Re: logflash software and RE: Using LogFlash

[Rick Nylander <rnylander@DTSI.COM>]

RE: logflash software

Lojbab writes:
>>>I think getting through 340 words is pretty good, especially without
a
>>>class environment to reinforce the words in other ways.  And you got
>>all
>>>of that in under 3 weeks.
>>
>>Under 3 weeks?  340 words represents about 2 months of work.
>
>At 20 words per day, that is 17 days.

I figured that out after I posted.  That's 17 days, spread out over 2
months (<sheepish grin>).

>>As I look
>>over the log, I see I used it about every 3 days.
>
>If that is your frequency of usage then indeed you need to be in New
Word
>Review mode.

(<Sound of embarrassed shuffling of feet>)
Um - you're right.  As I study my log file, I see that I get the worst
drop back results (0 - 25%) when I skip more than 2 days.  When I used
logflash on consecutive days, I typically hit 50% correct (or better) on
drop back.

RE: Using LogFlash
Lojbab writes:
>>My observation is that words seem to be chosen randomly from the
>>dropback pile.
>
>When you set a maximum, I believe it takes the words from the beginning
of
>the list (i.e. in preset New Word order) up to the maximum, but it
randomizes
>their order every time through the pile.

I just tested this to check - yeah, you're right.  That means you'll
always get the words that were introduced earliest from the New Word
pile.

>>So, upon examining the log file, I see that I average 12 errors from a
>>new word lesson (note that data is from New Word Review mode).  This
>>would indicate setting new word lessons to 25?
>
>Yep.  Though the numbers you gave in the other post seem to indicate
that 20
>is not all that bad for you, especially since you have noticed that
your
>Dropback percentage is not much higher than your New Word percentage.

As far as New Word errors are concerned, true.  But as for the Drop Back
errors, I was actually kinda talking off the top of my head in the
original post, giving an example, rather than quoting actual numbers.
As noted above, when I used logflash consistently, I got better results
than I originally stated.

>The best language learning methods usually proivide an average of 50
words
> mastered per week in serious daily study (of the type you get in a 5
unit college course).
>  LogFlash has beaten that rate for everyone who has used it
rigorously...

Interesting.  Could it be that it's because the vocabulary is simpler
(that is, most definitions are a single english word), or that people
who have undertaken it are simply more dedicated/passionate/fanatical
(:-) to start with?  Perhaps because they're self motivated (sezmu'i! -
Ha! - I knew I could combine another thread into this one.:-).

Thanks for the advice.  I think I understand what's going on now and how
it's supposed to work:
1.      Get exposure to the new words fast, and let them build up in the
drop back pile.  (No matter how depressing it looks.)
2.      Carve away at the drop back pile, which emphasizes the words
introduced earliest from the New Word pile.  Limit the lesson sizes just
enough to keep lessons from being too abusive.

Well, I'm gonna start over on Gaining Control, with 20-25 new
words/lesson, and probably 30-40 words on other lessons (to start -
fortunately, it can be adjusted), complete one session (or more?) daily
for the next couple of months, and see what happens.

Hopefully, I'll learn how to learn.

rik.
"Real men speak lojban without an accent."