Did you consider a lexically organized syllabus or a mix of the two?

Do you intend to publish a syllabus after you finish?

My last word here on this subject (I promise!) is that I hope that any structure which you may overlay eventually will be nicely flexible and fluid and intuitive (even fuzzy), which reflects so much of what users love about CPOD/ Praxis. Thank you so much…

We’re very much aware of the concerns you raise and the possible ways to solve the problems created for some users by a lack of formal structure. This isn’t an issue we plan to ignore forever (nor can we afford to). In fact, we’re already working on the solution.

As Standuke says, when you’re modular, you can always overlay structure, but you can’t go the other way. So we have certainly not backed ourselves into a corner or anything like that.

The plan, which was initiated approximately 2 years ago, is to link every lesson to discrete grammar points in the grammar guide. Once we complete this, we will have an immensely powerful relational database covering our lesson content and grammar points. That will allow us to do all kinds of very interesting things (and grammar points in PDFs are among the simplest).

Our biggest problem is that we’ve been slow to realize this vision, but we have definitely not given up, nor have we lost the opportunity to do it.

It isn’t that “they” can’t do it. They can.

It isn’t that they have completely ignored demorganization because they haven’t. Structure is embedded quite deep in the form of control on complexity.

Certainly there is a concern that when you authorize a set linear path you might end up subtly devaluing the shows that aren’t along the path.

But more to the point, once a set path is established you lose a lot of flexibility to the system you create. Having flexibility making it possible to innovate.

And with a plan you attract all sorts of criticism. Right now C-pod is bullet proof. They can be all things to all people.

Very clever! Why upset the apple cart with a clear path?

But you are right, at some point in the future they will need to create some paths.

Why? Because knowledgable people will demand and that they make the best use of their study time. Language is not completely chaotic. It has order and there are slower and faster ways through the order. In the end, in the name of efficiency, I suspect some paths will appear.

For example, surely it is possible to have a modular kind of linear learning, where some modules do not consist of a single podcast or lesson, but are actually modules made up of a handful of serialized lessons which build upon each other in a useful, fun and intelligent way.

I like solutions which are simple and intuitive! And to be honest, I don’t think it would be a bad thing if the huge database of content were to be — lovingly and gently –given some new street signs here and there.

In theory, having nearly 300 Newbie lessons to choose from sounds perfect for learning “on your terms”. But how easy or intuitive is it to make a truly individual and self-directed selection from the menu, when you’d have to click through dozens of pages simply to know what’s on the menu? Especially if the user may not be that familiar with the subject he is trying to study. I guess that is the IP challenge… but it’s also about understanding human intuition.

The Glossary helps, but it is like expecting a diner in the restaurant to tell the waiter what he wants. I like the kind of restaurant where the menu is written so well that the diner is severely tempted by many things but can tell what he or she will like, without being too overwhelmed. Thanks again for the air-time.

All it would take is for just ONE American college to give credit for a package of Chinesepod lessons with the requisite testing to convince a whole slew of other colleges to eventually jump on board, especially if a Uni. could make some money by affixing their stamp of approval to the package.

Sure there one be a need for some “linear” follow through, but that would be easy to piece together. The people at C-POD have been working with a “deep” syllabus for some time now.

For me the interesting question isn’t how but why. The “how” of piecing together and publishing a college course can’t be a high barrier at this point.

I feel one interesting question with classroom teaching is does C-Pod do strong blended learning or stick chiefly with on-line transmission? If strong blended learning is offered, is the course material provided to outside teachers or do they keep it all in-house?

I see some real I.P. management issues here and the brilliant thing about the present model is that they can thrive using an open source, massive content model. Go linear and you diminish the need for a huge database of content.

This leads me to wonder, are open source models incompatible with linear, fixed approaches?

Ken, I’ve been looking at the architecture of the CPOD site since my post, and I wish to propose a simple fix for the “not knowing what you don’t know”-aspect of non-linear learning:

I’ve noticed that the titles of the QingWens — as well as the lessons themselves, of course — are packed with excellent information about key features of Chinese grammar and syntax.

Do you see some value in providing a very simple list of all the QW titles somewhere? Just the titles, all in one page. Really, the simplest kind of menu. At the moment, a user would have to click through six pages merely to see what the QWs have covered.

It is very likely that all of the students described by standuke above, who are studying Chinese for school credit, are dealing with exactly the kinds of issues addressed by your QW. Ken, I’m willing to bet that all they need to see is a complete list of the QW titles, in order to be hooked. Thanks!

Really, at the rate ChinesePod is generating lessons it seems like the next logical step is to become a place for ambitious high school/college students to go to prep for, or pass out of (expensive) introductory language courses at the university level. I have the feeling ChinesePod is close to being able to lay claim to being ‘better than college’, but it would help if students were provided with an academic framework to allow them to apply what they learn to accumulating college credits. College credits are, after all, the elephant in the room when one talks about ‘context’ and learning (mobile or otherwise). It might make be necessary to create a separate ‘channel’ or ‘group’ for grade-grubbers so the current look and feel of ChinesePod isn’t degraded by ‘linear’ people who are just thinking in terms of ‘how do I pass the next test?’, but it still would make sense to make a place for them.

Another way to make the dreaded “canon” less dreaded, is to consider covering some of the more difficult grammar points in a serialized form. That is, over a few lessons which are meant to be studied as a series. At the moment, your CPOD series are hugely popular, but they are only linked by the storyline and characters. I think that a “Conquer 是 。。。的”series with Zhangliang and Lili”series might be popular…
One very useful feature of linear learning, which is difficult to harness in a totally non-linear system is: Spiral learning. I am one of those users following the CPOD lessons as they come out , and past lessons in order of publication, and I am happy to detect quite a lot of “spiral learning” being worked into the more recent lessons by your wonderful team. Thanks so much for that!
Ken, thank you for putting up with this super-long post. I’m sorry to hijack your thread in this way, and thank you sincerely for this “air-time”.