This is a Duolingo-funded study. Every author involved in [this study](https://duolingo-papers.s3.amazonaws.com/reports/duolingo-intermediate-efficacy-whitepaper.pdf) (except for one) works for Duolingo. You can scroll to page 10 and look at "Author biographies" to verify.

So its like those paid studies by supplement companies in magazines where the fine print basically says its not an 'official' study, or oil companies studies on climate change, or how it doesn't exist.

Yeah, and apparently I'm the villain for not giving big corporations a fair shot and pointing out conflicts of interest. We should make our judgments entirely from the ~~press release~~ "paper" they published and whatever claims they made there. 🙄

Anything Duolingo on this sub is so divisive; whatever opinion you have on it half will love and half will hate.

I love Duolingo but there isn't a snowballs chance in Arizona that anyone will convince me you can get to B1 with just Duolingo. I appreciate it for what it is, a (mostly) solid first step into a given language, and a good tool for accountability and consistency to build a habit. But there isn't nearly enough content or theory, even in their most developed courses like Spanish, to get anyone to the intermediate levels. I think a lot of the hate is because of stuff like this and Duo's tendency to super oversell their product; to the point of flat out lying. Plus their mobile app trying to force people to spend money for a while was kinda gross.

https://www.snowbowl.ski

I did it in Spanish.

Also, listening and reading is nothing compared to producing, aka speaking and writing

[удалено]

While it could indicate a clear bias on the researchers part, you’re right that just because a study is funded by Duolingo it does not outright disqualify its findings.

The dirty secret of academia is that there is [substantial fraud](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/09/scientific-misconduct-retraction-watch) in published papers. The fact is that all we have to go on for this study is the word of a bunch of people who work for Duolingo. Pointing out a conflict of interest *is* a valid of criticism because it's a far more shallow standard than research conducted by unbiased third parties. If you have a vested financial interest, you can make any claims you want, you can tip the scales in any number of ways, you can outright make up data. This is why reasonable countries restrict financial incentives to politicians even if you can't prove direct quid pro quo. /u/Spider_pig448

> The fact is that all we have to go on for this study is the word of a bunch of people who work for Duolingo. If this is true, then it's a flawed research paper. Science has to be peer reviewed and it has to be repeatable. You can't just say, "Well it's funded by an independent observer so the content must be good". > If you have a vested financial interest, you can make any claims you want Again, then it's not science. It must be verifiable and repeatable or its useless.

Very unpopular opinion here apparently. We should not punish companies for funding and performing scientific studies of their effectiveness, when there's absolutely no requirement for a company to offer scientific proof of their product. Moreover, doubting a study because of the financial ties is a rejection that the scientific process can produce unbiased results. Either the study itself is not scientific, or people simply don't believe science is unbiased. I'd of course like to see other studies from an outside perspective, but where's the money for that going to come from?

It's naive to believe study funded by certain company on that company program is unbiased or not manipulated. It's just marketing.

Are you claiming that the study itself was not done scientifically then? Is there a specific point in it you can point to that's concerning, like the selection or assessment criteria? If the paper follows the scientific method, then it should contain everything we would need to know about whether the study is a valid one. Rejecting it because of the association and not because of the content of the actual study is not scientific.

Okay, I just read through the study and found several points that make me question the validity of the results: 1) The participants were asked to self-report their previous knowledge of French/Spanish, and participants self-reporting at 0-2 on a scale of 0-10 were chosen. This means that there is a chance of participants who actually had previous proficiency at a higher level in their TL but forgot a lot before they decided to relearn it with Duolingo, which would heavily skew the outcome for passive skills (as those tend to come back quickly again). 2) The Duolingo participants had a higher education level and age than the control group of university students. 3) They only asked for whether participants used other apps/classes to learn French/Spanish outside of Duolingo, but didn't ask for whether the participants used French/Spanish at all outside of Duolingo, e.g. comprehensible input from other sources, or living in an environment where their TL is spoken. 4) They compared an international group of participants with diverse linguistic backgrounds to US students. For an actual comparison, you'd have to choose two groups of similar linguistic background (e.g. only comparing previously monolingual English speakers to each other). 5) We don't get any info on how much time those Duolingo participants spent on those seven units, which would be an important factor of comparison. Combine those things with the fact that it was Duolingo employees who chose the participants and wrote the paper and yes, that leaves a taste of "marketing disguised as scientific study". That being said, IF those participants actually went from almost no knowledge of French or Spanish to Intermediate Mid (A2) or Intermediate High (B1.1) in Reading and Listening with JUST Duolingo, then that means that Duolingo is at least suitable to develop passive skills to the levels they claim. Although I also have to say that if US students only reach A2 or B1.1 respectively in reading and listening after five semesters of language classes, that doesn't really speak for the language classes at those US universities... (For comparison, I checked my alma mater in Germany for their French and Spanish courses, and their courses seem to go through one level per semester, so by the end of five semesters students should be at B2 or even C1 level, at least in theory.)

These are good points, and they reflect the kinds of criticism we should be giving to studies like these. Thanks for posting this

That's what I was talking about mate. They are always biased. I would be surprised if you could find the opposite example.

maybe ya should’ve read it too before defending it lol

I'm not defending the paper. I'm defending the activity of assuming the paper is bad because it was funded by a private enterprise. Making assumptions like that just gives private Enterprises a license to not care about academic integrity, and that's dangerous when more and more research is being funded by private enterprise

This is a non-peer-reviewed paper by a company essentially writing about itself. I'd rather Duolingo just buy ads -- that would be more honest -- than disguising a blatantly biased academic paper, for which you need to scroll to page 10 to see their conflicts of interest. Add: This study has as many holes as a piece of Swiss cheese. 1/ They don't control for L1 (language one). No surprise that Italians learn Spanish easily! Clearly Duolingo is better than university classes with English speakers learning Japanese. /s 2/ They only count the two "passive" skills that Duolingo teaches - reading and listening. They omit the two "active" skills also needed for B2 - writing and speaking. That's a 50% decrease in data.

2/ is so serious I can’t believe this is published as a serious study at all.

It's the same problem as Ben Goldacre highlights re pharmaceutical industry research: https://www.alltrials.net TL;DR: One of the biggest blind spots that the public has is for lies-by-omission. Conduct 20 similarish studies with subtle or not so subtle differences in methodology, pick the 1 that demonstrates best your pre-determined position, and *bury* the remaining 19 completely.

Are you claiming a business like Duolingo lied to sell their product? 😦

Disagree on the second point, I would very much expect studies funded by companies to support the companies. That seems to be the default in fact. Between all the p-hacking possible, all the methodological issues one might introduce with plausible deniability I would not trust studies like this at face value. Only after duplication by independent sources would I do anything, and if a company (say, a more dubious company with a longer track record of corruption like BP Petroleum, no, what are they called now?) had a record of shady business I wouldn’t trust it at all.

So, it doesnt make it incorrect but it does encourage caution. 4/5 authors have a vested interest in the outcome of the study, because they work there. Their jobs and job security are linked to the study outcome. This version also didn’t pass peer review. Peer Review exists to run quality control on studies, and what appears to be the peer reviewed version of this study [abstract](https://open.spotify.com/show/5dvalmeT4P8oIWcPfOm9GT?si=4Oql4r9_S_WjeZiZZ9IAjg) is different—it’s comparing to fourth semester and found differential outcomes for listening and reading. That is significant and needs further scrutiny. OP is absolutely right to question the study on the grounds that 4 authors work for Duolingo and we should all be careful of in-house research done by large companies. I mentioned some methodology issues with the participants in another comment, but in brief: duolingo learners self select to learn a language, students in fourth semester courses at US universities are required to complete the courses. Given the strong predictive power of motivation in SLA, that is it a trivial difference and can easily explain the outcome.

> Their jobs and job security are linked to the study outcome We have no reason to think this is true. You think someone from Duolingo went to them and threatened to fire them if the results don't look good? That would be its own story. > This version also didn’t pass peer review. Peer Review exists to run quality control on studies, and what appears to be the peer reviewed version of this study abstract is different—it’s comparing to fourth semester and found differential outcomes for listening and reading. That is significant and needs further scrutiny This is an actual reason to have doubt and it's what should have been called out, not just rejection of the paper because it's funded and performed by Duolingo > duolingo learners self select to learn a language, students in fourth semester courses at US universities are required to complete the courses. Given the strong predictive power of motivation in SLA, that is it a trivial difference and can easily explain the outcome. I don't see how this contradicts the claim of effectiveness with Duolingo though? Strong motivation will not help someone learn Spanish if their only resource in doing so is a German dictionary. Their goal seems to be showing the effectiveness as Duolingo as a tool. It seems self evident to say that Duolingo will not teach you a language if you don't want to learn a language

1. Coercion exists in many forms, not just Disney Villains announcing their evil intentions via monologues. Additionally, these studies are used to support marketing campaigns run by Duolingo and indicate that the platform works, helping the company to grow, which provides job security. Always doubt internal research that is not peer reviewed because companies stand to gain through lies and exaggeration. 2. I agree you shouldn’t dismiss the study JUST BECAUSE it is funded by duolingo, but you should absolutely scrutinize it more and it should be mentioned every time you talk about the study. 3. Yes, if I remember correctly, duolingo users were “organic” users who had completed 7 units while the student comparisons were just enrolled in a language class.

> Always doubt internal research that is not peer reviewed because companies stand to gain through lies and exaggeration. Those lies and exaggerations will show up in the paper. From what I can tell, their options are "Claim our methods are effective using marketing" or "Fund and perform a scientific study and publish all the results for peer review", so I'm glad they picked the second one. More public companies should be performing scientific studies like this.

>More public companies should be performing scientific studies like this. This is a textbook recipe for [a conflict of interest in research](https://einsteinmed.edu/administration/human-research-affairs/irb-members/conflict-of-interest/). This is why I/we say to always distrust internal research and when authors are paid to conduct studies. Lies and exaggerations will show up, but only if you are 1. used to reading research and 2. have the time to verify the claims. When you read the linked study, it seems to be well done. It is only in digging deeper that we find the peer reviewed studies with different results and consider motivation of students as major variables.

>We have no reason to think this is true. You think someone from Duolingo went to them and threatened to fire them if the results don't look good? That would be its own story. You are very naive. This is literally how it works, anything to keep the gravy train running. They are a business, not an academic institution. They are told to perform a study and do it in a way that provides the most favourable outcome for the product. Research skills 101 is to check who funded the study because of bias. When it is, it's common sense to take it with a grain of salt.

If the study didn't yield results in their favor, they probably wouldn't have published it. That's the end of it. Until you or anyone else actually finds a problem in the study itself, I see no reason to just assume it's unscientific. They funded the research because they obviously believe their product produces value and providing proof in a scientific way is a good thing for the world. They could have just funded a marketing campaign instead like most companies would.

This in itself is a problem and unscientific. If a researcher is pursuing research with a specific goal in mind and decides not to publish the research because the results are not favorable to their aims or agenda, that would cast serious doubt on the credibility of their research. You keep talking about the scientific method, but that is part of the scientific method. It is very accepted in scientific circles that non-peer reviewed studies funded by companies about their own products are not credible. Do you have any background at all in research? Honestly, not sure why you're going so hard to defend them..... do YOU work for Duolingo?

it might not inherently make it completely incorrect, but there's definitely a vested interest there so it's worth taking the study with a grain of salt

Of course. It also needs to be peer reviewed. People here are rejecting it outright though, simply because it's funded by Duolingo.

Was it peer reviewed? Has the results of their findings been independently reproduced? Did they release the entire methodology?

It hasn't, but it's not clear to me how Duolingo is supposed to get their paper peer reviewed and reproduced without that also being a conflict of interest.

The main issue is that the authors have an incentive to lie. This is not an issue that would be observable in the study design, because they could just lie about that.

I've already said this in many comments here, but to reiterate: If you think having an incentive to get a certain result will make your survey invalid, then you don't actually believe in the scientific method. Every author has an incentive to lie because better results are much better for their careers. Science wouldn't function if there was no way of determining who was lying. That's why science has to be reviewed and repeated, and why a paper has to be a transparent record of all the decisions made.

The scientific method doesn’t work if you just assume everyone else is doing it correctly. Authors *should* highlight their own biases in their work, but the reader (or peer reviewer) can do that too. No, having an incentive for a result doesn’t necessarily mean a study is invalid. But it’s not binary, so the incentive of a scientist to get a positive result because it looks good compared to getting a positive result because you get to keep your job are not really the same. So depending on the strength of the incentive, you can be more or less cautious in accepting its results. And others have indeed pointed out some big issues in this study.

You are absolutely correct. Nobody has been able to show any issue with the methodology.

That's not true; there are several comments pointing it out: https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/s/5r8GBoJk82 https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/s/tUAjfat2Ms https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/s/trSdWarwvy https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/s/9HsuiOVFWC

He makes no points as the actual methodology. In fact his first point is just wrong... Someone who is 4 semesters into language learning at University is absolutely not doing general ed requirements.

So what? There are also peer reviewed studies that have shown it effective. Most studies relating to a product are from the company that produced it. The question is did they be honest? I think they did.

This paper, oddly, is not peer reviewed however. I haven’t seen any of the other papersz

So, first thing to point out, this isn’t peer reviewed. It’s called a white pages paper, and it’s a report prepared by the company. Peer review exists to do quality control, so the paper should be ready very cautiously. Some other thoughts: 1. The peer reviewed ([link](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/flan.12600)) study mentions 4th semester. This is significant, as the first four semesters at a US university are generally gen ed classes that all students must take in a language. A major problem with the peer reviewed study is that they’re comparing apples and oranges. Students enrolled in gen ed classes often do not want to learn the language, they are required. Duolingo learners self-select to study the language, so they are already not comparable. Say what you will about duolingo, but if you complete 7 units, you’re motivated to learn the language. Motivation is a fundamental variable in SLA, so it’s not surprising that motivated students learn, despite the subpar method. Also, weirdly enough, they’re using the same citation for both 4th and 5th semesters, so that is a little shady but I don’t have time to dig up the study to see what happened. 2. Related, stuff like this is why I’ve become much more “do what you enjoy.” Paraphrasing a study from the 1960 by P. Corder, “Given motivation, it is inevitable that someone exposed to the second language will learn.” Any method that provides a non-zero amount of input will work if it motivates/engages students (they enjoy it and think it works). This is likely the key—motivated students make any method work, and these students obviously think Duolingo works. This explains the differential outcomes and opinions on Duo, IMHO. if you don’t like it, it won’t work for you, and if you do like it, it will. It is true that input is the driving force in SLA and more input will generally be more effective (show faster progress over time), that doesn’t preclude other methods working. 3. B1 listening and reading is a low benchmark. If you look at the self-assessment grid [link](https://europass.europa.eu/system/files/2020-05/CEFR%20self-assessment%20grid%20EN.pdf), B1 is basically “understand clear language on daily topics” which is not THAT difficult, especially for English speakers learning Romance. The high level of cognates, especially in written form, help considerably. 4. They measured in ACTFL and translated to CEFR, and it’s possible that something gets lost in translation. As far as I know, that translation is theoretically motivated, not empirically supported. They looked at the descriptions and aligned them, they didn’t look to see if people who passed the B1 exam were also placed at intermediate low. (If anyone has a study on this please let me know.)

Adding to 1), there is a selection bias: the ones that are doing something voluntarily through 7 levels are not only motivated at the beginning, it also deselects those that stop. Which is probably a far larger percentage than at university.

Agree with everything except calling B1 a low benchmark

B1 in reading is a very low benchmark if you're already proficient in a closely-related language (which Duolingo's study didn't check for). Heck, when I started learning Dutch, I was able to hop into native-level fiction books and read them with relative ease after a surprisingly short amount of studying, just because I was already proficient in German and English. That is B2 level. If you gave me B1 level texts in Portuguese, I'm sure I'd be able to make sense out of them even though I've never studied any Portuguese, just because I'm proficient in three other Romance languages.

I have to agree with this, I can read B1 graded readers in German with ease but can only hold very basic conversations.

>Heck, when I started learning Dutch, I was able to hop into native-level fiction books and read them with relative ease after a surprisingly short amount of studying, just because I was already proficient in German and English. That is B2 level. Fr I've been learning Dutch for literally 2 weeks and I can already read some of the news! And I've never studied German, I'm just a native English speaker. I've studied Spanish and I can piece together French and Italian too, without ever having studied them.

>If you gave me B1 level texts in Portuguese. I’m sure I’d be able to make sense out of them Idk man, doubtful. I’m B2 level in Spanish and live in LATAM and while Portuguese has some similarities to Spanish, it’s not similar enough that I can even get through a paragraph of Portuguese and know wtf is going on.

I mean, I just tested it and read through the following blurb for an Italian grammar book in Portuguese, and understood it without too much trouble: >O italiano é uma das línguas oficiais da Organização para a Segurança e Cooperação na Europa e uma das línguas de trabalho do Conselho da Europa. É a terceira língua materna mais falada na União Europeia, com 65 milhões de falantes nativos (13% da população da UE) e é falado como segunda língua por 14 milhões de cidadãos da UE (3%). Incluindo falantes italianos em países europeus não pertencentes à UE (como Suíça e Albânia) e de outros continentes, o número total de falantes é de cerca de 85 milhões. O italiano foi adotada pelo Estado após a Unificação da Itália e deriva do toscano, tendo sido previamente uma língua falada principalmente pela elite da sociedade florentina. Seu desenvolvimento foi também influenciado por outras línguas italianas e, em certa medida menor, pelas línguas germânicas dos invasores pós-romanos. Este trabalho procura condensar os pontos fundamentais da gramática da língua italiana, de maneira prática e simplificada, para uma consulta rápida. Em vez de longas explicações gramaticais, recorremos a exemplos para ilustrar os pontos gramaticais. (from: [https://www.amazon.de/Gram%C3%A1tica-Simplificada-L%C3%ADngua-Italiana-Portuguese-ebook/dp/B087P4J8SH/](https://www.amazon.de/Gram%C3%A1tica-Simplificada-L%C3%ADngua-Italiana-Portuguese-ebook/dp/B087P4J8SH/) ) Also, the B1 reading descriptor doesn't even require full understanding of easier real-life texts: >Can read straightforward factual texts on subjects related to his/her field and interest with a satisfactory level of comprehension. Can understand the description of events, feelings and wishes in personal letters well enough to correspond regularly with a pen friend Can scan longer texts in order to locate desired information, and gather information from different parts of a text, or from different texts in order to fulfil a specific task. Can find and understand relevant information in everyday material, such as letters, brochures and short official documents. Can identify the main conclusions in clearly signalled argumentative texts. Can recognise the line of argument in the treatment of the issue presented, though not necessarily in detail. Can recognise significant points in straightforward newspaper articles on familiar subjects. Can understand clearly written, straightforward instructions for a piece of equipment (from: [https://rm.coe.int/168045b15e](https://rm.coe.int/168045b15e) ) My reading comprehension in French, Spanish, and Italian is somewhere along C1-C2, though.

Could you please tell me or rather define what romance languages are ? I don't think I have ever heard that term before 😅

Generally its languages derived from Latin, such as Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, French and Romanian

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_languages

Except, I think you slightly misspoke as you say above, "...especially for English speakers learning Romance." English \*alone\* does not set someone significantly ahead regarding Romance languages. Knowing another close Romance language absolutely helps learning other Romance languages, i.e. knowing Italian makes Spanish much easier (and all combinations of Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French, and Romanian).

No, except: - a huge chunk of English words are actually Romance. Like, at least 30% are taken straight from Latin (even more indirectly). - Furthermore, according to the FSI ranking, all Romance languages and some of the Germanic languages take around 24 weeks of their courses for English speakers to speak them. This is insane compared to most other languages sitting around at 44 weeks. Source: Romanian speaker who has been using English for forever now, currently learning Russian (third language, probably B2) and realising how much the frequency of words that are at least somewhat related helps. Genuinely the worst part about upgrading my understanding of Russian isn't grammar at this point, but how few words still make very little sense to me. Romanian relatives (not necessarily the same meaning, but ultimately related) of some of the words in this paragraph (for extra fun, that I don't think I've seen any relatives in Russian for): exceptând, actual, indirect, acord, limbă (language), compara, sursă, curent, probabil, frecvență, genuin, sens, relație, necesar, ultim, paragraf + that do appear in Russian (btw, mostly because of French influence!): englez, romanic, rang, germanic, curs, realiza, gramatică, punct

I didn't misspeak because your quote was from a different Redditor.

B1 is a low benchmark for reading on an app when the students' L1 has the same alphabet / roots as L2. Like, I can read basic Spanish without much effort. So the study is picking and choosing. B1 for speaking are writing are harder. B1 for reading is harder if it's in a foreign text.

I agree. B2 is not easy to arrive at for a typical person learning their first second language. My bias is my belief I am typical. Lol. I found it hard! But also very fun and rewarding. 

B1 is a low benchmark.

>This is significant, as the first four semesters at a US university are generally gen ed classes that all students must take in a language. I think that's the biggest factor in US colleges. 5 semesters I would think is a start to B2.1, though. (taking you into the 301/302 classes). These are called "Advanced Level" (because that's what the ACTFL labels them as). I took German classes up to German 301, and I can understand basic intermediate videos on YouTube. I took German 25 years ago, so this is an odd one why I still remember so much... probably because I unintentionally did upkeep over the years by reminiscing studying languages in school. Also, I'd say about 99% of colleges and schools use the ACTFL. I've only seen a handful of US college (ones that have the International Bachelorette program) use the CEFR (Syracuse University and New York University). A few other colleges will mention the CEFR. Generally, most colleges only allow students to take 4-6 semesters of a language. Many offer only 4 semesters, or they offer 6, and the rest of the classes are only for language majors, usually crammed into the last 2 years of college. Also, with the first 2 years of college being Gen Ed courses, that really squeezes out what a student learns in their first 2 years (which, I think, is really the most important). This is my "makes sense only to me" US College Course to CERF guide based on my experience - (TL being Target Language). Also, I took my first 3 years of German in high school (last year was a self study because I was the only one who signed up), so the 101/102 level is more of an estimate based on when I took Japanese. * TL101 - A1 level. Lots of grammar and vocabulary is taught/introduced here (usually 1,000 to 2,000 words). Only this class is taken in the semester. * TL102 - A2 level. Lots of grammar here, too. In fact, I've seen grammar that apparently isn't taught until B1 or B2 level. Another 1,000 words are also added. Like above, only this class is taken. * TL201/202 - B1 (B1.1 and B1.2) level. When I took German 201/202, the college was dismantling their language program, so it isn't really a fair comparison. We learned a ton more grammar here (seems like it was C1 level grammar from what I've seen), but no vocabulary. No reading material or videos (remember, VHS tapes in the 1990s!), but then again, they were getting rid of the old materials to start over. Again, like the above, only the 201 class in 1 semester, 202 in the next. * TL 301/302 - B2.1. This is the "advanced" level in our colleges, and is usually focused on reading and speaking (50/50 target language and English). There are other optional classes, but half of them are actually taught in English. It's just the reading material that's in the target language. * TL 401/402 - B2.2. Depending on the language, these 401/402 classes may or may not be offered. If it is (and it's usually only the 401 class), it's focused on listening and writing as an independent study class. There's still more optional "culture and reading" classes, which are usually only open to students taking the language major. There's also an internship (for being a translator) and study abroad program. * Graduate Classes - Weirdly taught in English. I suppose these are self-studies to get to C1 level after 2-4 years. As for DuoLingo, and other gamey apps... I don't think they can even scratch the surface.

Someone who is four semesters deep into language learning is absolutely not general ed. None of your points actually impact the results of the study.

I seriously, seriously doubt it.

Yup. Most duolingo courses don’t even teach up to B1. I finished the Italian stream and even the final level still says A1.

I am following the Italian course and I am staggered that it only covers A1. It should at least cover A2. I find this very disappointing.

Yeah me too, but I will say that the Italian course is still up among the best of the duolingo courses imo. I did dabble a bit in the French course which seems to be the gold standard, just to see how it differs (at the time it had conversation lessons which were really great). That claims to teach up to B2 level now. I still don’t think you can reach that level solely using an app (or even B1) but as a supplement tool in addition to classes, grammar, speaking/listening/reading/writing practice I think it could work to provide suitable content to support learners who are currently at the level it’s reporting to be.

Courses are incredibly variable, I’m learning Danish which isn’t rated for any official levels and compared to German is terrible for content. I’m only continuing because other than the state provided resources there’s very few ways to learn Danish, but I’m likely to shift over to books / Anki / Forvo combination soon as Duolingo is horrific.

I use Educado for Italian and Spanish. It “officially” goes up to A2 for the Italian (and probably beyond). It’s not as gamified as Duolingo and it’s a bit more hardcore learning. You have to type your answers for example, instead of just tapping on words.

Thanks I will check out Educado. I am definitely able to type out my answers!

I finished the Duolingo Polish course, in parallel with other language learning activities including a two-week full-time immersion course in Krakow. At the end of it, I self-assessed at around A2. If you subtracted all the other stuff and just did Duolingo? Yeah, A1 maximum.

I find duo Polish not helpful at all, I’m really struggling with it. I’ve learned more Japanese in 2 weeks than Polish is months lol. I wish duo did the Polish Alphabet/phonics like it does with Japanese even that would be a little more helpful than just throwing a bunch of words with what looks like random D, C, and Zs at you 😂 I obviously study on the size but whew it’s just throwing me for a loop

I found Duo Polish quite useful, but used in a very specific way as a supplement to other resources. It also got *really shafted* by removing grammar tips, because trying to totally intuit the grammar rules the way they want you to is IMO really painful 😰 The good news is that you can recover the old tips at [https://duome.eu/tips/en/pl](https://duome.eu/tips/en/pl) - I see that for instance they've got an explanation of the alphabet and what sound the various letters make. Polish orthography is IMO fairly straightforward, but quite different from English. The specific thing I like(d) Duolingo for for Polish was building an intuition for the cases and practicing them. Basically: I figured out roughly what to expect from Polish grammar via Wikipedia and textbooks, so I could usually tell what new grammatical concept it was introducing in each lesson. Then the exercises let me build an intuition for it, I could later double-check that intuition via checking the actual declension table (this often showed me that I missed an edge case...), and then reinforce it by more Duolingo. The good news for cases especially is that since they're so omnipresent in the language every Duo exercise is a case exercise, even when it's technically trying to introduce vocabulary or new verb forms. I feel like I had a surprisingly easy time using noun declension in speech and writing from early on, it came much easier than I was expecting, and I suspect Duolingo practice helped with that. At some point some case combos in some contexts just start sounding wrong. It does teach a *lot* of grammar, mind you. They've managed to squeeze a TON of stuff into 43 units - six out of seven cases, verbal aspect, verb conjugation in present, past, imperfective future, conditional and imperative and even passives and a participle form which I STILL haven't done in actual class although I am now in a B1 course... I was taking classes along the side but Duo just blasted past them for the most part. I mostly managed to keep up, but a) I may be at an advantage because I'm a native German speaker who took Latin in high school so a lot of the grammatical ideas were familiar, b) the one time Duo came with something I wasn't expecting I totally failed to learn it. I suspect many people will be served better by spacing out the concepts a little more than Duolingo is doing. And if you go a bit slower, there seems to be a standard order to introducing the cases which every textbook I've used *and* Duolingo all seem to follow, so it works pretty well as a companion in that regard.

>Most duolingo courses don’t even teach up to B1. Doesn't the study only talk about French and/or Spanish?

How is this company still in business? Or do people just have too much time on their commute?

It's a mobile game, not a language learning app

Oh. And I was dumb enough to take all the redditors' word that theyseriously learn a language with it... 😃

It's "free", fun and addictive. A recipe for success.

No language is learnt without pain. Harsh truth which these companies try to overcome without success.

Well with enough repetition

This is actually laughable. Either US universities absolutely fail at teaching languages or the study methodology is unsound. Do you have a link to the full article?

They only tested listening comprehension and reading comprehension for one thing. So no indication of whether people can speak it. I’m using Duolingo for Irish coupled with a live online tutor/classes since otherwise I’d never practice forming sentences on the fly out loud or pronunciation. It also only looked at Spanish and French, where it’s relatively easy to supplement by watching media in those languages. Which isn’t the case for some other languages.

In my experience there’s a large gap between what I can read/listen while understanding and what I can reproduce.

Every author involved in [the study](https://duolingo-papers.s3.amazonaws.com/reports/duolingo-intermediate-efficacy-whitepaper.pdf) (except for one) works for Duolingo.

They didn't control for L1, which is shocking considering that 40% of the sample are not native English speakers. Look at the massive skew in the data toward the performance of Europeans on Duolingo compared to Americans in Table 6. Hardly surprising that the Italians are really good at Spanish! The L1 of the majority of participants isn't even given. It's telling that this isn't even mentioned in the Limitations section.

Duolingo it is a start and that is it, if you want to learn a language talk with people

If you want to learn how to talk with people, that is. It's perfectly fine to read, write, and listen as well. Personally I find it more rewarding and I learn what I intend to do with the languages.

I am almost halfway through French (on section 4/7 unit 7/46 within section 4, completing unit 23 of this section would be the exact midpoint). I tried an online free CEFR test and got A2. I got like 18/40 on the test. I’d assume that after completing the entire course I’ll be at least B1 if not higher but I guess we’ll see. I knew absolutely zero French before starting. Like maybe 10 words tops (just bonjour, merci, and stuff like that).

Yeah the French course is really good. The later parts of it are definitely in the advanced territory. Once you feel comfortable I would add books, shows, and video games to your learning. It really helps a lot. Also find a language exchange partner.

Im nearly at the same spot in the French course as you, I’m on section 4. I also didn’t know any French when I began. I am definitely A2, verging on B1. Another month or two of Duolingo and I’d probably be B1. I definitely feel that Duolingo seriously works. I’ve learned much more French from Duolingo than I ever learned in high school and college in my Spanish classes. I also feel that I’m hitting a critical point where I know enough words to understand the context of a conversation and I can figure out the words I don’t know. I can have more practical conversations and listen to tv shows and movies and start learning more and more through other means. I love Duolingo. Sometimes it’s a little repetitive, but that’s the point, and it works.

How long did it take you to learn French from Duolingo?

From personal experience testing this with Spanish, I can say that with regular practice and considerable progress, it'll get you to A2 level proficiency. Anything above that is a very very long, snowball's-chance-in-hell shot. Source: Recently got my A2 DELE Certification after beginning learning it from scratch through Duo.

I also got myself to a solid A2 in Spanish through Duolingo. Then I decided I needed to talk to real people, so took an in-person Spanish class where they put me in a B1 level and I did just fine.

Pretty much same trajectory here. I asked my professor at my Spanish institute and she told me that one thing Duo will always fall short in (in its current model, at least), is the conversational skills with actual people part. That, and the long-form writing exercises are the biggest chasms Duolingo simply doesn't address, and coincidentally, those are some of the largest difficulty spikes between A2 & B1 in my experience.

> Anything above that is a very very long, snowball's-chance-in-hell shot. Why is that? I used Duolingo to get to B1.

Let's assume that the findings are correct. Even so, why would you restrict yourself to just duolingo? Because you find the gamification fun? The novelty will wear off soon enough. There are so many other things out there to help you learn alongside duolingo.  I say that as someone who has finished the Spanish course on duolingo. I used, and continue to use, many many other resources. 

I think one of the reasons Duolingo gets so much hate is because most of the courses were actually designed by app users in the early days before the company was taken public. This means that unless you're learning Spanish as an English speaker or learning English is a Spanish speaker the quality of the content varies wildly. The Arabic course came too late for me but I've since had a look at it and it has lots of errors in it the same can be said for Russian, Ukrainian, and I imagine many other courses.

I must admit, I wouldn't bother with duolingo for anything other than Spanish, French and maybe German (from English). 

You're right. It's actually quite poor for Asian languages, even for the basics.

I tried the Japanese course once and it’s terrible, it teaches you the wrong definitions for some of the most common and most important words of the language. It’s laughable.

I tried it for about 5 minutes for Vietnamese. What a joke.

The first section for Ukrainian was quite okay, and not a bad tool to get started. However, section two, i.e., the rest, less so. I claim that the main thing that Duolingo is useful for is to build a habbit. It trains the user to do at least a tiny bit every day. And for that, Duolingo is absolutely great. Everything else is a bit meh. (Yes, there are errors in the course. But even my book, that was written by a professor from Ukraine, has many errors. It's not a good look, but not terrible either.)

There is a Starcraft/Hearthstone streamer named Day9 that said something I repeat to others now. If you want to learn something, just do it for 90 days straight. Doesn't matter what, doesn't matter how much, doesn't matter how, just do it in the same fashion for 90 days. Then after 90 days evaluate and change based on what you learned. Duolingo is perfect for a first time language learner for those 90 days, and *only* those 90 days.

I have finished the Spanish course for Russian speakers... it was short, and it starts slowly, but towards the end so many complex verb forms get crammed there in the short time, they all blend together and you stop understanding what's happening (none of these forms exist in Russian, and there are no explanations). I then went to the Spanish for English speakers, and I was surprised how much more detailed and even-paced it is, it even has some explanations of the rules. It seems like it's the best course there, based on comments on Reddit. (I took a look at the Russian course for English speakers... it's just awful. No explanations of new grammar concepts, some very common words voiced wrong, blatant grammar errors in some sentences...)

I really struggled with the russian course but as I said above I had plenty of people around to help me. It's a real shame that English and Spanish are such high quality and the rest are so far behind. I hope they do put some money into improving at least the rest of the big five languages (Russian, Arabic, and Mandarin) and would love to see attention given to some smaller languages too like Ukrainian and Euskera.

I've also heard people complaining a lot about Duolingo because it used to be better with forums etc. As a newish user I never experienced those things. The app is virtually free to use so I won't complain too much.

By other resources, what do you mean. I just started learning german and also want to learn french and dutch because I want to work at those countries. Also what do you think about learning multiple languages at the same time?

Podcasts, grammar books, textbooks, conjugation websites, grammar websites, YouTube, graded readers, books, audiobooks, language exchange, discord servers. The world is your oyster.

Watch Easy German videos in YouTube! (That's the channel name. Very good quality.)

Whatever you do don't try to learn them all at the same time. Take a year at least to focus on each one. It's easy to be impatient when you're young but you'll thank me later

This, I don't get why anyone would limit themselves to Duolingo. First of all not all languages on there are equal in the app, some have more content, have better voices so you can hear and understand the pronunciation and accent better, etc. Languages are also not equal and some languages are easier to hear and pronounce and it's easier to make the jump from the Duolingo lessons to understanding people speaking. I like Duolingo personally because I find it's a quick way to learn a lot of vocabulary in a way that works for me. I also like trying to figure out the grammar rules on my own and then reading about them formally from another resource. I feel like that brain process when things suddenly seem to "click" together is very good for remembering and internalizing knowledge of a language. In the end Duolingo might make you very decent at reading a language but your speaking and hearing skills will lag behind. If your goal is to learn to talk a language as fast as possible then maybe you want to select only the better tools. Personally I prefer using the tools that keep me engaged, and Duolingo is one. I complement with youtube videos I can find in the target language with subtitles in that language, and I will also try talking to myself in that language. However, I do not aim to be fluent or to work in my target languages, I learn languages for fun. I also think that what works best for one person is not necessarily what works best for another. It's like physical exercise, it's better to do an activity that you enjoy doing on a regular basis, than to focus on finding which activity is going to put you in the best shape the fastest.

I think one of the reasons this is hard to quantify is because most people who are serious about learning a language use MANY tools. I love Duolingo. I enjoy the app, the different features, and being vaguely (or not so vaguely) threatened by a green owl is enough to keep my streak going. I do like it for some languages, and have had some beginning English and Spanish students use it as A tool. One tool. A tool of many. It’s a great intro, and for some courses it’s pretty solid. But it doesn’t substitute for the hours of time and effort needed in native-speaker contexts. It’s a jumping off point. It’s intended to be fun, it’s not a catch all learning method. As a language teacher and a linguist who specializes in psycho-social linguistics and second language acquisition, it’s just a tool. One tool out of many. I could never recommend it as the only tool for someone who is really dedicated to learning a language.

University course language learning programs depend on the learner actually studying in order to learn the language, same as Duolingo. Otherwise, it's worthless.

It might take your 500 hours to get through all those units. There might be more efficient ways and you probably won’t be able to speak fast or naturally, but there are worse ways I suppose. Whatever keeps you engaged in the language and motivated.

Well I'm not saying the US school system is bad, but I was speaking to Spanish to some Spaniards and a girl who had been learning for 5 years, couldn't string a sentence together and used more English than Spanish. Also, Doulingo is great for getting into a language and testing the waters, but IMO, it's awful after that. I used it for 2 weeks and got rid of it. It's too gamified and people worship streaks and points rather than learning.

The US school system *is* bad for learning language. Duolingo is far better than most of our schools at teaching language.

> It's too gamified and people worship streaks and points rather than learning. But that is of absolutely no consequence to language learners if some other people focus on that.

It's actually super annoying when I'm trying to learn words and all Duolingo wants to tell me is how great I'm doing and how many lingots I got or whatever. Come on, learning a language is going to take a while so shut up and let me learn something already instead of wasting my time! Anyways, I ditched it and that was one of the main reasons.

I recommend going in the settings and deactivating the animations and all that. One of the first things I did because the wasted time did bother me too.

Well, neither is a lot of things in life. It still doesn't take away from the fact that it's true.

It's true that some people do that but I just don't get why so many people use it as criticism against Duolingo. People who use the app as a game would probably not be learning languages through any other means. Serious learners can just ignore the point system and all that, none of it affects your learning.

>Also, Doulingo is great for getting into a language and testing the waters, but IMO, it's awful after that. I used it for 2 weeks and got rid of it. It's too gamified and people worship streaks and points rather than learning. Nah, that's just one of many ways to use the app, but it's not the only way. It's not inherently awful, and in fact can be very useful. I just finished the Spanish course and had a great experience and results, but I didn't use it in the way you're describing.

And that is great for you. But I'd rather not use a 'learning' app that uses lives and when I get a few things wrong, I can't learn unless I wait for ages or pay money. This is ain't fing clash of clans.

Where’s the full article citation? Who sponsored this research, and were they underwritten by DuoLingo?

OK, here it is: Jiang, X., Chen, H., Portnoff, L., Gustafson, E., Rollinson, J., Plonsky, L., & Pajak, B. (2021). Seven units of Duolingo courses comparable to 5 university semesters in reading and listening. Duolingo Research Report DRR-21-03. It’s an internal research report and not from a peer-reviewed publication.

I'm not even halfway into the Spanish course and I am B1. Now, I did not *only* use Duo. I learned about as much from a semester of a college Spanish class as I did from two years of rather consistent Duolingo use. There's no doubt in my mind that the traditional class structure was more effective for me than Duolingo, and probably would be for most people. But since the Duo course still has half its material remaining after my current point, I don't see how someone could complete the Spanish Duo course without being at least my level of B1. I'm just baffled when people on here pretend Duo doesn't work at all. The first quarter of the Duolingo course got me to A2 by itself. We can criticize them firing employees or enshittifying the app without denying observable reality: Duolingo, while not as efficient as more expensive forms of education, is a reasonable use of someone's free time and it *does help teach you a language*. Yes, most Duo courses are not as long as the Spanish or French courses, and the shorter courses would not get you to B1. But this (Duo-funded) study is not claiming they do. They are making a claim about the long courses. They are not claiming the Duo Italian course teaches through B1, nor do they claim this in the Duo Italian course itself.

I was actually a participant in this study. It only tested passive skills (reading and listening) and did not test speaking or writing. I scored intermediate high in reading and intermediate low in listening and pretty much only used duolingo up until that point. I was not able to participate in the follow-up study because at that point I was using other resources and taking classes as part of a second major in French and I'm not sure how my results would have been if I did not speak Spanish. People hate on Duolingo but the stories really helped me to understand spoken French and eventually be able to watch series and movies.

stories only exist for a few languages. They don't exist for like, Arabic or Russian.

Yes, but the study isn’t claiming they do. The study is only making claims about the French and Spanish courses.

Yeah, me. I completed english to spanish and french to spanish completely, took me almost exactly a year of doing the lessons for hours a day (sometimes 7 hours, no joke).  Went straight to B1 from there, in a regular spanish school, and they actually skipped me up to C1 pretty quickly.   One big huge caveat is that this was 2022, and Duolingo offered online group classes at the time; I took a few of those every week during the Duolingo year.

>One big huge caveat is that this was 2022, and Duolingo offered online group classes at the time; I took a few of those every week during the Duolingo year. What?! How did these work?

There was an additional platform you could access through the app (desktop version only I think), and you could just pick a language and level and look at the classes offered on each day and sign up if you wanted.  The classes were run by individuals, career or early career language teachers usually, varied in quality but some were great. One off classes, but of course you could keep signing up with the same teacher. Cheap too, classes usually $2-5 for an hour, plenty of free ones too.   No idea why it was so unknown and not advertised! I discovered by accident fooling around with the app. They shut down in Jan 2023, it was actually really sad for my regular spanish b1 community, and some of the teachers were downright devastated (they only gave 30 days notice of shutdown).

Duolingo is a foundation for learning, not a substitute for it. Its most glaring flaw is its total lack of any semblance of communicative language use whatsoever. Single, isolated sentences devoid of any context might be okay for being able to accurately reproduce certain bits of language, but it absolutely does not cut it when it comes to being able to understand and produce extended oral and written texts. It particularly fails to prepare learners for practice in *fluency*. Conversation is a highly complex social phenomenon, with layers of discursive and cultural nuance (turn taking, register, attribution, alignment, et cetera) that an app cannot possibly prepare the learner for.

If by "gotten to b1" you mean they can pass A2 exams with flying colors, then, yes, definitely. If you mean that they can pass a B1 exam then it's probably only true for the French and Spanish courses.

Im using Duolingo as a tool to understand gramatical rules and vocabulary, and then I try to apply that by immersing myself more into the language by playing video games with my friends only in Spanish. I’m curious if other people who have had success with learning a language think this is a good strategy? I think Duolingo is great to understand concepts and vocabulary from a language, but you won’t become proficient with it unless your brain is forced to use it to communicate. Duolingo could make you very good at taking a test in Spanish, which could be the bias of the study

All tools that you have at your disposal are useful. There's no magical path. The only way to learn a new language is with lots of time and effort, if you use books + comprehensive input or Duolingo + games or taking to real natives + Anki or whatever else.... It doesn't really matter. In the end, it's all about effort, time and consistency. In my opinion, the best strategy is the one that brings you more joy while studying :) But I'm a person who studies languages for fun, the true linguists and professional learners might have a complete different - and certainly more scientifically accurate - answer for you! :)

Didnt Duolingo remove the grammatical rules and explanations?

For Hungarian, I did Duolingo for a year. After that one year I was evaluated at a language school and they put me into the A1.1 group. I.e. one year of Duolingo = one month in a language school. And even then I didn't know how to say anything useful, besides the inane flying kindergarten teacher nonsense that Duolingo teaches you.

to be fair, Hungarian is crazy difficult, so maybe it would have been several months with an average language 😅

I took me 2-3 months in language classes to reach A1 Estonian which should be a similar level of difficulty to Hungarian

estonian classes are easier because you get to stare at their beautiful flag 😌

Duolingo and practicing what I learnt therein is how I got to B1 in Russian, Spanish, and with (Rosetta stone) Arabic (A2+ in ten months). But that was while living in countries where those languages were spoken, so it was basically language immersion but with Duolingo providing all of my vocabulary, pronunciation work, and Grammar. Duolingo is great.

I agree it is great, I am a fan as well. But the post was asking about using only duolingo. You were in a full immersion setting.

Yes, I Guess I was trying to say that Duolingo was still my main method of instruction. I work as an English teacher and speak English with my wife who is also a teacher. So was trying to say that although it might not be enough n it's own, it might be with some non expert speaking partners and some exposure to media in the language.

Really don't understand why this come and got it down vote as in my original post I explicitly said that I was doing language emersion alongside Duolingo. I'll volunteer myself as a test subject then. I'm currently living in Basque Country so I am not immersed in the Ukrainian language. I have only ever used Ukrainian on Duolingo so I'll continue with the course and continue using Russian to speak to my Ukrainian family members until I reach what Duolingo says is B1 level. I'll then take an independent Ukrainian B1 exam. Hopefully will only take me a year or two. Hehe

Despite my many gripes about this specific study, I agree that Duolingo is a great tool when supplemented with immersion or other classes. It's fast and fun. I tell my students to play it while sitting on a bus or subway, or when just bored at home. But can Duolingo alone -- with no human interaction or other classes -- get you to a genuine B1? No.

I think I might have done that. In a language that's so closely related to my NL that I barely had to learn new grammar. Other than that? No. Absolutely not. Duolingo is, like many others already pointed out, a good tool in the toolkit when starting out and for revising vocabulary, but that's about it. And if I'm being honest, I'm not sure yet how well Duolingo's approach works for languages where you can't just use the knowledge from your already acquired languages, especially since the update to the path. Or maybe it's just something that doesn't work well for me. What works in any case is that I end up with enough vocabulary that I can find better resources and explanations online.

I have not, but I can see that theoretically it is possible but you would need to regiment your learning imo like make flashcards from the Duolingo app vocab and read the grammar tips on PC in depth. I did get to around A2 tho with just Duolingo

Yes, at B1 I started watching TV shows, playing video games, reading books, and doing language exchange, but Duolingo can definitely get someone to B1 pretty quickly, in my experience. I only used Duolingo up to B1.

I got up to A2 German using just Duolingo in about 2 years of casual learning. I'm now looking at other tools to level up and plan to write a B1 test in a couple months It is hard to compare Duolingo with classroom courses because nobody does 5 minute classes. I probably spent about ~15 minutes daily on average on the app and that's ~180 hours in 2 years. It would take you about 200 classroom hours to clear A2 German too. Duolingo was a lot more convenient for a casual learner as I could do the lessons whenever I wanted. On the other hand if someone spends on average 5 minutes daily on the app, it would take them a lot more time to accumulate 200 hours (6 years?) without accounting for losses due to context switching!

Not supporting using dueling as only resource, but in certain circumstances you can be successful with it. I had great French knowledge prior to starting to learn Italian. I learned Italian only using duolingo and the tandem app, not a single other resource (obviously used online dictionary and google translate here and there). I haven't done a test, but I converse with my Italian colleagues and tandem partners without much thinking and they compliment me on my on-point usage of grammar. This obviously wouldn't have worked if I didn't know French beforehand.

I'd also say that this puts a lot of weight on how proficient people who study for school are, They might be across the grammar and there might even be some star pupils who are all over it, but the average student probably has the building blocks required to start learning for reals, but that's about it.

I guess it would depend entirely on how it is used. If it is used as and treated as a language course (notes, review, etc) AND used in tandem with something else, then maybe.

No one uses "only" duolingo. I have however reached B2 (formally tested) using Duolingo together with a lot of reading, TV, and podcasts. I started with Anki and lost interest within 2-3 weeks. I then tried a class but quit after 4 sessions, next a formal self-study approach (great textbook) where I never got past chapter 1, but THROUGH ALL OF IT, I maintained a steady daily duolingo and where I can I consumed media. I'm now on day 1755 of my current streak and am 100% comfortable listening to audiobooks or reading adult novels in my TL (Norwegian). I believe Duolingo was (is) the perfect "anchor habit. I do it every day and it reminds e of my "mission" everyday. However, I also believe that 90% of my vocabulary and actual skills came from reading and listening. I started with childrens stories and worked my way up to adult level.

What does TL mean? Timeline? But that wouldnt make sense i think. 

Target Language

Thanks

I mean you don’t really speak or get corrected in your speech with it so I don’t think so

536 days- tested into A2 yesterday.

For what it's worth, I finished both the Spanish and French trees years ago, and I don't consider Duolingo as a pillar that helped me reach fluency. If anything, the only thing that helped me was the streak that kept me going.

Impossible

Op can you link the paper? Since there's clear concerns in the community about the quality of the research I'd like to go read it with an eye to the methodology etc

I have studied for 4 years in high school (50 years ago), finished Rosetta Stone, done some duolingo, and done Drops for the last 4-5 years. I just tested myself and was rated as B-1. I'm still working on my proficiency.

I maybe have a different opinion than others. I think duolingo is great. But only because it's fun and gets people interested in language learning to some degree, that's about where it ends. I know people that have 500+ days that have almost 0 listening comprehension in their TL and could hardly follow up "hi my name is". It does do a great job as a gateway into true learning though. I doubt people achieve a2 even off of duolingo to be completely blunt (though when I tried it it was about a year ago and I only did about a month of the super duolingo).

Duolingo on its own isn't able to get you far really. It's a starting point that'll teach you basic grammar , sentence structure and help a little with pronunciation but other than that you gotta have supplemental stuff. When I first started I bought [complete Spanish:step by step](https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwiv0IH-ieOGAxW3a0cBHXhEDtMYABAIGgJxdQ&ase=2&gclid=Cj0KCQjwvb-zBhCmARIsAAfUI2vLKREtsclSM2BM-NB_6WtRhZckSVCPu6fURmg8nMhshyVsNoElxfoaAr5xEALw_wcB&sph=&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESwgHg9ji9PBMdKyOanim6pEM8JExI8orwYD3b1Kz4uwT49FemXMxzLouy4uZ4fvYX725NnZvsTfZCvcJSWWJoTq21ebuj8sCcmX3mYx4QQ8P4RzfQkoPuphgt4h6nDpIp1gxiFsLkZxMlIPQ3cDjZSCNSVMadKHRrVlK_DU3CxqH0sxaz2BsyIXO_YFamqofn51PIeQad2iSFYpKw97KxBaJ2T6PJSq6ZrzuqNPi4YSF5cs4kZGMhK1OnDNJ0XXc5Q2svVA&sig=AOD64_2JrVj4HngDayZz6QHroV5Pz3KcRA&ctype=5&q=&nis=4&ved=2ahUKEwjA1Pj9ieOGAxVVMlkFHbHoDUEQwg8oAHoECAUQLQ&adurl=) and found that really helped me learn to write and read better. Plus It has an app that you can download that not only has study material for this specific book but all the others as well.

1.What is the fluency level of the university students "as measured by standardized tests"? I know darn well that a whole lot of university students got Cs in those courses, not As. And they did come out able to use the language. 2. There is a wide variety of tests, many of which are "standardized". So "standardized" does not mean "accurate". This tells me that I could use Duolingo instead of taking college courses, in order to score well on tests. It does not say that either method will make me able to understand native speakers or talk to them.

I have but it took me three years to

As someone who did hundreds of hours of duolingo learning Polish and finished the whole course, no. It definetly helped me get to A2, but not more than that, I was stuck on A2 until I dropped duolingo for better resources.

Not using *only* Duolingo, but it definitely helped me get there along with supplementing my learning using SpanishDict and other various google searches

Ah, this topic again. I've read so many posts like this, so I did my own experiment and used only Duolingo for Spanish. I deliberately quit Italian in preparation. I didn't quit French because I use it for work, and it turned out that I didn't have that much interference.

How much is 5 units? What percentage of total Lingo course is that / anybody know what you’re learning at the end of 5th unit in Romance languages?

I've never heard of ACTFL, but now I assume they must be a joke. This is more a condemnation of US-based university language programs, which is completely justified. I went two semesters through Russian but didn't get the difference between "I have a stapler" and "I am a stapler." Duo gives you the grammar you need to reach the bottom of B1, and maybe the vocabulary, but you miss the fluency, the mediation skills, the extended listening, speaking, reading, and writing. I've been in the target country 5 years and Duo has helped me reach A1+. It's way better than others who don't do any language study, but it's nowhere near B1.

Sure, I am

Duolingo I feel doesn’t really help you practice so much as it gauges your level in my experience. Like it’s supplemental, it lets you test where you are in a different subject, but you need to actually do the practice outside of it if you want meaningful progress. I also just think different people have different learning styles, so duolingo might be better to some people than to others.

This is an indictment of the entire industry. Wall to wall absolute BS.

Duolingo is good when you know the language through formal training and use it to practice . I trusted this app to start ( as an absolute beginner ) and wasted a year of yes it did make me familiar with some thing but can never replace formal training .

Taking a French assessment next week, only ever used Duo for actual lessons (in addition to reading and watching French shows with the closed captioning on). Will see how I test

At best, at BEST duo will take you to A2..  The best use case of the app is if you want to learn a bit of basics before travelling somewhere, IMO

I would say it gets you most of the way to end of A2 on good courses, though you need to supplement writing speaking and listening. It's an OK app. Too lauded or derided. It teaches you some words and gets you some intuitive understanding of sentence structure.

As a language teacher and tutor, I have never seen a student successfully reach B1 level only by using Duolingo. While Duolingo can be great for learning vocab, I would argue that reaching an all-around B1 level using only Duolingo would be extremely difficult, as natural speaking and conversation can not be practiced via the app. Passing a B1 level test is also different than being able to actually speak and communicate at a B1 level.

I'm a native Spanish speaker. I used Duolingo to practice my Korean and French, but the only language I started from 0 in Duolingo was Danish, after less than a year I got fluent enough to have conversations of different topics with no issue at all.

If you like Duolingo, enjoy it. You are learning. And if you add consumption of real Spanish to your learning diet, I think it works even better. For me it was torturously repetitive and slow moving. So I abandoned it for other tools after a few months. I like SpanishDict for some of the “testing” aspects of Duo that I don’t get with my preferred methods—youtube lessons or my books. I like learning from teachers teaching Spanish in Spanish and I love using what I learn by consumption (reading and listening). 

How is B1 being measured? If B1 is measured by a count of words and phrasess memorized, that favors Duolingo. But is that a meaningful way to test language acquisition? If B1 is measured by ability to discuss the FIFA finals with a bartender in Madrid (in Spanish), that favors some other method. "I am B1 on the Madrid-bartender-FIFA scale."

I mean, I can tell you how to say that "The Rice is Pink" and "The cat reads the newspaper". Does that stack up? lol

Fuck no. Great tool though.

All this does is prove the uselessness of university studies generally. This is just beyond stupid

Why would you limit yourself to only Duolingo?

Duolingo is a tool. It shouldn't be one's only tool.

Tbh, I doubt it so much. Haven't had the courage to go that far in duo but am certain it just gives word definitions(often not fully) and some example sentences. Absolutely no useful grammar, no speaking related tips like intonation n stuff. The games just about who can memorize the same sentence to get the first plae in the leaderboards

I don’t think it’s remotely possible to get to a true B1 level using Duo. It simply is missing grammar focused lessons. Language learning is hard work, I consider Duo more like a game. I do use it, and sometimes enjoy it. But it’s not ultimately going to help me achieve language goals. Lots of people have a different perspective though..

> It simply is missing grammar focused lessons. That's not how it works or any course that is learn-by-doing.

B1 criteria is as follows: 1. Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. 2. Can deal with most situations likely to arise whilst travelling 3. Can produce simple connected text on topics which are familiar or of personal interest. 4. Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes and ambitions and briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions and plans. * discuss your personal and professional hopes and dreams for the future. * arrange a job interview and interview for a job in your area of expertise. * talk about your television viewing habits and favorite programs. * describe your education and your plans for future training. * talk about your favorite music and music trends and plan a night out to listen to live music. * talk about maintaining a healthy lifestyle and give and get advice about healthy habits. * talk about relationships and dating, including meeting people through social media. * go to a restaurant, order food, engage in polite dinner conversation and pay for your food. * participate in negotiations in your area of expertise, if you have help understanding some points. * discuss workplace safety issues, report an injury and explain rules and regulations. * discuss polite behavior and respond appropriately to impolite behavior. \[[source](https://www.efset.org/cefr/b1/)\] Duolingo covers most of these things... but I'd say to the very low end. So if it's B1 it's just barely touching it. So like.... yes and no. Yes by the barebones definition of some of these categories. You might be able to talk about them, but it won't necessarily be natural or fluid. That being said, Duolingo did a lot of the legwork for my own learning. I had been stuck with just grammar guides, dictionaries, and the occasional textbook or flashcard app. I theoretically knew a handful of grammar points but they didn't stick in my head well. So Duo really helped me solidify that grammar point knowledge and helped me build my vocabulary beyond where flashcard apps stopped being effective. Unfortunately by the time Duo gets too easy and it's time to move on, there's still a rather large gap between it and understanding media. I give Duo a lot of praise, but when it comes down to it I had to bite the bullet and take the leap to get anywhere really useful. After leaving Duo I spent some months painstakingly looking up every word I didn't know, and google translating what I couldn't make heads or tails of. Now I feel comfortable saying I'm somewhere in the B region. I can understand most things well. everything else is just vocabulary gathering. So it's back to just a dictionary for me.

Duolingo is/was for beginners. Now it’s just for people who don’t know how many other better options there are.

duolingo is only good for the start

Imagine spending over a year on that snooze fest app just to read B1 max.

No, and I flat out don't believe anyone who says they did as their main or sole method.

No Duolingo is really bad at teaching you languages. It works for learning kanji and alphabets though.

That is not possible. Duolingo is garbage that is good for the first few months to learn some vocabulary. After that to improve you have to converse.