world language laboratory

Rosetta Stone: A Review

Filed Under Best Bytes, Chinese, French, German, Latin, Spanish, Tools, World Languages

Yesterday, we had the pleasure of viewing a presentation by a Rosetta Stone representative. He graciously gave the department several days to trial several different languages (Spanish, French, German, Italian, Chinese, Portguese, Irish, Hebrew, Arabic) and then came yesterday to show us how the online Classroom version works. Here are some of our impressions:

**PROS**

1. Rosetta Stone provides instantaneous feedback about pronunciation and gives students an opportunity to practice over and over again until they get it right. We don’t know of another program that has the feature of analyzing whether your oral communication is actually communicative. This is something that a human being (teacher) can’t do in the classroom in real time. And it’s something that would be costly for families to do with a tutor.

2. The pictures are clear, colorful, and multicultural.

3. Version 3 has a good mix of activities (listening, reading, typing, speaking) that would keep students engaged.

4. No English is used to explain language. It’s instant immersion and theoretically the brain will begin to “think” in the target language, if all you are seeing are visual prompts.

5. Having a Rosetta Stone site license would allow students to branch out into other languages that they are interested in (e.g. Italian), practice their pronunciation for music classes (e.g. French), or simply brush up on languages that they are no longer studying at school.

6. Rosetta Stone is very good for the independent language learner who is less comfortable venturing a guess out loud in the classroom and would prefer to make mistakes and get it right in front of a computer first.

7. The Rosetta Stone manager would allow teachers to create custom lesson paths using pre-existing language activities, tailored to fit the needs of individual students or groups of students within a classroom. There is also an easy way to see how much time students are spending with the software.

**CONS**

1. Teachers cannot upload their own images and sound prompts to create lessons that are more precisely focused on existing vocabulary lists used in our curriculum. This may be a feature in the future (we hope so!), because it would give teachers ultimate control. Even better, I’d like to see *students* creating their own vocabulary sets (like we do in iFlash) and then reviewing them, Rosetta Stone-style, until they have them down pat. There are lists of course content for each of the different languages that can aid teachers in determining how applicable the content might be to their classes.

2. Rosetta Stone does not approach the AP level. It ends with about 3rd year language skills in high school. It would be great if it had more advanced levels, but the company’s first goal is to get all 30 languages upgraded to Version 3 by middle of 2009.

3. Rosetta Stone Version 3 can be repetitive and boring. There is no easy way to jump ahead without knowing exactly what kind of new content you could be missing. The “Adaptive Recall” feature, which is supposed to remember which exercises you had trouble with and bring them back periodically, might be good in theory, but I think most language learners are going to want to see new content at a faster rate rather than constantly reviewing old content.

4. Rosetta Stone does not allow for student interaction either in the classroom or with other classrooms.

5. The speech recognition may not cover enough of a range of variation in pronunciation. Sometimes it does not recognize “correct” pronunciation as correct, and while an adult learner might just shrug their shoulders and move on to the next activity, that could be really frustrating to a student who wants to get it right.

6. There is no direct explanation or even review of grammar points. Students would need to get that support elsewhere, from sites like BBC Languages or teacher websites.

7. The Chinese program sometimes uses pinyin in the place of the original Chinese characters. They should always be used together.

8. The price tag. Rosetta Stone prices their licenses based on total student population, not on actual users. For our school (1700 students or so), the cost per year would be $20,000. This works out to about $10 - 25/student. Not all students would use the software, so all parents would be paying an extra $25 / year for the privilege. The good news is that accounts not being used by students can be used by other members of the Lab Schools community, which would give family members, faculty, and staff a chance to dabble in many different languages on their own time.

To summarize, while the Rosetta Stone approach does have its limitations, we think that having this resource at our disposal would most certainly increase students’ exposure to different languages, would give teachers another way of differentiating instruction, and would mark the Lab Schools as a community that is committed to connecting and communicating with a multilingual, multicultural world. I think the opportunity for students to learn languages on their own would be a terrific preparation for college-level language classes. And it would be a valuable support to students who prefer to learn by themselves and at their own pace.

We’d be most interested to hear from the opinions of our parents about this software. Feel free to leave your comments below.