paasan Wrote:I think you all speak the truth (mostly).
As bodhisamaya kindly points out, SRS has it's great advantages for kanji and unrelated vocabulary. Though I must disagree that SRS as a language learning tool will die out. On the contrary, I agree with nest0r that we will see more of it in the future. As a side note, I never had an issue with SRSing RTK. Great tool!
I've noticed that I enjoy using SRS for vocabulary if I can connect with previous experiences or put it into context. It also makes memorizing much easier. Indeed, from now on I will SRS some my favorite anime shows so that I can think of hot anime girls while doing vocabulary too. (Perhaps this is why RTK went so great..).
Thank you all for the input so far!
You might find this useful:
The Four Strands
This is by Paul Nation, well known for his work on vocabulary acquisition. Here he stresses the importance of combining deliberate learning and spaced retrieval with learning through passive exposure (such as reading), because the latter, while the primary goal/focus, is so slow and limited.
Norbert Schmitt is another well known researcher, whom I quoted here:
http://forum.koohii.com/showthread.php?p...#pid141180
I'll requote since you might not have access to the source article (
http://ltr.sagepub.com/content/12/3/329.short)
“Taken together, the research confirms that worthwhile vocabulary learning
does occur from reading. However, the pick-up rate is relatively low, and it
seems to be difficult to gain a productive level of mastery from just exposure.
Hill and Laufer (2003) estimate that, at the rates of incidental learning
reported in many studies, a L2 learner would have to read over 8 million
words of text, or about 420 novels to increase their vocabulary size by 2000
words. This is clearly a daunting prospect, and thus it is probably best not to
rely upon incidental learning as the primary source of the learning for new
words.
Rather, incidental learning seems to be better at enhancing know-
ledge of words which have already been met. This conclusion is congruent
with Waring and Takaki’s (2003) findings that reading graded readers does not
lead to the learning of many new words, but that is very useful in developing
and enriching partially known vocabulary. Studies with a variety of test types
have shown that exposure leads to improvements in multiple types of word
knowledge. Also, given that repetition is key to learning words, the benefits of
repeated exposures in different contexts for consolidating fragile initial learn-
ing and moving it along the path of incremental development cannot be
underestimated.”
“... there are good reasons to believe that vocabulary requires a different approach
which incorporates explicit attention to learning the lexical items themselves:
• learners who understand the overall message often do not pay attention
to the precise meanings of individual words
• guessing from context is often unreliable, especially if the learner does
not know 98% of the words in the discourse
• words which are easily understood (guessed) from context may not
generate enough engagement to be learned and remembered
• new words which learners have met in discourse need to be met again
relatively quickly to avoid their being forgotten. In order for words to
be met 10 times in reading, learners would need to read 1–2 graded readers
per week. The typical learner simply does not read this much.
(Laufer, 2005)
However, the main reason for an explicit focus on vocabulary is that it is
effective: although research has demonstrated that valuable learning can
accrue from incidental exposure (see below), intentional vocabulary learning
(i.e. when the specific goal is to learn vocabulary, usually with an explicit
focus) almost always leads to greater and faster gains, with a better chance of
retention and of reaching productive levels of mastery. Laufer (2005) reviews
a number of studies which contain an explicit focus on vocabulary. Those in
which the explicit exercises were related to, but not embedded in, meaning-
based tasks led to 33–86% of the words being learned. Exercises which
required work on isolated words, without a meaning-based task, led to gains
of 13–99%. These ranges reflect a variety of types of measurement and immed-
iate vs. delayed testing, but regardless, they compare extremely favorably with
the magnitude of results typically derived from incidental learning. Laufer
goes on to report on three of her studies, which show that explicit vocabulary
exercises led to about 70% of the words being known on immediate receptive
posttests. Although this decayed to 21–41% on two-week delayed posttests, it
is far better than results reported from incidental learning. Similarly, Smith
(2004) found that target words which were used and focused upon in inter-
active tasks on an internet chat program were retained very well in terms of
receptive meaning knowledge (80–90%), and still fairly well in terms of
productive word form (50–59%) (one-week delayed tests).
Given the relative effectiveness of explicit activities in promoting vocabu-
lary learning, one might think such an approach would be a major element in
most classrooms. However, this is not necessarily so...
... Despite this relative ‘shortchanging’ of vocabulary, research clearly indi-
cates that a vocabulary learning program needs to have an explicit component,
and so the important question concerns which activities are most effective.
Although it impossible to say that any activity is better than any other activity
in all cases (which is not surprising given the complexity and variability
inherent in the language acquisition process, e.g. Ellis & Larsen-Freeman,
2006), vocabulary research has suggested a number of principles for selecting/
constructing effective learning tasks.”
(Schmitt then goes on to talk about active engagement, repetition, etc. [referencing the Four Strands article where Nation talks about distributing the repetition].)
Another paper:
Four Principles of Memory Improvement: A Guide to Improving Learning Efficiency
Lastly:
http://psychologyinaction.org/2011/01/04...classroom/
http://psychologyinaction.org/2011/02/09...-learning/
http://psychologyinaction.org/2011/02/14...-teaching/
And with reading as the example, as I mentioned before and in the linked comment, it's not just SRSing, but things like Rikaisan where you have audio + definitions at your fingertips while reading to enhance receptive exposure, and of course the selection and arrangement of materials (such as graded readers). Keeping in mind you can also extract words and collocations from texts before reading them using MorphMan and AntConc.
Add the necessary fields to your deck, name them Audio and Pictures or whatever you want, and add the fields to either the front or the back of your cards. You can then simply copy and paste the media into the fields when adding cards. 
