kanon Wrote:Ok shouldn't have done this on an iPad. I accidentally made a bunch of omissions and substitutions that I clearly heard because it was hard to verify when you can't look at what you are typing while hearing the youtube video (in safari video pauses when you switch tabs), making #32 look really bad

I am omitting you from my follow up report since you had technical difficulties. Thanks for letting me know about it.

lumiina Wrote:I'm actually still working on analyzing the results.

#28 was interesting because even though he got a low accuracy, he picked up a lot of words, contradicting my description for the orange tier. So I'm adding another value for the amount of correct words picked up (instead of sounds) to see how that figures in.

That was me. I think it's because I didn't try transcribing any sounds if I couldn't hear a word I knew, while others maybe did so?

Or maybe I'm just weird lol.

Also I just wanted to mention that my "Learning Since" is a little misleading since I put down the year I first poked at Japanese (2007; basically all I learned was kana and X は Y です then dropped it). I only really got serious in 2012 with RTK and 2013 with the actual language. I thought answering "yes" to the "on and off" question clarified that the first date wasn't entirely useful. I know it's hard to pinpoint stuff like this in a survey, but it rubs me the wrong way to see the date displayed so conclusively in the chart while the other timeframe-related questions are omitted. Although I guess the self-declared "Level" column helps a bit with showing that there's more to the picture.

...Actually I guess it doesn't really matter, but I felt like I ought to mention it since I'm writing a post anyway.

Anyways I've been enjoying following all of this, thanks for posting your analyses.

zurisu -

I really want to thank you for writing that. I will put a note in my follow up notes about your actual study date. It actually makes lot of sense too.

I really messed up with the "on and off" question. Some people put "yes" but wrote the same amount of years for consistency. So the question lost its validity. What I would do in hindsight is just leave a textbox and people could explain those details instead.

I also hate the whole "time spent learning" value. It doesn't and shouldn't matter. But at some extent, it gives insight as to how long someone has been attempting something. A 102 student who has been trying to study Japanese on and off before he started classes will probably have a little advantage over the 102 student who started at the same time he enrolled in his first class, even if it's just slight. I just hope no one takes that value personally and is confident knowing where their own Japanese is for themselves.

You won't like to hear that my newer chart doesn't have the level posted! I can only fit so much in a blog post. Perhaps I'll make an excel chart with all the details? I can't fit them all into one chart on a Word doc, another reason that question got left out. What I'd love to do is make a chart you could toggle by value and categorize by clicking a category. If I can find out how.

I was thinking you probably just didn't try writing down any sounds of words you don't know. In someway, that's good, prevents bad habits if you mishear things.

Thank you for writing what "rubbed you the wrong way." I hope others do too. It only benefits my research.

I'll keep updating my results as I find more things. I hope to compile it into a new report replacing the old report too when more of the details are figured out.

zurisu - I changed your date to reflect when you seriously started.

http://petitelumi.blogspot.com/2014/05/s...value.html

Awesome, keep up the good work!