What I was thinking was what about having the learner choose what kind of correction they want. Keep it simple and break it down into three categories
1- quick review (not so much error correction and a little comment… this could be for advanced writers like Vera, this wouldn’t cost as many points)
2 - normal (the normal correction system currently used)
3 - strict review/re-write (for people like me sending my resume to Emma to correct and give a very strict, good re-write, which got me the interview. This could be for work that needs a lot of time, and it could cost more points)
Vera
I am interested by the following statement because I would really like to understand the thinking process behind it:
" I’m as a writer expects that my errors would be corrected. That is, why I pay for a correction. I would think, I did it fine, when errors are not shown. "
I take it to mean that you feel you are paying for error correction, therefore you expect to pay only if you have errors.
To me it is like feeling like you have a pain in your tooth, then expecting to pay less for the check up if if the dentist finds nothing wrong with your teeth. I don’t know if this is a good analogy or not. Is there a better one?
Hi Ed,
For me it is a good analogy. If the dentist only takes a look and find nothing is wrong then I pay a small amount. I have to pay more money, if the dentist found things that have to be done. So works the system in Germany. But I got the impression that you pay the same amount at a dentist when he only takes a look and when he did more? Do you really pay the same amount for such different efforts?
I think the present system works fine. The main benefits of the system are
The writer is induced to write, perhaps the major benefit.
The writing is reviewed by a native speaker. Even if there are no corrections, the report, hopefully with comments from the native speaker are beneficial, and with words and phrases to save, is beneficial. One day the tutor will record the corrected writing.
The overwhelming majority of learners experience a corrections ratio of between 10-20 words per correction. Vera, please tell me if you have fewer corrections than this. The corrections identify gaps problems to be addressed.
The corrector will always be there because she is paid for doing the correction and so an interactive relationship is established with the tutor.
I think most people are satisfied, so this is not a priority item for us now. We will be working on it later.
Nothing prevents a tutor from offering a writing course where additional help and advice can be provided during one on one or group discussions.
As to grading the tutors, it may be that allowing for comments about the tutors and correctors will be more meaningful than simply grading them. But nothing is going to happen soon.
Here in Canada, you (or your insurance) pay a predetermined price for taking a look, then if there is something wrong, you pay more money for more treatment. So it is the same as in Germany.
My point is that you agree to pay X amount for the check up. That amount stays the same whether the dentist finds a problem or not. In LingQ, you agree to pay X amount for writing, whether errors are there or not. If errors are not found, I don’t think that should diminish the original agreed-upon charge any more than a clean dental check should diminish the original dental fee.
This analogy breaks down a little because in dentistry, the dentist is the only one who can fix your problem. At LingQ, the student (not the tutor) is the only one who can possibly fix their errors. This is why tutors make less money than dentists
Perhaps a better analogy would be a speaking class. If your tutor suggests many topics. is enthusiastic, friendly and so on, but really finds few grammatical errors to comment on, does that make you feel like you should pay less than the original agreed-upon price?
After reviewing quite a few recent corrections done by our tutors, I have to say they are doing a great job and that I didn’t see anyone who didn’t get their money’s worth. Quite frankly most writers are getting more than their money’s worth if you consider the tutor’s hourly rate and the time that was spent.
We have been correcting writing using this method of calculation for at least 5 years now and I can’t remember this issue being raised before. We have thought about it ourselves internally but haven’t ever had someone else mention it. Therefore, it is not something we are likely to worry about anytime soon. The added complexity that would be required in the system and that would need to be understood by members is not worth the potential benefit.
Having said that, thanks for the suggestions. Some neat solutions have been proposed by Ed and Val. Maybe in the future…
I really like Val’s idea! I think it is fair for everybody.
I feel happy when I have less corrections, although I usually have errors every 10-15 words. It has never bothered me. I like reading tutor’s comment more than checking on my mistakes (that’s why my English seems to be never improved). I submit writings because I want to tell my funny stories to my tutor and good friend Allison. However, I get concerned when I ask her to do more. So I hope LingQ offers a separate pricing someday in the near future.
I think that current method is very simple, therefore very clear.
To reduce the price to correct advanced writings, when they are easier to correct than usual, you could introduce a discount that is added by the teacher as soon as he has corrected the essay.
I mean a ratio of discount added only sometimes by the teacher (e.g. 10% or 25%) when he finds the single writing easy and quick to correct.
Realistically we are not going to make any changes for now. Thanks for the input, and when we go to improve the writing section we will take these things into consideration. It may be enough to allow more freedom to choose the corrector, so that people can find the corrector that best suits their style. I also plan to offer a course on writing for more advanced writers. In addition, in review the writing corrections I do not see many that do not have at least one mistake per 17 or 18 words. I think the correctors are doing a good job.
By the way Monica, are you interested in tutoring in Italian? We have no courses available in Italian right now. Even one time per week would be great.
If I feel that I can write “OK”, then I’ll spend points on conversations instead, or try to write something more challenging (as regards tenses/topics/whatever).
One could compare the price with that of a Skype session - if a tutor should have a chance to make a decent analysis/correction of a conversation, then I’d say that 15 minutes are about right, and the same thing applies there - if you want “corrections”, then try to speak about more… eloquently.
I know the price in advance and I pay simply to have a native speaker look at my writing and give me feedback. Whether this happens to be in the form of error correction or simply a note saying that the writing was okay makes no difference, for me at least, because I find both equally helpful.
I have had conversations and submitted writing in two languages so far and am very happy with the tutors, who have both helped me to make significant progress in the short time I’ve been at LingQ.
First of all…I just wanted to apologize if some of my other posts have sounded a bit too critical.
I have many ideas about how things “could” be done…but I’m also very new here…so even though I really respect the many things that have been done here, it sounds awfully presumptuous of me to start throwing around critical comments. I’m very opinionated…so I do it anyway…but I completely understand how it can rub people the wrong way.
I’m trying to be helpful…but instead…I look like a bull in a China shop. I apologize if I come off wrong Steve, cause I know this is your “baby” and I like it…I really do. Any suggestions I’m offering are with the best of intentions.
There are certainly many options available…But I don’t pretend to know which is best. That really depends on Steve’s goals for this site, and that of the site administrators.
For this issue…one possible option might be to charge a standard amount of points per writing correction, but limit the length of the submission. For example…instead of charging per 100 words, you could simply charge a flat amount…and limit the submission to 500 words or less. Including positive comments, so that people feel they are getting their money’s worth, as Steve suggested, would also be helpful.
A wise man once told me to K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid). Not always, but often times, the best solution is the one that keeps things from getting too complex.
I happen to think that the closer you reach one flat rate, the better.
Forgive me if i’m too critical, but I have been thinking about this issue some time and I think the points are too expensive. 1000 points are 10 $ (if you are basic and higher), 1 on 1 Conversation (15 minutes) = 500 points ($5*), Writing Correction 100 words = 333 points ($3.33*). Don’t you think that’s a lot of money? At Mingle you could speak an hour 1 on 1 with a native for 10 $ (sometimes 8$). Writing correction 100 words= 333 points? 100 words is not very much, you’ve reached this amount in a minute. If you want to be active in a foreign language then if think you have to write a letter of 300 words (every week) and speak a minimum of 15 minutes a week. When you’ll do this you’ll have to spend 3,33*3= ca. 10$. 10$ + 5$ (speaking charge) = 15$. 15$*4 (weeks)= 60$. 60$ + 10 $ (basic membership/ minimum)= 70$ a month. I just don’t have it…I’m not a money-grub, not at all, but I just can’t afford this. That probably means I can’t advance in a foreign language a lot because of the costs or II’ll have to double/ triple my time which I don’t like to do. I can imagine that running this community costs a lot and I’m certaintly willing to pay for it, but I find the points to buy very expensive, probably for the points you could better speak to a tutor for fifteen minutes than to write a letter of less than 200 words. Maybe I don’t see things very cleary and can somebody enlighten me:) Thanks!
For me writing and speaking are not the most important learning activities. Listening, reading and word learning (lingqing) are. That is how I learn. That is how LingQ is conceived.
A little bit of writing and speaking goes a long way, if it is integrated with massive listening and reading activities.
One discussion a week with a discussion report, and a few hundred words or writing correction, is enough. Nothing prevents you from writing more on your own. You do not need to have everything corrected.
The cost of the tutor services is simply a matter of compensating people for their time. Quite frankly I think our tutors should get much more than they get. They are enthusiastic, put a lot of effort and thought into what they do, and are very competent and motivated. I also think that LingQ is worth a lot more than what we charge.
However, that is for the users to decide. The Internet is a competitive space, and each person will make his or her own decision on how to learn and where to spend money. However, what we charge is, if anything, too low. Most people spend many times more money at schools that are not nearly as effective LingQ, if you use LingQ properly.
After reading some more information about this issue, I have to nuance my previous post. After taking in consideration the tutor’s time and energy, it isn’t a lot of money at all…
