaker of a second language. It may lift you up to a "tourist" level, I agree: that's what it was initially designed for. But the question is, is that enough for a high school language learning experience?

 

What's high school level and what's not, well, we'll have to agree to disagree there right away, as it's one of those eternal European vs. American things. Obviously, there are always nuances to master and some specific uses, but the basic overview of morphosyntax should certainly be taught, and a course should include lots of reading experience, gently moving onto actual literature by the end of high school, if you study the language all years. But even if you don't, the grammar is an absolute must, in addition to all these "tourist" stuff, and combined with some reading.

 

I'm aware of the fact that not everyone wishes to go very far, some have preference for other fields, etc. The things that RS enlists, as a content, still, can constitute about a year, at most a year and a half of learning if you're slow, after which you're, as I said, "high beginner". It cannot possibly cover a decent high school foreign language experience unless you go by very low criteria. It's a start only, and in my view, by graduation, a student should use a language on a far more sophisticated level than what RS offers, even if s/he doesn't opt to delve into literature: there's also reading newspaper articles, being able to write one, being able to understand enough of a film to follow, being able to informally correspond in a language or to write a formal letter to somebody, all of those are pretty basic things, and you can't do them without grammar. It's not super-advanced level, that's, actually, your effective communication. RS doesn't prepare for that, because you don't get the grammar down properly, you only get rudiments needed to be a good tourist. If we're talking about the meat, about the actual substantial knowledge offered, it's very low, and all of us who deal with a/the language notice it right away and say, well, this is too low even for high school, which is by default some sort of introductory level.

 

RS is maybe fun, but that's its only advantage.

Of course that students would prefer to be amused by a software and watch pictures rather than sit hours upon hours over Calderon with a dictionary.

But Calderon, dictionary, grammar books, etc... teach. You may yawn and whine and even hate it, but it's effective.

RS isn't, even with equal time investment (though the classical method, of course, usually takes a lot more time too if you want to do it well). Of course, it's your right to use whatever you like, and if RS works for you within whatever is your definition of "works for me" - great. I say it's a program that won't damage you, but won't teach you much unless you flesh it out with something else.

Edited November 10, 2010 by Ester Maria

[Julie in MN]

Really? All? What about subjunctives of the pluperfect? What about subjunctives of the pluperfect in passive? What about syntactically complex Cicero-ish sentences with 4-5 levels of subordination? How about shifting explicit forms into implicit ones and knowing when you're allowed to do that and when not? ;)

 

Oh, Ester Maria. My dd took French 1-4 (only year 2 was at home), yet I doubt she would have any idea what you just said. DD didn't use RS but instead relied on a variety of materials, including public school teachers and tutors. She was good at French and good at grammar but not interested in a grammar degree or a French grammar degree. She took French for exposure, for requirements, for speaking (we had an exchange student, too). Her training, although possibly deficient in the pluperfect passive, was adequate for her needs then, and her skills could have been continued as a means of communication, if she had sought that.

 

My oldest son took German in the public schools and met all requirements and got some insight into his German heritage. He is an engineer now, and a sweet young man, and hasn't been hampered by the fact that he just didn't care much about high school German. As sad as that may be, it hasn't seemed to hamper his education or his career or his personal happiness.

 

As I mentioned in my previous post, I rely on the Hazells for advice in regard to languages. They and their children really do use the languages they study. They spent 8 years in Russian Bible translation, helping get the Bible into very obscure languages in Siberia. They still are very involved in Bible translation, traveling over there for projects, and their kids have worked at language camps in Sweden and done other translating. This is their passion, and I do not believe they would recommend something that was a toy.

 

Rosetta Stone is useful in their eyes, in their real-life experiences. I consider that an excellent recommendation. Rosetta is also useful in some of our eyes.

 

It's not a contest to know everything on the planet. I think anything you use diligently can train you to communicate with others who speak different languages; toddlers don't need to attend university before they are allowed to speak. I work with many non-native English speakers, and I'm not always sure that thinking through grammar details as they form sentences is helpful to them as much as just "hearing how we do it." Lots of their mistakes have nothing to do with grammar, but we just don't say things that way. I'm not dishing grammar altogether, because it does give me the vocabulary to discuss their errors in speaking and writing, but I've never had to use the kind of grammar language that you're talking about in order to explain their errors in real life.

 

I used many French language tools with my older dd, and I find Rosetta Stone offers quite a variety of tools to me in one package, plus it has homeschool-friendly tools (we use the homeschool version). And very importantly, real-life folks like the Hazells have found RS very useful. I hate to see homeschoolers scared away from jumping in and learning in different ways.

 

Julie

Edited November 10, 2010 by Julie in MN

[Ester Maria]

She was good at French and good at grammar but not interested in a grammar degree or a French grammar degree.

None of the things I mentioned are exclusively a part of a French degree, in sense that they'd be some obscure terms for some obscure never-used grammatical forms, some nuances of nuances.

I could analyze a sentence in English after a few years of studying, by parts of speech, with enough grammatical precision: verb, aspect, tense, etc., I could draw temporal relations between tenses, read sufficiently well (heck, even spell that crazy language no worse than an average anglophone elementary school student :lol:) AND do those RS "tourist" stuff. And that's how it should be - "tourist" stuff per se are not enough, not in school, just like the opposite extreme, learning tons of rules without practical applications, is not enough.

toddlers don't need to attend university before they are allowed to speak.

Apples and oranges situation, actually. ;)

Second language acquisition is not comparable to soaking up one's first language from their surroundings. A language is learned differently at an adult age than at a young age, when children "reconstruct" it from their surroundings. Even if an extended period of total immersion would work equally well, you would probably still have to attain an adequate level of literacy in a language and it would take a lot of time around the speakers of exclusively that language. Learning a language analytically past elementary school is a lot better option than by immersion.

Lots of their mistakes have nothing to do with grammar, but we just don't say things that way.

I don't deny the importance of a real life experience, "picking up" all sorts of details and so forth - not at all. But it has to be combined to attain optimal results.

Very few people ever attain truly native-like skills in any language (just look at me and how much I butcher English :p), but a firm grasp of grammar is very important, not so much to think in those terms, but to become consciously aware of the mechanisms of the language. Who cares what's pluperfect if you can use it, but my point is exactly that people don't know how to use it because they were taught partial, minimal grammar and thus remain largely unaware of how the language works.

I hate to see homeschoolers scared away from jumping in and learning in different ways.

And I hate the tyrrany of educational relativism and an overpresent force that aims to subject me to the mechanisms of political correctness and "it's all equal but different" philosophy. :(

I'm sorry, it's just not.

I'm all for learning, in ANY way, in ANY form, using ANYTHING you like - really. I place learning extremely high on my list of priorities, any learning, and value it greatly.

But right now we're discussing school, school for credit, not something you do at your leisure, with a pace and an intensity you like - and I believe I do have a right to articulate why I honestly believe RS is not enough for school, even more so given my background. My aim is not to discourage anyone from learning but to shed a different light on the matter. :)

[ColoradoMom]

Well, maybe it is just me - but all that gobbley-gook grammar linguist stuff just sucks ALL the fun out of foreign language. :tongue_smilie: I don't even what to know that much about ENGLISH - let alone Japanese or German! :D

[Ester Maria]

Well, maybe it is just me - but all that gobbley-gook grammar linguist stuff just sucks ALL the fun out of foreign language. :tongue_smilie: I don't even what to know that much about ENGLISH - let alone Japanese or German! :D

:D

 

But now seriously, who said foreign languages are learned for fun in school? I think we may have a clash of perspectives here.

 

That's the MAIN problem in this whole debate, actually - foreign languages are almost considered a "fluff content" in American schools, so we attribute too much importance to the criterion of fun.

Do you learn math for fun? No, you learn it because it's a part of a framework within which you're educated; you can enjoy it more or less, though, but you learn it because it's an integral part of your repertory. Same with a foreign language. It doesn't have to be fun. Choose the materials based on content first, not on whether it's fun.

 

Informal learning is a whole other thing, that's where fun is the most important content.

 

Maybe I'm just too rigid when it comes to school. :D

But it works.

 

(Off from the topic lest I ruin it.)

[Guest Barb B]

Well, maybe it is just me - but all that gobbley-gook grammar linguist stuff just sucks ALL the fun out of foreign language. :tongue_smilie: I don't even what to know that much about ENGLISH - let alone Japanese or German! :D

 

Agreed! Ester Marie - I am glad you are obviously a linguist, but not everyone has to be. Yes, I am glad to be able to communicate with my lawn guys and in a spanish speaking country. I don't expext to sound perfect -but understood. After 5 levels of RS spanish - I will be understood and will understand them. Goodness sakes, I had to look up morphosyntax. Sounds like you like to wield those big words to make the rest of us feel inferior. Well, my kids will not be going into any linguist degree and probably won't pursue foreign language in college and I think they will be just fine. Yes, we are discussing school for credit as you say. And my dc will be doing 2 levels of RS per year for one credit. Tourist stuff just gets you ordering a meal and getting to the bathroom; rs gets beyond that. No, it will not get me a degree in some linguist area of study and I can't mouth off big fancy linguist vocabulary in English even (the basic tenses plus the usual perfects and progressive type stuff I can, beyond that really I don't care to go). Really, unless I had some linguist backround like you obviously do, there is no way I could teach what you want me to teach my kids in spanish. Are my kids getting a poor education - no. Actually they are doing quite well. Ds 12th grade has great act scores, is already accepted into the college of his choice and already has an academic scholarship. So put away your high and mighty attitude and let us discuss the pro's and cons of a curriculum without condemnation please. This discussion was fine - people just listing what they liked and didn't like about various curriculums - until you chimed in with a sweeping condemnation of anyone who used rosetta stone.

 

Barb

[regentrude]

Well, my kids will not be going into any linguist degree and probably won't pursue foreign language in college and I think they will be just fine. Yes, we are discussing school for credit as you say.

 

I think it comes really down to the different expectations about high school language education between people who are from Europe and people who grew up in the US.

The list that you had in a earlier post are all skills my DD would have acquired by 8th grade in her second foreign language, had she attended a German school. In high school, we were reading original literature- as in Great Books- in our first foreign language and some original books in our second foreign language.

So, I believe the cultural background forms these expectations. I definitely expect my DD to be able to read French classics by the time she graduates, and be conversational in yet another language- even if she is not majoring in a language in college. Back home, this would just be considered a part of the standard cultural canon that makes somebody be considered an educated person.

[Julie in MN]

I think it comes really down to the different expectations about high school language education between people who are from Europe and people who grew up in the US.

 

Do you think it has something to do with the opportunity to actually use the European languages in Europe? I mean, of course we can get international jobs or go on missions, and we can keep up our exposure in different ways. But in reality, how long can we maintain language knowledge in the US if we never use it?

 

Or do folks in Europe not expect to converse in the language, but just enjoy reading books in other languages? I'm not wondering about the serious academics, but just the general population of school children -- do they keep up their languages after they have completed their schooling? I do work with a group of kids who go to immersion schools in the USA (French or Spanish) and they are very proficient in their second language (often coming to us for English reading & grammar, where they are weaker). But I wonder what happens when they graduate high school.

 

I mean, I think one of the downfalls of living in a country that is 3,000 miles across is that it's not practical to get to other countries very often. And even when we seek experiences with other languages (we've hosted internationals in our home for several reasons), everyone just wants to work on their English :)

 

Julie

[Guest Barb B]

But it makes more sense in Europe, where neighboring countries speak different languages and these countries are closer then most states are here in the U.S. So maybe the cultural thing happened out of neccesity in Europe and didn't occure here becuase geographically we are quite isolated. Anyway, I am quite happy that my kids can read a classic in English :lol:; I don't see for my kids, why reading a classic in spanish makes them a better person. I would have not idea nor desire to try to figure out how my kids and I could read a classic in a foreign language. I am happy with reading kids books like Barney and Dr. Seuss in spanish.

Barb

Edited November 11, 2010 by Barb B

[regentrude]

Do you think it has something to do with the opportunity to actually use the European languages in Europe?

 

 

Of course people certainly have an opportunity to use the languages (although, in any larger US city, there would be communities of immigrants who are speaking another language). More people have traveled outside the country.

I think, however, that this cultural preference goes back a long time and goes far beyond practical considerations. Till WWII it was standard to study Latin, a language nobody was learning to actually converse in, but to read the classics. If you wanted to get a higher education, Latin was absolutely mandatory. Now the shift has gone from Latin towards more modern languages.

Another factor is that, in order to have any education in science or engineering, a student nowadays must have good English skills. Every European physicist, for instance, needs to be able to read and publish in good English (if the language is bad, the editors will refuse your manuscript) if he wants his publications to be read. (There exist some journals in other languages, but those are mostly considered of inferior quality). So English is probably the language that has priority number one. And yes, I would say even in the general population, young people keep their English skills - as any American tourist can attest who can address a random stranger on the street in English and have a good chance at being understood.

Edited November 11, 2010 by regentrude

[regentrude]

I don't see for my kids, why reading a classic in spanish makes them a better person.

 

It certainly would not make them a better person.

It would, however, give them a very different experience from reading only translated works.

I do have the comparison because, although German is my native language, I am fluent in English and able to read anything that was written in English in its original. It is remarkable how much any work loses by being translated; even a good translator can not fully capture the exact style and tone of an author. Wordplays for instance are largely untranslatable. Poetry loses the most.

So, I find it a wonderful enriching experience to be able to read Shakespeare in English rather than in a German translation - it would just not be the "real" thing.

[cathmom]

I think it comes really down to the different expectations about high school language education between people who are from Europe and people who grew up in the US.

The list that you had in a earlier post are all skills my DD would have acquired by 8th grade in her second foreign language, had she attended a German school. In high school, we were reading original literature- as in Great Books- in our first foreign language and some original books in our second foreign language.

So, I believe the cultural background forms these expectations. I definitely expect my DD to be able to read French classics by the time she graduates, and be conversational in yet another language- even if she is not majoring in a language in college. Back home, this would just be considered a part of the standard cultural canon that makes somebody be considered an educated person.

 

Exactly. When budgets are tight, in the US, languages are one of the first things that go. And why not, when we can just buy RS? That leads back to my earlier comments.

 

I deleted my other comment because I was afraid it would turn this thread in a bad direction. Now I see that you all managed that without me! :D

 

I understand and accept that many of my fellow Americans don't consider languages to be important. I understand that there are many for whom RS checks off that box for high school and that's all they want. I think that there are much less expensive, better options out there, but if you've got the money, why not spend it? The best outcomes I've heard about RS are from people who used it shortly before travelling somewhere or while they were there, I guess because it was immediately useful.

 

It is very common, even in the US, to begin reading literature in the language by the 3rd or 4th high school year. I even start my beginning German students on a medieval poem very early on because it's pretty simple and reinforces possessives.

 

Language teaching has changed greatly since a lot of us were in high school. It is much more focused on communication. But there is still a place for direct instruction. In my first German class this semester, one of my students who has German family and friends and had studied quite a bit on her own told me after class, "I finally understand umlauts!"

 

I have been studying second language acquisition for several years (and foreign languages for 25 years), and one day I hope to get a PhD in it. All of my research has led me to this conclusion: humans learn language from other humans. In High Tech Heretic, the author claims that when the phonograph machine was invented, it was touted that "Now all you need to learn a language is your record player, and our fabulous record!" Sound familiar? Remember in Cheaper by the Dozen, the father makes them listen to records to learn French?

 

Oh well, I'll get off my soap box now. I could go on all night. I do have a question though - when does RS start teaching basic conversation like "Hello. How are you? I'm fine. Good morning/day/evening. What's your name? My name is .... How is the weather?" I've done demos and it does not start with that, and I wonder how long it takes before it gets into that - ie, before you can actually have a conversation with someone and say something besides, "The girl jumps."

[cathmom]

It certainly would not make them a better person.

It would, however, give them a very different experience from reading only translated works.

I do have the comparison because, although German is my native language, I am fluent in English and able to read anything that was written in English in its original. It is remarkable how much any work loses by being translated; even a good translator can not fully capture the exact style and tone of an author. Wordplays for instance are largely untranslatable. Poetry loses the most.

.

 

Here's a simple example. I read a children's book in German this summer. The narrator is a girl whose father works for a newspaper and is always busy. In German, the word for time is "Zeit" and the word for newspaper is "Zeitung." So the girl thinks it's ironic that he works for a "Zeitung" but doesn't have any "Zeit."

 

I was thinking about how I would translate this if I were translating it into English, and the best I came up with was, "He works for a newspaper called The Times but yet he has no time. Isn't that funny?" See how I had to add something there that wasn't in the original to make it make sense? Or I could leave that out entirely and then some sense of the original is lost.

[Jamee]

I agree with those who said it a tool and meets the need for those of us who don't have other resources. DS wanted to start learning Italian in second grade--he was born there and figures he NEEDS to know the language:D I knew of NO other resources that could help him, I don't speak Italian. He took a couple years off and has started again. This summer while in the states, I looked high and low for a text or another resource to help, but no luck. Language study in the US at lower levels is practically unheard of, let alone for something other than Spanish or French--found plenty of extras for those. I remember how impressed and amazed I was when my German cousin came to visit. She spoke fantastic English, also knew French and I believe her classical language was Greek. All in the same time that I was only able to take four years of German at most--which is not even offered at my high school any more. Needless to say, DS is still working through RS. He may not be getting as good as Italian education, but at least if he ever does get formal instruction he'll have a bit of an advantage. (He did learn something since when he went back to PS in third and started Spanish instruction, he kept speaking Italian.)

[Kates]

First of all, I don't think Ester Maria was being "high and mighty". I think she's absolutely correct. It might have been stated in a way that came across as less than merciful, but what she said has real merit.

 

I studied to be a Bible translator (like the Hazells) and have done pretty extensive linguistic study. Do the Hazell kids use RS as their sole curric? You better bet they don't...they use it as fun vocab study and to start to hear the language. Many are still young, and RS is right at their level. They sell it because it's something that makes beginning language study available to a lot of people...and, quite honestly, because it's a well-known and well-marketed program. Curriculum companies (MFW, BJU, and many others) aren't just selling it because it's "the best"...RS has a good marketing structure with its vendors as well. (I'm a curriculum rep for another company and am on the convention circuit all spring and summer long...I'm pretty aware of company networking.)

 

David Hazell is a linguist. I've met him, talked with him, and discussed stuff with him. I can just about guarantee that he teaches his kids the inner workings of the languages they study - beyond the grammar years, kids need to know that stuff in order to truly grasp what they're learning.

 

I teach Latin and Greek at our co op, since those are two of the languages I love. I've also taught Spanish and studied several other modern languages...I'm just drawn to ancient languages, so that's what I teach. Does learning the intricacies of grammar kill the fun in a language? Not according to pretty much any student I've worked with...it makes the language come alive. My middle school students translate Latin texts that are designed to be at their level, my first year high school students translate sections of Livy, and my second hs students translate and analyze full books out of the Vulgate Bible. Is the grammar always fun to slug through? Of course not...but the rewards are huge.

 

Do I think that kids should spend all their time reading Don Quixote in Spanish or Aristotle in the Greek? No...but do I think they should be able to grapple with ideas from other cultures, other times, and other linguistic structures? Yes. There are so many ideas that are presented in really profound ways in their original languages that just plain don't translate well into English. English is such an amalgmation of languages and cultures that we've lost pieces of communication along the way.

 

Let me give an example...in translating John ch. 1, one of my Latin 2 students came across the word darkness, as in "the Word illuminated the darkness". In Latin, it's actually "darknesses" - plural. What that student came up with (because he had an understanding of grammar, syntax, and the culture as well as encouragement to analyze what he saw) was that Jesus, the true light, came into the world and brought light that could fill people who were so consumed with darkness, it was a term that was used to describe them. In English, it says "he brought light to the world". Which translation would make you dig into the ideas, to see why it says what it says?

 

Do I think it's necessary for all of our kids to become full time grammarians? Of course not. Do I think it's necessary for them to have the ability to analyze and react to ideas that studying a foreign language will offer them? Absolutely. You wouldn't believe the number of proverbial light bulbs I've seen go on in the students I've taught...and it's stuck with them, into other subjects and situations, even years later.

 

 

Please don't get me wrong - I don't think RS is the downfall of Western Civilization. However, I am among the language teachers who firmly believe that RS is not a stand-alone language program for high school. Even if your child is not going to major in linguistics, don't you want them to be able to tackle ideas that originated outside of the US, Canada, Britain, and Australia? Heck, even reading Harry Potter means a lot more with a basic understanding of Latin - almost all of the "spells" are forms of Latin verbs, nouns, and adjectives. ;)

 

What I do disagree with is the "get off your high horse" attitude that I've seen against those who have tried to explain, upon request, their belief that RS is overmarketed and overpriced. It is. Just because someone has a background in something and is able to teach it, is passionate about it, doesn't make them arrogant. If you don't agree with it, fine...but they might have a point. That point might be worth looking into a little deeper.

 

I believe in what I do because I want to teach kids that there is more to life than what they see on the surface - and mastery of a foreign language affords them that opportunity. Whether they choose to use it on a daily basis doesn't really matter...do you really think they'll use the Gettysburg Address or the quadratic equation on a daily basis? They won't. However, they'll have an understanding of both when they need them, as they were encouraged to study them. RS is a good supplement, but it won't give them an understanding of what that language can truly offer them. Just because American public schools (in general) have dumbed down the foreign language requirements doesn't mean we have to as well.

 

Off my soapbox...back to the regularly scheduled thread. :001_smile:

Edited November 11, 2010 by Kates

[Joan in GE]

What about subjunctives of the pluperfect? What about subjunctives of the pluperfect in passive? What about syntactically complex Cicero-ish sentences with 4-5 levels of subordination? How about shifting explicit forms into implicit ones and knowing when you're allowed to do that and when not? ;)

 

No, RS doesn't teach all the tenses, let alone all moods and all voices, let alone provide a clear overview of morphosyntax, let alone provide a decent literacy practice.

 

Esther Maria, here I think you went too far in trying to make your point.

 

While I agree with you in some ways, to hold these verb tenses and complex sentence structures up as the measure is, I think, inappropriate.

 

At 9th grade maternal French (you probably know that French is the language in this part of Switzerland) level here (in the Geneva public and private schools), the equivalent or more of AP level French, my oldest sons were not doing these tenses. ETA - just asked the French tutor about this and she says the tenses you mention are hardly studied at all, even in high school. So the use of the subjunctive of the plusqueparfait (Fr) is uncommon and is taught even for native speakers in their high school, just so they recognize it. And the "passif" form is just for literary (as in older literary) or historic works. The "passif" form is not even in their 9th grade level conjugation book. And the example of subj. pp is only given for one verb, but not studied. (Here 9th grade is the end of obligatory schooling).

 

So to try to compare 4 levels of RS, which has been compared by some to 2 years of high school level foreign language study in the US, to the level of foreign language fluency you describe, seems like you are trying to compare apples and oranges.

 

(Out of curiosity - how many American high schools, that you know of, attain the level you are describing?)

 

I will say that at the end of my French studies (I had 2 years of high school French in addition to 2 years of university French), I could not hold a single conversation in real life when I went to Belgium to learn how to speak as an au pair, and I certainly was not fluent in the tenses you mention, let alone reading Circero-like works. Now I did learn grammar and some vocabulary in French which did facilitate conversation once I got to practice, but overall it was an underwhelming experience and hampering to my conversational abilities even today.

 

Yet after one semester of intensive university Spanish (5 days a week), I could speak. The teacher was of course different, the method was different, the language lab was different, the university was different. But we weren't doing much reading and the number of verb tenses was not so high...

 

In high school and university language courses in the US, there is great variety in the expectations and the level of competence acquired by the end.

 

My experience could have been much better elsewhere, esp in Europe, but I'm not sure how common it is to be able have the skillfulness with language that you mention, in most US high schools (but it has been awhile since I've lived there).

 

If people have the money, I think RS is good if you need low parental involvement (not saying it has to be) and the first two levels are a good precursor to high school level studies. (It is true that we have not used all the levels so I cannot evaluate the later levels). It has permitted my son and daughter to be adept at learning (US level) high school level German and (Geneva, CH) Jr high level German. My daughter, in 7th grade, especially is zipping through year one of OSU high school German. She says she knows most of it already, but I don't think she would have been able to pass an exam, and she only did 2 levels of RS with some Berlitz CD's and other listening type stuff (meaning that it gave her a good base). (And for regentrude - maybe they have a higher expectations in Germany, but in 8th grade here, learning German as a second language, so their first foreign language - having started in 3rd grade, students are not doing all of Barb's list - I think her list was more complete on another thread. Their books are at an A2 level and they don't even want to speak.)

 

EM, I appreciate all the valuable insights you have to offer (seriously) but think you should be more judicious in your choice of comparisons.

 

Joan

PS for Barb, you are right, that I have not used all 5 levels, nor have we done worksheets with it, but we did use version 3. I do think the first two levels were good preparation for their work now, for those who want to move into something else, using the first couple of levels of RS as a base.

Edited November 11, 2010 by Joan in Geneva

[creekland]

Do you think it has something to do with the opportunity to actually use the European languages in Europe? I mean, of course we can get international jobs or go on missions, and we can keep up our exposure in different ways. But in reality, how long can we maintain language knowledge in the US if we never use it?

 

 

Not long. In my high school we started French in 7th grade and that is after I already knew some just from living along the border and traveling in Canada plus watching French TV cartoons for fun (I know, my sister and I were probably weird). By the end of 10th grade I had won contests in French for impromptu speaking. We also started reading the classics in French that year (Les Miserables comes to mind). I took two more years while in college - just for fun - but those ended up being review classes.

 

Then I moved away from the French border. I've been away for roughly 25 years. My French is so rusty now I can barely help my son in his French 1 class in high school with 100% accuracy. Honestly? I only use French here for 2 weeks every other year when our school hosts French exchange students from a "sister" school (and even that's now out as their teacher retired meaning their last trip was the last - the new teacher doesn't want to continue) and the very occasional trip to Montreal where I'm certain I speak like a poorly taught American! I actually have to translate most things to understand them. By 10th grade I didn't have to do that, but it's almost all lost now.

 

I often feel very fortunate that English is now the major world language! Granted, it's still French for the UN, but honestly? I never get there.

 

Other than Spanish, in our country, it's very difficult to KEEP a language due to hardly ever using it.

 

It's not just Americans either... our exchange students lose quite a bit of their language being here for just a year (it's one of the fun things they write about when they return home! They make "English" mistakes in their native tongues.). Over the years, their English slips too. I've had oodles of e-mail proving it - the occasional phone call too. I think it's a human thing. Use it or lose it. They have more opportunities to use it than we do, but if they don't... it still goes. It's not as if one had never learned a language, but one sure isn't fluent any longer!

[Hilary in MI]

Rosetta Stone is an excellent language lab component. Very good practice.

[Guest Barb B]

Some of you speak of 4 levels of rs - there are 5 now. The newer version 3 is much, much improved over the old one. I am starting level 3 this week in version 3 of spanish. The first level was what some call tourist. Now I feel I am really studying the language (yes, with grammar too). I have level 3,4,and 5 to go; so I honestly can't say I won't be able to read a literature book in spanish by the end of level 5. That is 3 more levels to go. THe old version 2 of rs said that 2 levels were equal to 1 year high school - the new version 3 is one level equal to 1 year. that said ds and I are still doing 2 levels per year. What some of you state you want out of a foreign language is just not even accessable to most of us - there is no way I can do what you want and no one I knopw to hire to do it. So, rs is the best thing for me - my kids hear it, read it, use it, type it. . . Yes, with any curriculum (be it math, science, lit. . . ) you need to do more then just the textbook with your kids - be it discussion or whatever. Rs is no exception. We can easily supplement cultural info that I want my kids to have. Also, I really do think that after one or 2 more levels we can read some books in spanish. Earlier, I was trying to see if any of you actually went on to complete this program. You really can't base a judgement on it from the web site samples. I have been using it and have gotten through 2 levels and see how far we have come in just 2 levels. No, I am not at the point now of reading a spanish novel - but I have only completed 2 levels. Ask me in 3 more levels - I bet I will be. So really, unless you have sat down and completed all levels - how can you judge it. It is working great here for us.

 

QUOTE: but it won't give them an understanding of what that language can truly offer them Well,as someone who is going through rs I disagree. It isn't just point and click on the pictures. My point is that those who are so against rs haven't used it and don't get it. By the end of 5 levels I will be able to read in spanish (I can some now). You can't look at what something is at level 1 and judge the whole product. Version 2 did not have grammar that changed with version 3 and I feel most judge this product based on the older version. I don't feel that rs dummies down the language. My kids after just 2 levels know more then their friends who took 4 years at the public school. Do I say rs is for everyone - no, but you shouldn't suggest it is for no one and that it isn't high school level - because it is high school level. Do 40 minutes per day 5 days per week; get through all 5 levels for 3 years of credit. And no, I don't have my kids use it for low parental involvement - I do it too; we discuss and review together what we are learning. You talk of rs needed to be supplemented. Actually, I would say that of ANY curriculum in ANY subject. There are very few textbooks or curriculum I have used that I haven't supplemented in some way. And spanish is no exception. And yes, you all are comming across very judgemental. Not all curriculum choices are for everyone, but you shouldn't say that something alot of us use; should never be used. Barb

Edited November 11, 2010 by Barb B

[southcarolinamom]

I'm using the RS Homeschool version, levels 1,2 and 3, for my DD's 2 years of Spanish requirement for a foreign language. She completes the work sheets that go with the computer lessons. I told her from the beginning... "when you are completely finished with all 3 levels, you are done with Spanish." She is halfway through Level 2 this year and maintaining a 94% average.

[Kates]

Some of you speak of 4 levels of rs - there are 5 now. The newer version 3 is much, much improved over the old one. I am starting level 3 this week in version 3 of spanish. The first level was what some call tourist. Now I feel I am really studying the language (yes, with grammar too). I have level 3,4,and 5 to go; so I honestly can't say I won't be able to read a literature book in spanish by the end of level 5. That is 3 more levels to go. THe old version 2 of rs said that 2 levels were equal to 1 year high school - the new version 3 is one level equal to 1 year. that said ds and I are still doing 2 levels per year. What some of you state you want out of a foreign language is just not even accessable to most of us - there is no way I can do what you want and no one I knopw to hire to do it. So, rs is the best thing for me - my kids hear it, read it, use it, type it. . . Yes, with any curriculum (be it math, science, lit. . . ) you need to do more then just the textbook with your kids - be it discussion or whatever. Rs is no exception. We can easily supplement cultural info that I want my kids to have. Also, I really do think that after one or 2 more levels we can read some books in spanish. Earlier, I was trying to see if any of you actually went on to complete this program. You really can't base a judgement on it from the web site samples. I have been using it and have gotten through 2 levels and see how far we have come in just 2 levels. No, I am not at the point now of reading a spanish novel - but I have only completed 2 levels. Ask me in 3 more levels - I bet I will be. So really, unless you have sat down and completed all levels - how can you judge it. It is working great here for us.

 

QUOTE: but it won't give them an understanding of what that language can truly offer them Well,as someone who is going through rs I disagree. It isn't just point and click on the pictures. My point is that those who are so against rs haven't used it and don't get it. By the end of 5 levels I will be able to read in spanish (I can some now). You can't look at what something is at level 1 and judge the whole product. Version 2 did not have grammar that changed with version 3 and I feel most judge this product based on the older version. I don't feel that rs dummies down the language. My kids after just 2 levels know more then their friends who took 4 years at the public school. Do I say rs is for everyone - no, but you shouldn't suggest it is for no one and that it isn't high school level - because it is high school level. Do 40 minutes per day 5 days per week; get through all 5 levels for 3 years of credit. And no, I don't have my kids use it for low parental involvement - I do it too; we discuss and review together what we are learning. You talk of rs needed to be supplemented. Actually, I would say that of ANY curriculum in ANY subject. There are very few textbooks or curriculum I have used that I haven't supplemented in some way. And spanish is no exception. And yes, you all are comming across very judgemental. Not all curriculum choices are for everyone, but you shouldn't say that something alot of us use; should never be used. Barb

 

I do see where you're coming from...but honestly, you're coming across as very judgmental as well...and not too many posts said "that something alot of us use; should never be used." We said it's not a complete program, which it's not. Your tone in every post I've read from you has a strong basis of "I've chosen it, I've used it, and I like it, so how DARE you speak against it - you're speaking against ME."

 

Well, no, we're not. The OP asked for opinions on what's wrong with it, and many people, including those with experience in teaching languages, have answered her question - honestly. And we've explained why. Most have said that it's a decent lab component, but for that much money, probably not worth it. That's our story and we're sticking to it. ;) (That was a joke, by the way.)

 

Could it be possible that, having devoted a large portion of our lives to learning linguistics and teaching foreign languages, there's a large part of this argument that we really have researched out? Is it possible that there might be merit to what we're saying, even if you don't agree with it? That maybe, even if we haven't gone all the way through it, we have researched it (not just by pictures on the internet, either) and this is our honest conclusion?

 

Just because we see a program as a) incomplete (for whatever reason) and b) overpriced does not mean that we think your choice to use this curric will permanently damage your kids. We don't think you're a horrible parent, and we don't think you're bad at making choices for your kids. We think there's more to learning a language than it offers, and that the price isn't really worth it if you don't already have access to it. That's all. Promise.

 

Can we get off this personal attack thing and get back to the question now?