Why ‘Learning Science’ isn’t Always Enough
There’s much hype these days around the importance of science-based learning, and many learning tech providers use slogans like ‘backed by learning science.’ But what do these claims really mean, and is the science all it’s cracked up to be?
I’ve been conducting my own scientific experiment, learning one of the hardest things there is to learn, a language. Recently, after achieving a 282-day streak on Duolingo, I decided to ditch the app from my daily routine.
My Personal Language Learning Journey
My new strategy was to pay for one-on-one lessons, with a Dutch teacher that I found through the italki platform. He suggested replacing Duolingo with a simple flashcard app. He explained to me what I had sensed, that while I might get lots of right answers in Duolingo, it’s more to do with the fact that English and Dutch are both Germanic languages with lots of similarities so with a ‘fill in the blank’ approach it’s possible to guess missing words from the list they provide. The gamification element with points and leaderboards means I’m getting a false sense of achievement. It’s more of a guessing game, words aren’t necessarily going into my long-term memory and grammar rules aren’t being fully understood.
Why I Ditched Duolingo: It’s More Guesswork Than Learning
So now I’ve replaced Duolingo with a simple flashcard app, called Mochi. There’s another called Anki I’d tried previously, but the Mochi interface was easier to get my head around. Much like Duolingo these flashcard apps use spaced repetition algorithms to maximise retention, but the beauty is, you can add your own flashcards. My new teacher provides the flashcard decks, or you can import them from Anki. There’s accountability, the app tracks your progress: total cards learned, new cards learned, cards reviewed and retention rate. My teacher checks my progress each week which is shown in the app, according to the target we’ve set for me e.g. 5 new words a day. The main difference is I have to recall a word or phrase, without any prompts or lists to select from.
The Problem with Duolingo’s ‘Science-Backed’ Claims
So with my decision to quit Duolingo, given its popularity and how it is universally hailed as a great example of ‘learning science’, I thought let’s see what the actual ‘science’ is. I discovered that the only scientific studies conducted on Duolingo were funded, you guessed it, by Duolingo. The fact that Duolingo funded these studies raises questions about bias, as the research may be framed in a way that overemphasizes the app’s strengths while overlooking its limitations. The studies consisted of the following:
- Only conducted on English to French or Spanish.
Learning languages within the same family (like English, Spanish, and French) may be easier for native English speakers due to shared linguistic structures (e.g., alphabet, vocabulary). Therefore, the success in studies on English to French and Spanish, may not reflect the difficulties learners face when learning languages from vastly different linguistic backgrounds, such as tonal languages or those with non-Latin scripts. Thus the ‘fill in the blank’ exercise, selecting from a list of words, which is the main stay of duolingo use, tests for comprehension and guessing rather than memorising and something going into one’s long-term memory.
- On learners where 80% were learning just for fun rather than for practical use.
Learning a language ‘just for fun’ is completely different to learning for full mastery, and while I’m sure Duolingo would not make the claim that by using their app you could get to full mastery, it does make the point that saying something is ‘backed by science’ is completely contextual on what the science was trying to prove.
- Skills focus – Most studies focused on outcomes in reading and listening rather than speaking
Reading and listening another language are much easier to do, you can easily work out what the meaning is from other contextual clues provided. This does not mean you can open your mouth and know what words to say, when you need them.
This is not an attempt to dump on Duolingo. For those planning a holiday abroad and wanting to pick up a few phrases and vocabulary, Duolingo may be the perfect tool for you.
What I am highlighting – is that splashing around claims like ‘backed by science’ is technically meaningless, unless you examine what the science actually was.
For me, and many others, the gamification elements, drawing you in to something, can be a distraction from the effort that is required with ‘real’ learning – the kind that puts you out of your comfort zone, and requires concentration and focus.
AI and Buzzwords in Learning Tech: Are They Meaningful?
I use Duolingo as an example as I am seeing all over the learning technology market, where mentions of the ‘science of learning’ or ‘backed by science’, and in particular, the new kid on the block, the ‘power of AI’ are dropped in to product headlines.
Many learning technology products nowadays tout AI or learning science without fully explaining what these technologies are supposed to accomplish. In many cases, these terms are used more as marketing buzzwords than as meaningful features.
For example, here are some claims on some learning systems: ‘content creation made simple with the power of AI’, ‘closing learning gaps faster with the AI-powered xxx’.
I’m sure most people are savvy enough to not be swayed by these headlines. The technology itself can never do the learning for you or the content creation, or whatever it is you’re trying to achieve. And it’s always worth digging a bit deeper to understand exactly what the science, or the AI, is purporting to do. In many cases, AI is simply a more advanced algorithm, and while it may sound impressive, it doesn’t necessarily bring a deeper level of intelligence to the process. It’s crucial to understand that real progress, whether in learning or content creation, still depends on human effort.
Ultimately, creating anything of real value—whether learning a language or developing content—requires focus, effort, and accountability. These are qualities no amount of gamification or tech jargon can replace.
If you’re looking to enhance your organization’s learning technology or optimize your current systems, I’d love to help. Here are a few ways I’ve recently supported clients:
- Strategic Learning Tech Selection: Helping organizations choose the right platforms based on their unique needs and goals.
- Maximizing Existing Systems: Assessing and improving the effectiveness of learning management systems (LMS) to deliver maximum value.
- Supporting with Customer Education goals: Researching and implementing the best solutions to support revenue generation
- Custom Learning Solutions: Creating tailored content solutions that align with your specific organisational goals.
If you’d like to discuss how we can work together, get in touch at rachel@talentstorm.co.uk. I’d love to help you take your learning initiatives to the next level!
Join our online community in our FREE Facebook group The Learning & Development Hub.
Sign up for our People Development blog, to get our blogs delivered straight into your inbox.