Should Qing Wen's sometimes be a bit harder?

xiaophil
February 21, 2010, 04:52 PM posted in General Discussion

Hey guys, I've got a question.  Do y'all think it's about time for some of the Qing Wens to be more in the intermediate range or higher?  I mean, I learn something from almost every QW lesson, so don't think I'm upset.  I just feel they are always aimed at the elementary level, and I'm not so sure it has to be that way.  Anybody agree?  Disagree?  Any other thoughts?

Profile picture
bellaiza
February 21, 2010, 05:06 PM

Agreed. There could be some more difficult ones.

Profile picture
xiaophil

I just noticed you rarely comment. What an honor! haha

Profile picture
changye
February 22, 2010, 10:59 AM

Hi go_manly

Well said. I agree with you.

Profile picture
BEBC
February 21, 2010, 05:32 PM

I absolutely agree, xiaophil ! Our problems with the use of 得 and 地 is a case in point. I looked at QW #106 on the use of 得, and I found it extremely basic (granted, it was not covering 得vs地, but even so ....).

Of the QWs 131-138, I only have downloads of #131 and #132 ( I'm not currently subscribed ) and I wouldn't say that they are at a high enough level for an Intermediate learner.If some QWs are now covering grammar at a higher level, it would be useful to have them marked as 'Intermed'/'Upper Intermed' etc.  I must say that every QW I have looked at so far is pretty basic, and I can't get much new out of them even though I'm not very advanced in my studies.

Profile picture
BEBC

I just looked at #131 and #132 again, and apart from some of the vocabulary, I don't think there's anything there which an Ele couldn't handle : In #132 we just get a definition of 舍不得 and examples of it's use with verbs and nouns. In #131 we learn that 难道 is a marker used usually with 吗 type questions. It would have been interesting to have had it spelled out to us why two of the example sentences do not end in 吗 despite John telling us that all the examples end in 吗。

( In the community discussion the use of 吗 is said to be optional, so 难道 is only used with 吗-TYPE questions ) Anyway, I digress.....

Profile picture
xiaophil

I kind of think maybe those lessons were marked intermediate due to them being used slightly less frequently than previous discussed points in other lessons, and not because they are particularly more difficult. Maybe that's just me, though.

Profile picture
BEBC
February 21, 2010, 06:11 PM

I just looked at #131 and #132 again, and apart from some of the vocabulary, I don't think there's anything there which an Ele couldn't handle : In #132 we just get a definition of 舍不得 and examples of it's use with verbs and nouns. In #131 we learn that 难道 is a marker used usually with 吗 type questions. It would have been interesting to have had it spelled out to us why two of the example sentences do not end in 吗 despite John telling us that all the examples end in 吗。

( In the community discussion the use of 吗 is said to be optional, so 难道 is only used with 吗-TYPE questions ) Anyway, I digress.....

Profile picture
bababardwan
February 21, 2010, 11:00 PM

I agree mate,but I get the feeling that CPod have been heading that way anyway and it's coming.I think the approach to QW has been a little different to the weekly Newbie to Media lessons that come out each week.After all,there is only one QW per week and not 5 [one at each level like there are with the other lessons],so I think in the case of QW they have pretty much been building it up from a basic level.Though past QW's weren't rated in level until very recently I think it's safe to assume that they were pretty much newbie to ellie level in the main and only recently as zhenlijiang has pointed out have quite a lot of them been [rated at least ] as Intermediate.I suppose with grammar/QW type questions it's important to have a solid foundation of the basics.But yeah,I can't wait until more grammar structures are explored in QW at a higher Intermediate and above level. :)

ps. On a personal note,one of my goals this year is to go through the QW archive as a priority [over and above any other archive lessons which realistically I'm not going to have time to do].I wonder as we strike higher level QW's how much there is going to be an assumption of a basic level of knowledge that we could have gleaned from previous QW's.I'm not saying that QW and CPod's approach shouldn't continue to be modular though,I just personally think it's an area I should probably start to brush up on.

Profile picture
xiaophil

I feel that maybe at this point your level is high enough that just a look at the pdf's would suffice.

Profile picture
BEBC

Babar: I hope your feeling is right, old pal. As I said, even those two QWs said to be Intermediate seem too elementary to me, and I would class my own ability as transitional between Elementary and Intermediate in terms of CPod's schema of levels. When I look at other grammar resources for Intermediate learners they are pitched at a significantly higher level than those two lessons, but the content is not out of reach for someone at my level.

In one sense it makes sense for CPod to introduce grammar in the QW series at the basic level and increase the difficulty, as you said. It also makes sense that CPod is probably catering to the majority of it's subscribers by not having pursued grammar in QW in greater depth; but the lessons themselves do not follow a progressive format -there are, and have been for a long time, a heck of a lot of Intermediate > Advanced lessons, not to mention Media etc, whilst QW has remained around the Newbie/Elementary level.

I think the QW format is ideal for a more in depth look at grammar. Points or structures which require more time could be covered in a series or in longer lessons. I'm not a grammar 'nut' - I do think that structures etc 'sink in' with repeated exposure, but there are times ( not infrequent ) when I need explanations; explanation directs my attention

and enables further 'unconscious' assimilation of material at a higher level in a sort of dialectical process. The audio input of CPod would be a fantastic way to reinforce what I am already trying to learn through the dry text-book method. My own method at the moment is to concentrate on a single grammar point for a couple of weeks and identify and study examples of it in my reading.

By the way, I think xiaophil is probably right about what you should do - if I can handle a higher level of grammar I'm sure that you can; we don't have to know everything before we take one step further.

加油!

Profile picture
xiaophil
February 21, 2010, 11:52 PM

Hmmm, I honestly didn't notice that they rate them. In that case, I would say, yeah, how about some upper-intermediate lessons and higher.

Profile picture
xiaophil
February 22, 2010, 12:18 AM

I feel that maybe at this point your level is high enough that just a look at the pdf's would suffice.

Profile picture
xiaophil
February 22, 2010, 12:20 AM

I just noticed you rarely comment. What an honor! haha

Profile picture
zhenlijiang
February 21, 2010, 05:14 PM

Hey I guess you're saying, should some of them be more Upper Inter to Advanced? Because quite a few are already Intermediate. Looking just at the QWs published this year (131 to 138), CPod says all except the latest, How to Start a Conversation With Chinese People (Ele), are Intermediate in difficulty.

Profile picture
xiaophil

Hmmm, I honestly didn't notice that they rate them. In that case, I would say, yeah, how about some upper-intermediate lessons and higher.

Profile picture
zhenlijiang

Well I do know you're talking about content (the level of questions addressed), not labeling, but just wanted to point that out.

The most basic grammar points can feel like trouble for us because we're learners who don't have the repeated experience (= confidence) of native speakers; we get the urge to ask and feel all clear on questions that would never occur to native speakers. And the most basic grammar points are difficult for native speakers to explain thoroughly and clearly.

Maybe a new (I'm not sure that what we're talking about here is necessarily higher-level grammar. I think that we're talking about a place for Intermediate - Advanced learners to discuss more "advanced" questions on grammar points) grammar show would be a good idea.

If CPod feels that QW can accommodate such needs, or can be re-positioned to do so, that would be cool with me.

Profile picture
changye

I agree with zhenlijiang. What I want to see most is an elementary QW that can be an eye-opener even for intermediate/advanced learners.Yeah, I know it's not so easy to make out this kind of QW.

Profile picture
BEBC
February 22, 2010, 06:35 AM

Babar: I hope your feeling is right, old pal. As I said, even those two QWs said to be Intermediate seem too elementary to me, and I would class my own ability as transitional between Elementary and Intermediate in terms of CPod's schema of levels. When I look at other grammar resources for Intermediate learners they are pitched at a significantly higher level than those two lessons, but the content is not out of reach for someone at my level.

In one sense it makes sense for CPod to introduce grammar in the QW series at the basic level and increase the difficulty, as you said. It also makes sense that CPod is probably catering to the majority of it's subscribers by not having pursued grammar in QW in greater depth; but the lessons themselves do not follow a progressive format -there are, and have been for a long time, a heck of a lot of Intermediate > Advanced lessons, not to mention Media etc, whilst QW has remained around the Newbie/Elementary level.

I think the QW format is ideal for a more in depth look at grammar. Points or structures which require more time could be covered in a series or in longer lessons. I'm not a grammar 'nut' - I do think that structures etc 'sink in' with repeated exposure, but there are times ( not infrequent ) when I need explanations; explanation directs my attention

and enables further 'unconscious' assimilation of material at a higher level in a sort of dialectical process. The audio input of CPod would be a fantastic way to reinforce what I am already trying to learn through the dry text-book method. My own method at the moment is to concentrate on a single grammar point for a couple of weeks and identify and study examples of it in my reading.

By the way, I think xiaophil is probably right about what you should do - if I can handle a higher level of grammar I'm sure that you can; we don't have to know everything before we take one step further.

加油!

Profile picture
WillBuckingham
February 22, 2010, 08:07 AM

I'd be up for a few more demanding QW episodes. But I also wonder if QW-related exercises might help in terms of exploring the grammatical patterns in the lessons (although they might be time-intensive to implement).

Profile picture
BEBC

How do, thinkbuddy. A closer relationship between different parts of the CPod universe would really suit me. The easiest way might be to have pointers to lessons which include examples of patterns showcased in QW; then I wouldn't have to search around for examples in action ( which is time consuming for me, haha! )

Profile picture
BEBC
February 22, 2010, 08:28 AM

How do, thinkbuddy. A closer relationship between different parts of the CPod universe would really suit me. The easiest way might be to have pointers to lessons which include examples of patterns showcased in QW; then I wouldn't have to search around for examples in action ( which is time consuming for me, haha! )

Profile picture
chunjie2010
February 22, 2010, 08:55 AM

Disagree. But my vote won't count anyway, because it seems I am the minority here...

Profile picture
BEBC

Hi chunjie. We're not so much taking a vote as talking around a topic. Why do you think QWs should stay as they are ?

Profile picture
xiaophil

Chunjie, I agree with Brick. Please talk. Besides, in the end, we might not get our way anyway, haha.

Profile picture
BEBC
February 22, 2010, 09:39 AM

Hi chunjie. We're not so much taking a vote as talking around a topic. Why do you think QWs should stay as they are ?

Profile picture
go_manly
February 22, 2010, 10:44 AM

I don't think of Qingwens as being easy or difficult. I rate them as interesting or uninteresting, useful or not. The recent ones have explored a particular vocabulary theme (is there an adjectival form of vocabulary, such as vocabularic?). Such lessons, by their nature, tend not to be difficult. But they are still useful and interesting. I think CPod has varied the difficulty well over the course of the Qingwen series. I am happy to see some harder ones that deal with difficult grammar points, but I would still like to see these mixed with the easier theme-based lessons.

Profile picture
changye

Hi go_manly

Well said. I agree with you.

Profile picture
xiaophil
February 22, 2010, 10:52 AM

Chunjie, I agree with Brick. Please talk. Besides, in the end, we might not get our way anyway, haha.

Profile picture
thinkabroad
February 22, 2010, 01:44 AM

I vote that Qing Wen should be more challenging.

What if Jenny and Connie only speak in Mandarin Chinese, John in English andLiliana in Spanish and English.

That would increase the intensity and be AMAZING!

Peace.