CONSTRUCTION AND EVALUATION OF A COMPUTER-ASSISTED

INSTRUCTION CURRICULUM IN SPOKEN MANDARIN
by
Peter E-Shi Wu
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 298
September 1, 1978
PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION SERIES
Reproduction in Ifuo1e or in Part Is Permitted for
Any Purpose of the United States Government
I N S T I T ~ r E FOR MATHEMATICAL STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
STANFORD, CALIFORNIA 94305
4
ACKNOWLEDGEtlENTS
I deeply thank Professor Patrick Suppes for his valuable ideas,
suggestions, assistance and support. As the chairman of the reading
committee, he lent principal guidance throughout.
Several persons deserve special mention. The members of my
committee: Professor Rosedith Sitgreaves and Professor Robert Politzer;
for his assistance in lIandarin Phonology: Professor Kung-yi Kao; for
his help in computer audio system: William Sanders; for their superb
computer programming knowledge: Scott Daniels, Ron Roberts and Robert
Smith; for his hardware preparation: George Black; for their
cooperation: Wun-I Chang and Josie Chen; for editing: Dianne Karnerva.
Laurine Zepper and Carol Rossi; for the most detailed and patient
assistance I received: my wife, Suzanna; for the greatest encouragement
"
all the way: my dear parents.
Special thanks I also give to my students for their patience and
cooperation to finish the whole curriculum without any material reward
whatever.
.viii
TARLE OF COnE'ITS
LIST OF TABLES.
LIST OF FIGURES
Chapter
1. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY. .
2. GOALS OF THE CURRICULU11 .
3. THE CURRICULUM. . . . .
A. Selection of Teaching Haterial
B.
C. Description of the Lessons
D. Description of Lesson Frames
E. Arrangement of Frames
F. Paradigm
G. Requirements for Students
H. Computer Program and Hardware
I. Computer Audio system and Recording
4. POSSIBLE-SIDE EFFECTS AND THEIR
5. EVALUATION•••
A. Experimental Design
B. Variables
C. Instrumentation
D. Administration of Experiment
E. Summative Evaluation
F. Data Analysis
G. Formative Evaluation
6. LEARNING MODELS
A. Models
B. Estimation of Parameters
C. Evaluation of the }lodels
D. Fitting Models
Student 317
Student 325
Student 327
Student 366
Student 371
Student 372
iv
. . .
vi
1
4
6
24
29
60
-
7.
BIBLIOGRAPHY••••
APPENDICES
A. Contents of the Text •• '.' ••
B. Handout Sheet of Introduction to the Curriculum
C•. Sample Lessons, Lessons 35 and 36
D. Vocabulary List
E. Pattern List • '.
F. Instruction on the Use of the Mandarin
Sound Dictionary •
G. Questionnaire I
H. Questionnaire II
109
112
114
117
120
130
137
139
141
• 145
I. ,Evaluation Sheet on Student's Ablilities
for Sound Production • • • . • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • 149
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1- Data on the Dependent Variables.
·
1,2
2. Data on the Independent Variables. 43
3. Data on Course Evaluation by Students. 45
4. Data on Evaluaion by Judges. 49
5. Scores of Rand A summed over y and y 51
7 8
6. Scores of R, A, and C Summed over y , y , and y 5.2
9 10 11
7. Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for
Student 317
· · · ·
·

.
· ·
· · · ·
· · ·
·
· · ·
·
. 73
8. Comparison of Observed and F..xpected U for Student 317 . . 74
Ak
9. Comparison of Observed and E.,<:pected V(U ) for Student 317 . 75
Ak
10. Comparison of Observed and Expectecl Probabilities for
Student 325
· ·
· · ·
· ·
· · · · · · · ·
· · ·
·
80
11. Comparison of Observed and Expected U for Student 325 81
Ak
12. Comparison of Observed and Expected V(U ) for Student 325 82
Ak
13. Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for
Student 327
·
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
·
· · ·
·
·
·
· · · ·
86
14. Comparison of Observed and Expected U for Student 327 87
Ak
15. Comparison of Observed and Expected V(U ) for Student 327 88
Ak
16. Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for
Student 366
· ·
· ·

·
·
· ·
· · ·
·
·
· · · · ·
92
17. Comparison of Observed and Expected U for Student 366 93
Ak
18. Comparison of Observed and Expected V(U ) for Student 366 94
Ak
19. Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for
Student 371
· · · · ·
· ·

·
·
· · · · · · ·
· ·
. '18
20. Comparisori of Observed and Expected U for Student 371 99
Ak
vi
Table
P a ~ ~
--
21. Comparison of Observed and Exoected 'l(U )
for Student 371 . 100
Ak
22. Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for
Student 372 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
23. Comparison of Observed and Exnected U for Student 372 105
Ak
24. Comparison of Observed and Expected 'l(U ) for Student 372 106
, Ak
r rz
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1. Announcement for the Course. • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 37
viii
CHAPTER 1
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of the study was to construct and evaluate (with norm-
referenced criterion) a CAl (computer-assisted instruction) spoken
aandarin curriculu:n and to design and evaluate four stochastic learning
models to help uS understand the learning processes of the students in
this curriculum. Each model is evaluated to its fit to the
results ·of the multiple-choice tests.
The reasons for constructing this curriculum are to provide
individualization. immediate attention to individual response,
flexibility in time and place of learning. and political and cultural
orientation.
Individualization
It is a well-known fact that there exist definite and significant
individual differences among students in a class. Students entering a
class may differ considerablely in language aptitude, attitude
towards the Chinese culture, and motivation to learn Handarin. These
three factors have been shown to be important in determining how
successful students will be in learning Ifandarin [9). Students work at
varying rates and at different levels of accuracy and
ordinary classroom instruction in Mandarin does not take care of these
individual differences. Although tutorial instruction is a possible
solution, it is too expensive to be feasible. Computer-assisted
instruction (CAl) is a technique that can be used in schools to meet
the problems of individual differences at a much deeper level and in a
1
more scientific way than has yet been possible [17], [18].
Immediate Attention to. Individual
In learning a language, students form correct habits when
their answers are immediately checked and wrong answers corrected; such
immediate responses are an integral part of good language instruction.
The average classroom teacher has too large a class to be able to do
this. but with the aid of a high-speed computer, CAl can simultaneously
respond to several hundred students and yet give each student the
impression that he is receiving individualized instruction [171, [181.
Convenience of Flexible Time of Learning
Push-button telephones, rather than computer terminals, are used
as a teaching medium so that students can conveniently learn at home.
in the office. or any place where a push-button telephone is available;
students have no need to come to school specifically to have access to
a computer terminal. Usually in a CAl class the number of students is
larger than the number of computer terminals available, so students may
have to wait for a computer terminal. The use of a push-button
telephone eliminates this problem. Also, as long as the computer is
working, the students can log in to the lessons and work any· time they
wish, which is another convenience.
Political and Cultural Orientation
People have recently begun to pay more attention to Chinese
affairs. The long historical traditions and rich cultural past of that
nation are best understood through the medium of the Chinese language.
The present research was developed in order to assist non-Mandarin-
speaking persons to learn the Chinese language.
As it is hard to input and output the Chinese characters in the
computer system available, this curriculum concentrates only·on
teaching spoken llandarin. (Actually, there is no commercial computer
available that can input and output Chinese Characters.)
The -curriculum we used evolved from consideration of the strengths
of CAl. There was no intention, however, of attempting to make any
experimental comparisons of the CAl curriculum with regular class
instruction in this study. Such a comparision is very difficult to
make, as the content of the curriculum used in this study.is new and it
is hard to find regular class instruction with similar content. As a
result; the norm-referenced criterion evaluation was used, and it is
hoped that the results of the study indicate what sort of outcomes can
be achieved in a carefully designed CAl learning situation.
CHAPTER 2
GOALS OF THE CURRICULffil
The main .goal of the curriculum was to teach spoken llandarin "ith
Chinese grammar introduced only as needed. For the reasons discussed
in Chapter 1, the writing of Chinese characters was not included in the
curriculum. More explicitly, the goals for the curriculum were as
follows.
Recognition
The recognition skills identified as goals of the c u r r i c u l t L ~ were
the abilities to differentiate among phonological elements and identify
the appropriate romanized symbol for each element, to manipulate
phonological elements (i.e., to spell), to differentiate and
discriminate among tones, to differentiate and discriminate among
;
vocabulary items, to grasp the explicit meaning of utterances, to
development the ability to respond to given Handarin utterances.
Production
The production skills identified as goals consisted of the oral
abilities to reproduce phonological elements, to produce appropriate
tones. to reproduce vocabulary items, to reproduce sentences, to
respond to a given tffindarin utterance in a conversational situation.
Changing attitudes and interest
The third important set of goals of the curriculum concerned
4
5
a positive attitudes toward a CAl curriculum in rtandarin
teaching, an interest in ;landarin.
;
CHAPTER 3
THE CURRICULilll
A. Selection of Teaching Material:
Four criteria were applied in the selection of teaching material.
First, it was to be oriented toward conversation, not grammar. Any
text that emphazised teaching Chinese grammar rather than
conversation was not considered for use. Second, in order to increase
and maintain the students' interest in learning, the material chosen
had to be practical. Language is for use. Students are interested in
learning language only if they can use what they have learned, so the
material chosen had to be practical and close to real-life situations.
Third, the teaching material was to emphasize the phonological teaching
of sounds., Through the emphasis on teaching sounds, students acquire
good pronunciation. Also, once students learn all the phonological
sounds and rules, ideally they can pronounce any word
accurately by themseves without help from a teacher. Finally, the
lessons were to be" of limited length. It must be possible to break the
materials chosen into units which occupy 30 minutes of the students'
time. One of the ideas in this course was that students would spend
only about 30 minutes over the phone each day. Because students did
not need to spend a great deal of time learning Mandarin, it was
less likely that they would become bored and discouraged with the
course.
6

7
No Mandarin texts were available that met the four criteria listed
above and that therefore could have been used in this There'
were a few texts that fit the first three criteria. None, however, met
the fourth criterion. The authors did not intend for their texts to be
broken into 30-minute units, but rather they divided their texts into
50-minute (or longer) units. Therefore, I had to select and edit, the
material myself.
In accordance with these four criteria, I selected the materials
that included a phonological component and a conversational component.
I had valuable help from Dr. Kung-yi Kao of Stanford University in
compiling the phonological material. In the conversational component,
I included the following topics for their practicality: greetings,
names, visiting, making phone calls, hometown, family, language,
Chinese fqOd, Chinese restaurants. counting, dates, and shopping. For
details about what was included in the text, see Appendix A. In
selecting the materials, r always kept in mind the 30-minute limitation
and selected brief material for each topic.
Some of the words selected to be taught from the frequency
counts of words in the Lingling's corpus [21]. tingling, a two-year
old girl. was born and brought up in Taipei.' Her native tongue is
Mandarin. A total of 12 hours of her conversation with a few adults
were recorded in Taipei. Although it consisted of a child's lexicon,
it was a valuable reference. There were several other frequency counts
of words. but all of them were based on written material, which was not
--
8
suitable as a reference for the selection of words for teaching
conversational material.
9
B. Editing
The material selected to he taught was edited carefully according
to the rules presented below. Carol Rossi and Suzanna Wong assisted me
in editing the English text.
Complexity ?f The order of presentation of
materials was established according to the complexity of pronunciation.
The order of presentation was as follows: phonological elements,
spelling, tones, vocabulary, and sentences.
Frequency of use. The more frequently used material preceded the
less frequently used material. For example, lessons on greetings,
names, visiting, and making phone calls were put·before lessons on
counting and shopping. Here, the judgment of frequency of use was my
_T_im_,e_. Because each student was limited to a 30-minute
segment on the telephone, the lesson content was tightly structured.
Therefore, 1 allotted about 10 vocabulary items for each lesson, 10
sentences for each lesson, and two patterns for every two lessons.
Every lessons Because of time limitations, it
was impossible to include in one lesson all the important material on a
particular topic. A second lesson was necessary to complete the work
on the topic. For one topic, then, two lessons were used as a single
unit.
Background information. Because of the cultural differences
between American EngliSh and Chinese, some expressions that are natural
to Chinese may not be understood by Americans. Background information
10
for some of these expressions "as provided to h e i ~ students understand
them.
Illustrations. Figures were used to assist students in
understanding the written material.
Exercise. The students were given many exercises to allow them
sufficient practice in the material being taught.
Review. Numerous review lessons were provided to maximize
retention of the material.
11
C. Description of the
a. Number of lessons: 55
b. Size of vocabulary: 274 (see Al'pendix n)
c. Total number of Patterns: 40 (see Appendix F.)
d. Total number of figures: 53
e. Total number of exercises: 131 ( 2.38 exercises per lesson )
f. Total number of review lessons: 13
g. Facility: For economy and for the convenience of the students.
push-button telephones rather than computer terminals were
utilized as the teaching medium. The course was. however.
completely controlled by the computer. In this way. the
students could learn at home. rather than having to come to
school to use a computer terminal. The students listened on
Fhe telephone and answered questions by pushing buttons on the
dial.
i. Contents: Lessons 1 and 2 were reading lessons designed to
provide basic phonological knowledge necessary for the accurate
pronunciation Lessons 2 through 23 introduced
phonological elements and tones of Uandarin. while Lessons 24
through 55 were conversational. The lesson topics are listed
in Appendix A. Appendix C contains sample written materials
from Lessons 35 and 36.
k. Average number of vocabulary per lesson after lesson 23: 9.67
(standard deviation = 2.37)
j. Average number of patterns every two lessons after lesson 23:
3.42 (standard deviation = 1.31)
12
1. Average number of sentences in the text after lesson 23: 6.67
(standard deviation = 1.56)
m. Average number of days to finish the course
(standard deviation = 34.07 days)
: 86.83 days
,
n. Average time per lesson spend on lessons 3 to 23 : 31.67 mimutes
(standard deviation = 4.92 minutes)
o. Average time per lesson spend on lessons 24 to 55 : 33.92 minutes
(standard deviation = 15.52 minutes)
p. Average time per lesson spend on the whole course : 33.00 minutes
(standard deviation = 9.57 minutes)
q. Average time in between lessons (time not spend on lessons) :
2262.60 minutes (standard deviation = 1064.86 minutes)
' ~ ' - ' "
13
D. Description of L e s ~ Frames
a. Reading frame. Every lesson had this frame. It was a handout,
explaining the material to be taught and the steps the student
must take to complete the lesson over the telephone. This frame
served not only as an introduction to the lesson. but also as a
text that could be used to review lessons.
b. Reading exercise frame. This was only for lessons 1 and 2 which
were reading lessons. This frame is used to determine the
students' level of comprehension of the reading material.
c. Listening frame. On this frame. the students listened to the
sound without imitating it. Through listening, students found
the characteristics of each new sound and compared it with the
English sound. This finding and comparing process helped them
in 'actually pronouncing the sound. Because of differing
,
abilities. it was not necessary that every student have this
practice in finding and comparing sounds.
d. Imitating frame. The students listened to the model sound and
then imitated the sound.
e. Discriminating frame. This excercise required 'students to see
whether a pair of sounds presented were the same or not. After
the students could detect the similarities and differences among
related sounds, it was easier for them to pronounce the sounds
accurately.
f. Identifying frame I. This exercise was used only on phonological
elements. The exercise determined whether students could
identify the romanized symbol for each phonological element.
14
Without this knowledge, the students could not read the handout.
Because the computer system could not input and output Chinese
characters, I used romanized letters to represent them. The
students had to know these letters in order to read the handout.
g. Identifying frame II. This exercise presented a consonant and a
final, then presented another four sounds, and then asked
students to decide which of the four was the correct spelling of
the consonant and the final. This waS to check the students'
spelling ability. After they had learned the phonological
elements, it was important to see how well they could combine two
elements to form a syllable.
h. Identifying frame 11.1. This exercise was used only in the
practice with tones. It presented a pair of tones with the same
sound and asked students to identify each tone, respectively, for'
every pair. By presenting a pair of tones, students could
compare the two tones and thereby to develop discrimination
skills. Some of the exercises required students to identify a
pair of tones with different sounds; this was more difficult than
identifying a pair of tones with identical sounds.
i. Identifying frame IV. This exercise again was used only in the
practice with tones. It presented a tone and asked the students
to identify the tone. This exercise was different from previous
ones in that it presented only one tone instead of a pair.
Students had to identify the tone without hearing it contrasted
with another tone.
15
j. Substituting drill This frame was used for pattern
practice. Each time a new pattern ,.,as introduced, 'the .students
could familarize themselves with the pattern this drill.
k. Translation frame I. The sequence was: Hear English
translation--hear aandarin--repeat :Iandarin--hear llandarin-
repeat This frame helped the students associate
with its English translation and also
to pronounce the !landarin properly.
1. Translation II •. The sequence of was: Hear the
English translation--speak aandarin--hear llandarin
--repeat Mandarin. The purpose was the same as that of
translation frame I. The difference was that in this frame the
students, after hearing the translation. were requested
to pronounce the corresponding }ffindarin, while in the previous
frame they were not. In the previous frame, the students heard
the corresponding after hearing the English translation.
This frame helped build the students' confidence in translating
from English to Ilandarin as they found that their pronunciation
paralleled the model sounds. This frame always followed the
previous one.
m. Translation frame III. This exercise tested students'
comprehenion ability. It presented an English utterance and
four Mandarin utterances, and then asked the students to
correctly identify the translation of the English. This grasping
of the meaning was an important initial step to communication.
n. exercise fram..."!.: This exercise was designed not only to
16
see how well the students but also to see
whether they could make the appropriate response when they heard
a Handarin utterance. It presented.a lIandarin utterance and then
four more !Iandarin utterances. The students were requested to
identify which of the four was the most appropriate to follow the
utterance. Students first had to fully grasp the
of the five utterances presented. If they failed to do so they
might possibly miss the right answer. After they understood the
utterances, they had to make the correct by the
most appropriate response to the utterance. If they
failed to make the correct judgment. they failed- to determine the
right answer as well.
17
E. Arrangement of Frames
The different purposes of the lessons required different
arrangements of the frames. The arrangements of frames were as follow:
a -> b: lessons 1, 2. Lessons 1 and 2 were reading lessons; a was the
reading frame and b was a reading exercise frame designed to test how
well students understood frame a.
a -> c -> e -> C -> d -> f: lessons 3, 6, 11, 13, 16. These lessons
taught the pronunciation of phonological elements. Frame a gaves the
necessary information about points and modes of articulation and
-possible-difficulties in pronouncing these elements. The students
heard the sounds at frame c, did a discriminating exercise at frame e,
and heard the sounds once again to make sure they had grasped the
features of the sounds and the pronunciation of each element. The
students started to imitate the sounds at frame d, and finally an
identifying exercise at frame f checked whether the students were able
to identify the romanized symbol for each element.
a -> d -> f -> d.-> g: lesson 4. This lesson was an extension of
Lesson 3 to teach students to USe the phonological element.s learned
in-Lesson 3 for spelling. Frame d reviewed the sounds learned in
Lesson 3, repeated the identifying exercise at frame f, and then
provided practice on spelling at frame d. Frame g was a test on
spelling.
a -> d -> f -> d -> d -> h -> g: lessons 7, 12, 14, 17. This
arrangement was the same as in Lesson 4 except for practice and
exercise on tones. Tones had not been taught prior to Lesson 4.
18
Students imitated the tones at d and did the exercise on tones at
frame h.
a -> c -> e -> d -> h: Lesson 5. This was a lesson on tones. a
described the importance of tones in llandarin and the ways to prononuce
them. The students listened to tones in Imndarin and the .mys to
prononuce them. The students listened to the different tones at frame
c, performed the discriminating exercise at frame e, to imitate
tones at frame d, and did the exercise on tones at frame h.
a -> c -> d -> h -> i: Lesson 8. This was for the
neutral tone and was about the same as the one'in Lesson 5.
a ->d -> d -> h -> g: Lessons 20, 21. The arrangement was for the
pronunciation of syllables with finals III, lUI, and IV/.
Frame d was 'for imitating the model sounds; frames hand g were
exercises on tones and spelling, respectively.
a -> d -> k -> m: Lessons 10, IS, 23. This arrangement was for
learning sentence patterns. Frame d was to imitate the model
sentences. Frame k was a translation frame to help students associate
an English sentence with its Handarin translation. Frame m was an
exercise on translation from English to llandarin.
a -> k -> 1 -> m -> k -> 1 -> n: Lessons 24, 26, 28, 31, 33, 35, 39,
41, 43, 46, 48, 50. This arrangement for lessons on conversations.
Frames k and 1 were translation frames to help students associate
English vocabularies w:i-th their corresponding llandarin vocabularies.
Frame m was an exercise on translation from English to llandarin.
Frames k and I were then repeated, in which English sentences were
associated with their Mandarin translations. Finally, frame n was a
19
response exercise to see how well students could respond to
sentences.
a -> 1 -> k -> 1 -> m -> .i -> m: Lessons 25, 27, 29, 32, 34, 36, 40·,
42, 44, 47, 49, 51. This was an extension of the
one for lessons on conversations. The students reviewed the previous
lesson at frame 1. Frame k, 1 and m were the same as in the
arragement for vacabulary. Frame j was for pattern practice;
the students did substitution drills in this frame. Finally, frame m
was a sentence translation exercise from to llandarin.
Lessons 9, 18, 19, 22, 23, 30, 37, 38, 45, 52, 53, 54, and 55 were
review lessons. Each lesson consisted of several exercises chosen from
frames e, g, h, i, m, and n.
20
F. Paradigm
The for this course was that of 'simple intrinsic'
programming. All the students went over the same frames throughout the
course. For all the exercise frames, students were required to ans\'er
at least 80% of the problems in each exercise correctly in order to .
pass the exercise. Those who failed to answer 80% of the problems
correctly repeated the exercise until they reached the 80% correct
criterion. There was no branch supplied for students not reaching the
80% correct criterion; they simply repeated the exercise which they
failed.
The 80% correct criterion was suggested by Dr. Patrick Suppes.
Those who failed to answer 80% of the problems correctly repeated the
exercise until they reached the 80% correct criterion. There was nO
branch supplied for students not reaching the 80% correct criterion;
,
they simply repeated the exercise which they failed.
Toe 80% correct criterion was suggested by Dr. Patrick Suppes.
because the criteria of 100% or 90% correct are very high and tend to
discourage learning. The 80% criterion did not lower the students'
achievements. because the course had 13 review lessons and much of the
material was repeated several times to give students the opportunity to
learn what they might have missed in previous exercises.
.•llI!all!\l_I!I)Ql!Itl!l._ ...._ ........_ .... -'-
21
G. Requirements of students
It was required that the students taking this course had
a. graduated from high school. As the beginning of each lesson was a
reading frame (frame a) in which the students had to read and
understand written handouts in order to work on the lesson, the
students needed a high school education.
b. ~ have reasonable auditory ability. This may be the most important
requirement in learning a foreign language, especially for this
course. The course was basically a self-instructed course, even
though I held meetings with the students periodically to hear and
correct (if necessary) their pronunciations. Unlike the usual
language-learning class where the teacher can hear the students'
pronunciations and immediately correct their errors, the students
in this course had no classroon teacher and had to rely on their
,
auditory ability to hear each sound clearly. They had to be able
to imitate the sounds and to compare model sounds with their own
sounds to try to correct their own pronunciations. Thus, students
without good auditory ability would not be able to succeed in this
course.
c. ~ have access to the push-button telephone. The push-button
telephone was the teaching medium and hence one had to be accessible
to the student in order to take the course.
d. !£ have access to ~ tape recorder and ~ telephone receiver yickup.
As mentioned earlier, students in this course had to record and
compare the model sounds and their own sounds for self-corrections;
therefore they need these two pieces of equipment.
22
H. Computer Programming ani Hardware
The Mandarin CAl computer programs were divided into three parts;
the main program, the history program, and the response program. The
main program was the largest of the three and contained the curriculum
itself. The history program kept records of the students' history of
learning; for example, with this program, a student who had just
finiShed Lesson 13 will automatically started at Lesson 14 the next
time he or she logged in on the telephone. The response program kept
records of the students' responses to the questions of each lesson.
The pDP-10 computer of the Institute for 11athematical Studies in
the Social Sciences (IMSSS) at Stanford University was used and the
programs were written in SAIL programming language. Scott Daniels.
Ron Roberts, and Rohert Smith helped design these programs.
1£".15
LXSLZ, _.2 &
I. Computer Audio System and Recording
The computer audio system that was used was the Delta Modulation
Audio System of IMSSS and had a reasonably good sound quality.
The llandarin sounds in Lessons 3 to 23 were recorded by Professor
Kung-yi Kao and me and the rest of the lessons by me alone. The
recordings in English for the whole course were made by Suzanna Wong
Wu.
CHAPTER 4
POSSIBLE SIDE EFFECTS AND THEIR RB:1EDIES .
Tnere are several possible side effeets to programmed instruetion.
These effeets and some attempted remedies are discussed in tnis enapter.
A. Students' Boredom
Tnis is a eommom eritieism about programmed instruetion. After
a short learning period, the repeated aetivity--whien is without
diseussion witn elassmates and teaehers; without slides, blaekboard
explanations or pietures; without experiments or field trips--beeomes
monotonous and students feel bored. Sinee a CAl course is one kind of
programmed instruetion, it is subject to this effeet too. To remedy
this effect, I arranged some activities to maintain student's interest
in learning; for example, I had a eonference arranged for each student
for a certain amount of time after finisned a eertain number of lessons.
I met witn the students when they had eompleted the work through
Lessons 10, 23, 30, 38, 45 and 55. Eaeh time the students met with me,
I cnecked their pronuneiation on phonologieal elements, tones,
vocabulary, and sentences, and I conversed with tnem in Mandarin. With
these aetivities, students were less likely to feel bored because they
nad chances to use what they had learned. Tnis point is very important
in foreign-language learning beeause language is to be used. Only
tnrough practieal use of the language do students develop a genuine
interest in learning a language. Aeeording to Lambert, the motivation
of tne students is one of tne important faetors influeneing their
suecess in learning a foreign language and is independent of general
24
. j ; ; ~ ! 1 ! ~ !!!_!l!IZiIl'Z!I!,lIIlitl!!,I!IIlIlI!!IIlII!I ....""'__............... ..... _
25
intelligence and language aptitude (12). So maintaining the students'
interest (or motivation) is a critical objective of the course.
B. Inaccuracy of Pronunciation
In this CAl course, the teacher could not listen to the students'
pronunciation and make immediate correction. Also, the speech
recognition of the computer audio system was still in an early stage of
development. The computer was not yet capable of recognizing all
speech or of correcting students' pronunciation. Since immediate
correction is an important procedure in helping students pronounce
accurately, this is a serious side effect of the CAl course. I
compensated for this effect in six ways, as follows.
(a). Handouts. The handouts I gave to the students included written
materials and figures. In the written materials for Lessons 1 and
,
2, I provided students with simple and necessary phonological
information about tbe phonological system of Mandarin and
presented the notions of point and mode of articulation. In
Lessons 3-9, 11-14, and 16-22, I included a complete description
of, first, how to produce the phonological sounds according to
point and mode of articulation, tones, and spelling. Second, I
described the difficulties Americans may have when they pronounce
phonological sounds. For example, the English IBI is heard as
voiced to the American ear, whereas Ipl is heard as voiceless; but
the modes of articulation for Mandarin IBI is stop, unaspirate;
for Ipl, stop, aspirate. To the American, aspiration or lack of
aspiration has nothing to do with whether or not the stops he
hears are a like or different. So I to the student that
when he pronounces the Mandarin /p/, he should give adequate
aspiration. He should try to hold a piece of paper in front of
his mouth during articulation; if the paper receives of a
shock from the aspiration to move it sharply, the aspiration is
probably adequate. Finally, I provided rough English equivalents
of Handarin sounds· that provide useful information for the
students. For example, in English there is no /Z/ sound of
Mandarin. A lot of American students have difficulty pronouncing
Iz/. After I told them that /Z/ is a rough equivalent to /ds/ in
/leads/. they were able to produce a proper pronounciation of /Z/.
(These materials were provided by Dr. Kung-yi Kao of Stanford
University.) I included 53 figures to help the students
understand these written materials. These aids could not
guarantee that the students would have accurate pronunciation, but
at least they helped the students' pronunciation somewhat.
(b). Discrimination training. Before having the students practice
pronunciation. I asked them to discriminate the sounds they were
going to pronounce. After the students were able to discern
similarities and differences among the related sounds, it was
easier for them to pronounce them accurately, even though being
able to discriminate sounds correctly did not necessarily mean
correct pronunciation. Part 2 of Lessons 3, 5, 6, 8, 11. 13, and
16 were exercises in discrimination training.
(c). Listening before pronouncin&. In addition to discrimination
27
training, I asked students to listen to sounds before pronouncing
them. From just listening, the students found the characteristics
of each new sound and compared them with the English sounds. This
finding and a comparing helped them lmen they actually pronounced
these sounds. Part i and part 3 of Lessons 3, 6, 8, 11, 13, and
16 were designed for this purpose. Of course, not all the
students have the ability to find and compare characteristics.
For the students with this ability, listening was helpful.
(d). Recording a.ll t h ~ sounds while .£!!. the phone. The students
recorded all the sounds they produced a.s well a.s the model
sounds while they were on the phone (by the use of telephone
receiver pickup coil). After the cla.ss, the students could
compa.re their sounds a.nd the model sounds a.nd try to correct their
pronunciation. This self-comparison a.nd correction procedure
,
depended on the student's ability to identify the simila.rities or
differences between their sounds a.nd the model sounds. Different
students ha.d different abilities. Some· students were not a.ble to
identify the differences [3]. But the students with this a.bility
were a.ble to improve their pronuncia.tion with this procedure.
(e). Compa.ring the students' sounds a.nd the .!!'.odel ~ n d s . After the
students ha.d finished Lessons 1 through 23, they should ha.ve been
a.ble to produce a.ll the phonologica.l sounds, tones, a.nd spelling
correctly a.nd to pronounce a.ny llandarin sound without problem.
Therefore, starting from Lesson 24, I asked the students to
pronounce all the sounds by themselves before going to the
28
telephone. When they were on the telephone, they could check
their pronunciation by comparing it with the model sounds. If
their pronunciation was correct, their confidence in their
pronunciation was increased. If not, they were able to correct
their pronunciation by comparision. Of course, the students
without the ability to identify the differences between their
pronunciation and the model sound did not benefit from this
comparision process, but students with this ability did.
(f). Correction of pronunciation during periodic meetings. In the
first section of this chapter, I said that when the students had
finished Lessons 10. 23, 30, 38, 45. and 55 they met with me in my
office. At these meetings I checked their pronunciations. If
their pronunciation was good I told them so and complimented their
ability in order to build confidence in their pronunciation. If
,
their pronunciation was not accurate, I worked with them until it
Yas correct. In addition to correcting their pronunciation. I
told them where and why they were making mistakes. I also asked
the students to bring a tape recorder to our conference each time.
so that they could record all the sound both they and I produced.
If they needed more practice in pronunciation later, they could
simply play the tape recorder.
-----,...-
CHAPTER 5
EVALUATION
A. Experimental design.
Beginning 11andarin as taught in the Asian Language Department
at Stanford University is grammar oriented and the textbook is
Elementary Chinese, pUblished by ShangWu, Peking, 1972. 'this CAr-
curriculum concentrated on conversation and used a text r edited
myself; hence there was no control group available and it was
impossible to make any experimental comparision with regular class
instruction in this study. As it was quite safe to assume" that the
students did not know any Mandarin before taking this course, a
one-group posttest design was used.
B. Varia"bles.
(1). Dependent variables. The dependent variableS fell into two groups:
y, s) and production variables
6 I
The recognition variables were as follows: s ,
2
,
Y
13
(y ,
7
recognition variables (y ,
1
s ).
3
y: phonological elements and association of phonological sounds
1
with romanized characters (measured as in frame f)
y: spelling (measured as in frame g)
2
y: tones (measured as in frame h)
3
y: vocabulary (measured as in frame m)
4
y: sentences (measured as in frame m)
5
29
30
y: responses (measured as in frame n)
6
s :
1
sum of y. y. y. y.
1 2 3 4
y • and y.
5 6
The production variabes were the following:
y: phonological elements
7
y : tones
8
y : vocabulary
9
y : sentences
10
y : reponses
11
s :
2
sum of y. y. y.
789
y • and y
10 11
s: s + s
312
.
.
Y
12
interest
Y
13
: attitude ·towards CAI.
(2). Independent variables. The following items were used as the
independent variables in the study:
x: interest
1
x: attitude towards CAI
2
x: number of times loged in
3
31
x : age
4
x : sex (M = I, F = 0)
5
x: educational background (high school = 1, undergraduate = 2,
6
graduate = 3)
x: major (linguistics or language = 1, other = 0)
7
x: native language (Chinese = 1, other = 0)
8
x: race (Chinese = 1, other = 0)
9
x : Mandarin-speaking family member (yes = 1, no = 0)
10
x : Mandarin-speaking friend (yes = I, no = 0)
11
.
. x
12
opportunity to hear Mandarin (yes = I, no = 0)
x
13
x
14
x
15
x
16
:
:
:
:
average time spent on Lessons 3 through 23.
average time spent on Lessons 24 through 53
average time spent on the (entire) course
average time in between lessons (time not spent on lessons).
(3). Student evaluation. The students were asked to answer the
following 10 questions about the curriculum.
z: Do you feel that the material presented is worth learning?
1
z: Are the handouts clear and well organized?
2
32
z: Are the parts of the lessons given over the phone well
3
organized?
z: Are the exercises valuable in their own right?
4
z: Is it worthwhile to spend a long time on Mandarin phonology
5
(Lessons 1 through 23)?
z: Is the convenience of learning at home or in the office
6
worthwhile to you?
z: Is the convenience of being able to work on the program at any
7
time worthwhile to you?
z: Is it heplful to talk to Peter after a short period of
8
learning?
z: Do you feel comfortable with this new way of learning?
9
z : What is your overall evaluation of this courSe?
10
33
c. Instrumentation.
Since there are no standardized tests for testing Mandarin
competence for any levels and the goals of this curriculum, special
tests were constructed for this experiment. The tests that were
constructed were be achievement tests to measure.mastery of the
lessons and questionnaires to obtain the attitudes and personal
information of the students. The measuring instruments consisted of
short ·multiple-choice tests, achievement tests, and composite
questionnaire.
Short multiple-choice tests. There were a l t o ~ e t h e r 132
short multiple-choice tests (each consisting of about 10
items) for the SS lessons making an average of 2.38 tests
per lesson. These tests were not used to evaluate the
students' performance but, rather, were presented as
,
exercises to the students. The students had to answer at
least 80% of the test items correctly to pass the test and
to proceed to the next step of the lesson. The results
of these tests were used to construct the learning models
described in Chapter 6. All of these tests were given
over the telephone. The order of presentation of the
items in each exercise was randomized so that the students
could not pass the exercises by simply memorizing the
correct answers as given.
Achievement tests. The dependent variables will be measured
in these tests to evaluate the student's overall
achievement at the end of the sequence.
Lessons 54 and 55 were actually tests to measure
variables y. y. y.
1 2 3
tests were given over the
y. y. and
4 5
telephone.
y •
6
All these
To evaluate variables y. y.
7 8
The students were asked to pronounce
y. y • and y •
9 10 11
all the phonological
elements. tones. vocabularies. sentences. and responses.
All of the sounds produced were recorded and evaluated
by two native Mandarin speakers for the quality of the
pronunciations. The evaluaton sheet is found in Appendix
I. The average scores given by the two judges were the
scores for y. y. y. y • and y
7 8 9 10 11
In the evaluation sheet. correctness of meaning shows
how correctly the studerit translated an English vocabulary
a Mandarin utterance
or Sentence into the Mandarin vocabulary or sentence
with a
(y )
9
or how correctly the student responded (y ).
10
Mandarin utterance when he heard
(y ). Response speed means how fast the student
11
responded to an English vocabulary or sentence or to a
Mandarin 'utterance. The faster the response. the more
fluent was the student in llandarin. Accuracy of pronuncia-
tion is self-axplanatory. I calculated the reliability
of the scores for the two judges.
Questionnaires. Two composite questionnaires were designed.
One (Questionnaire I) was given to the students before
the start of their lessons to collect information on
all the independent variables. x. x. x. x. x.
1 3 4 5 6
was given
x, x,
7 8
naire II)
x ,
9
x
10
,
35
x and x The other (Question-
11 12
to the students after they had finished
the whole course to collect information on variables y ,
12
y,z,z,
13 1 2
See Appendixes
z ,
3
G and
z, z, z,
456
H for the two
z, z, z, and
789
questionnaires.
z
10
Computer-recorded histories. The computer recorded the
number of times a student logged in over the telephone, so
the information for variable x was automatically
3
available. The computer also recorded the starting and
ending times for each lesson, so x , x • x • x •
13 14 15 16
and x could be calculated from these recorded times.
17
...
D. Administration of Experiment.
Recruitment of students. Two small advertisements of the course
were placed in Stanford Daily and Palo Times and copies of a
small announcement (Figure 1) were distributed to the public
libraries in Palo Alto, Menlo Park, and Ifountain View and put on
bulletin boards on the Stanford University campus and in
supermarkets within Palo Alto area.
The response was good with 34 return calls for information, 13
of which resulted in appointments to meet with me. Since some of
the students had to work in the daytime, I met with them in the
evenings and on weekends.
First meeting. Each student at his or her first meeting received
written materials and figures for the first 10 lessons together with'
the two-page introduction to the curriculum shown in Appendix B. I
went over the material item by item with the student and then
demonstrated the use of the push-button telephone in my office. The
demonstration included how to log in to the computer system through
the telephone and how to take each lesson. After my demonstration,
the student was given a questionnaire to fill out. This
questionnaire (Questionnaire I) was designed to obtain information
on the student's background for evaluation of the curriculum.
Other meetings. Meetings were held in my office after the students
had finished a certain number of lessons. Materials for the next
few lessons were given to them. An informal session of reviewing
"" _
37
FIGURE 1
ANNOUNCE1ENTFOR THE COURSE
#######################################################################
# #
iJ #
# FREE COURSE. IN CONVERSATION: #
# #
# #
# THIS IS A COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION COURSE AT lllSSS OF #
# #
# STANFORD UNIVERSITY. YOU BE ACCESSIBLE TO A PUSH- #
iI #
# BUTTON TELEPHONE TO TAKE LESSONS AT HOME. CALL PETER WU, #
# #
# 497-3084, 3-5 DAILY. #
iJ #
iJ #
#######################################################################
.'
the students' pronunciation, with corrections of their errors (if
any), followed. All the llandarin sounds pronounced by'the students
were recorded. The students' performance and weaknesses were
apparent from hearig the tapes, which could be of value to both
myself and others to revise the curriculum.
Last Meeting. At the last meeting, I gave the students another
questionnaire (Questionnaire II) to fill in and administered various
tests on the production of sounds. All the students' reponses were
recorded so that the judges could hear the tape and give a
evaluation of the students' achievements of 11andarin sound
,production.
39
E. Summative Evaluation.
Of the 13 students who took the course seriously and worked
on their lessons at the time of this writirtg, 6 had already finished
the entire course, 3 were still taking the lessons 'but at their present
pace might need' at least two more months before completion, 2 had moved
out of the area and thus had dropped out, and the remaining 2 had
stopped for unknown reasons.
The six students who finished the whole course took an average of
86.83 days for completion. Considering the time required by the
experiment and the absence of any constraint or material reward (in
terms of credits, mortey, etc.) to the students, six, ,in my opinion, was
not too small a number of students, as the students could quit any time
they ~ d s h e d and their interest in learning Ilandarin was the only thing
that kept them in the course.
The following is a brief description of the students:
Student 317: Male, age 31, completed graduate education, from the
Philippines; parents Speak non-Mandarin Chinese, student speaks very
little South Fukienese (one 'of the Chinese dialects), native language
is Tagolog, (a Philippine language); now an engineer.
Student 325: Male, age 36, completed Master's degree in
psychology, Caucasian; native language is English, learned Spanish,
French, Russian, and Portuguese; now a computer programmer.
Student 327: Female, age 28, completed undergraduate degree in
biology, an American Chinese; native language is Cantonese, speaks
fluent English; now a computer programmer.
Student 366: Female, age 51, completed undergraduate degree in
40
therapy, native language is English; nOW a
housewife.
Student 371: Male, age 33, Ph.D. in philosophy,
native language German, speaks fluent English, Spanish,
and also speaks Japanese.
Student 327: Female, age 33, undergraduate in history, an
Eurasian with Chinese blood; native language is English, cannot speak
any kind of Chinese at all; now a computer operator.
Data on the dependent variables, independent variables and the
evaluations of the for student are presented in Tables
1. 2. and 3. respectively.
Because of the small sample size (6), strong results from the
statistical analysis of these data for the summative evaluation were
not expected. The results of the evaluation in this study were only
tentative and were intended to give possibly Some indications of the
strength of the curriculum. However, as in psychophysis experiments,
I have a large number of observations from single subjects. The
results from fitting the four learning models for each subject are
reliable.
An important point to note is that all the dependent variables
were measured without the students' being aware of a test situation.
This was done to ensure the students' cooperation in the learning
process, as well as to avoid any possible Hawthorne effect (i.e.,
attention itself improves performance). As a consequence, the scores
obtained for the dependent variables are likely to be an underestimate
of the true scores of the tests.
---
41
TABLE 1
DATA ON THE DEPENDENT VARIABLRS
~
Student
317 325 327 366 371 372
Mean
(sd)a
a
y (12) 9.67 11 10.67 11 11 11.67 10.84
1 ( 0.66)
y (10) 7 9 6 7 10 8 7.83
2 ( 1.47)
Y (10) 8 8 10 7 10 7 8.33
·3
( 1.37)
Y (12) 12 11 12 12 11 12 11.67
4 ( 0.52)
Y (12) 10 10 10 11 12 10 10.50
5 ( 0.84)
y (12) 12 12 11 11 10 10 11
6 ( 0.89)
s (68) 58.67 61.00 59.67 59.00 64.00 58.67 60.17
1 ( 2.07)
Y (12) 10.5 8 7 10.5 8 10 9.00
7 ( 1.52)
y (12)
11 9.5 9 10 10 10 9.92
8
( 0.66)
Y (18) 15.5 9 13.5 14 16.5 f3 13.58
9 ( 2.60)
Y (18) 15.5 10 11.5 14 14.5 13 13.08
10
( 2.04)
y (18)
15 10.5 10.5 13.5 13 10.5 12.17
11
( 1.94)
-
-------
s (78)
67.5 47 51.5 62 62 56.5 57.75
2
( 7.58)
42
TABLE 1 (Continued)
s (170) 145.5 130 132.5 121 148 138.5 135.92
3
(10.14)
Y (20)
16 17 15 17 17 16 16.33
3
( 1.37)
y (12) 12 11 12 12 11 12 11.67
4
( 0.52).
y (12) 10 10 10 11 12 10 10.50
5 ( 0.84)
y (12) 12 12 11 11 10 10 11
6 ( 0.89)
--.
s (68) 58.67 61.00 59.67 59.00 64.00 58.67 60.17
1 ( 2.07)
y (l2) 10.5 8 7 10.5 8 10 9.00
7 ( 1.52)
y (12) 11 9.5 9 10 10 10 9.92
8 ( 0.66)
y (l8) 15.5 9 13.5 14 16.5 13 13.58
9 ( 2.60)
Y (18) 15.5 10 11.5 14 14.5 13 13.08
10 ( 2.04)
Y (18) 15 10.5 10.5 13.5 13 10.5 12.17
11 ( 1.94)
-----
s (78)
67.5 47 51.5 62 62 56.5 57.75
2 ( 7.58)
s (170) 145.5 130 132.5 121 148 138.5 135.92
3 (10.14)
Y (20) 16 17 15 17 17 16 16.33
12
( 0.82)
Y (30) 25 22 27 22 23 19 23.00
13
( 2.76)
a
The maximum score for each variable is indicated in parentheses
after that variable; ~ h e standard deviation, in parentheses below the
mean.
43
TABLE 2
DATA ON THE INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
Student
317 325 327 366 371 372
Mean
(sd)
x 15 18 15 18 16 17 16.50
1 ( 1.38)
x 20 25 27 21 26 28 24.50
2 ( 3.27)
x 64 214 76 97 58 58 94.50
3 (60.37)
x 31 36 28 51 33 33 35.33
4 ( 8.12)
x 1 1 0 0 1 0
5
x 3 3 2 2 3 2
6
.
x
0 0 0 0 1 0
7
x
0 0 1 0 0 0
8
x 1 0 1 0 0 0
9
x
0 0 0 0 0 0
10
x 0 1 1 1 1 1
11
x 1 1 1 1 1 a
12
x 34.2 30.7 30.7 36.1 22.8 35.5 31.67
13 ( 4.92)

44
TABLE 2 (Continued)
x
25.1 65.2 26.9 29.5 25.4 31.4 33.92
14 (15.52)
x 28.7 51.5 28.4 32.1 24.3 33.0 33.00
15 ( 9.57)
x 2495.3 2685.0 1989.1 3989.3 927.1 1489.8 2262.60
16 (1064.86)
~ L L & L a U _ & M
&
45
TABLE 3
DATA ON COURSE EVALUATION BY STUDENTS
Student
317 325 327 366 371 372
Mean
(sd)
z 3 3 3 4 4 3 3.33
1 (0.52)
z 3 3 3 4 3 3 3.17
2 (0.41)
z 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.00
3 (0.00)
z 3 3 3 3 4 3 3.17
4 (0.41)
z 2 4 4 3 2 2 2.83
5 (0.98)
z 3 3 3 3 4 4 3.33
6 (0.52)
z 3 4 3 4 4 4 3.67
7 (0.52)
z 3 4 3 4 4 4 3.67
8 (0.52)
z 3 3 3 4 3 3 3.17
9 (0.41)
z 3 3 3 4 3 3 3.17
10
(0.41)
1llM __.....
46
The mean scores for the variables of recognition are shown in
Table 1. All the mean scores were very closes to their m ~ x i m u m scores.
(phonological elements) was 10.84 out of 12.
It is my opinion that the the mean was 7.83 out of 10.
The mean scores for y
1
The student missed only 1.16 phonological elements. On y (spelling).
2
students did
very well. as this test is very difficult even for a native Mandarin
speaker. On y (tones). the mean was 8.33 out of 10. In this test.
3
the students were required to identify the tones for pairs of
"different" sounds. If the sounds were the same for each pair.
comparison of the tones within each pair might help the students to
identify the tones. but for "different" sounds within each pair. the
advantage of comprison was lost and identification of the tones became
more difficult. Therefore. I think the students also performed well on
(vocabulary), the mean was 11.6 out of 12. which is quite y •
3
high.
On Y
4
On' Y (sentence translation) and y (response) the means
5 6
were 10.5 out ~ f 12 and 11 out of 12 respectively. Botti exercises were
successful; the students missed only 1.6 and 1.3 of the items. the
contents of which are randomly chosen.
The mean of s (sum of y, Y , Y • Y •
1 1 2 3 4
for overall recognition ability; it was 60.17
y • and y )
5 6
out of 68.
was a score
The students
did very well on each part of the test (phonological elements. spelling.
tones. vocabulary. sentence translation, and response). One should
also bear in mind that the recognition of sounds over the phone was
more difficult than in ordinary conversation (because of the fidelity
and intensity of the sounds over the phone) and that the students were
taking these tests without knowing that they are being tested. The
47
standard deviation for s, 2.07, is quite small, indicating that the
1
students did uniformly well on these variables. Therefore, I will say
that the curriculum was doing a good job in teaching the recognition of
sounds.
Each student's sound-production ability was evaluated by judges
Wun-I Chang and Josie Chen. They are both native Mandarin speakers and
both grew up and graduated from college in Taiwan. Each has a Masters
degree from an American university. They speak excellent Mandarin and
were well qualified to be judges for this study.
The evaluation sheet (see Appendix I) has five parts: phonological
elements (maximum score = 12), tones (maximum score = 12), vocabulary
(maximum score = 18), sentence translation (maximum score = 18), and
response (maximum score = 18). Evaluations of the phonological
elements and tones were according to response speed and accuracy of
pronunciation, 6 points each; evaluations of vocabulary, sentence
translation, and response were according to response speed, accuracy of
pronunciation, and correctness in meaning, 6 points each. lleanings of
"response speed", "accuracy of pronunciation", and "correctness in
meaning" are explained on page 34.
The reliability or consistency of the two judges was measured by
rank correlation, since the 'score' as evaluated by a judge is an
ordinal measurement. The rank correlation (Table 4) for y (phono-

(total), 1. 000.
logical elements) was .957; for
Y
11
for
All the rank
which might have been y ,
8
(tones), .085; for y
9
translation), .986;
Y
8
(sentence
Y
10
Y
12
very high, except for correlations were
(response), .986; and for
(vocabulary), .814; for
48
if it had not been for the ties (four students by Wun-I
Chang and two by Josie Chen). Generally speaking. the of
consistency of the judges were very except for tones.
The sound-production scores (Table 1) "ere not as good as those
for sound recognition. The mean scores were quite a bit lower than the
9 out of 12 for
actually not doing that
maximum scores:
Table 5 the scores
, y
13.58
11
students were
9.92 out of 12 for y.
8
12.17 out 18 for
y ,
7
18 for
in this area.
Y
10
If we look closer. the
Y
12
poorly
13.08 out of
for
y •
9
of 78
out of 18 for
and 57.75 out
of R (response speed) and A (accuracy of pronunciation) summed over
Table 6 gives the scores of
students were better in
(correctness and . C A
Table 5 shows that the
R,
Y
11
they can produce the phonological A' ,
and
Y
10
than
y •
9
R
and y.
8
meaning) summed over
y
7
of
elements and tones without much hesitation, but the accuracy of
pronunciation is not that excellent. From Table 6, the students did
best in . C, then R. and then A. The mean score of the two judges
for R (13.7) is still higher than that for A (12). however, C
03.1) is the best. That is to say, to the native :Iandarin speakers
(in this case, the two judges), the students could communicate better
than they can pronounce aandarin. I think this is an interesting
point. According to Jakobovits [11), language is for communication.
He think that high phonetic accuracy is not required for effective
communication and is inordinately difficult to attain in any event.
I think Jakobovits is realistic. It is extremely hard to find a
foreigner Who speaks without a foreign accent and an American
who speaks Mandarin without an accent. Therefore, it may be
-------------_........_------_._-
TABLE 4
DATA ON EVALUATION BY JUDGES
Student
a
Judge A
Rink Score
Judge B
Rank Score
y (phonological elements): rank correlation = .957
7
bA RA
317 2 1 1 ( ~ , 5 ) 1.5 10(6,4)
325 4.5 9(5,4) 4.5 7(4,3)
327· 6 8(4,4) 6 6(4,2)
366 2 11 (6,5) 1.5 10(5,5)
371 4.5 9(5,4) 4.5 7(4,3)
372 2 11 (6.5) 3 9(5.4)
- - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - -
y (tones): rank correlation = .085
8
317 3
11(6,5) 1 11(6,4)
325 3
11(5,4) 6 8(4.3)
327 6 8(4.4) 2 10(4.2)
366, 3 11(6.5) 4 9(5.4)
371 3 11(5.4) 4 9(4.3)
372 3 11(6.5) 4 9(5.4)
-------------------------------------------------------
y (vocabulary): rank correlation = .814
9
RAe
317 2 16(5,5.6) 2 15(6.4.5)
325 6 9(3.4.2) 6 9(3.3.3)
327 5 t3(5.3,5) 3.5 14(5.4,5)
366 4 14(5,4.5) 3.5 14(5.4.5)
371 1 17(6.5.6) 1 16(6,4.6)
372 3 15(5.5,5) 5 11(3.4.4)
50
TABLE 4 (Continued)
y (sentence translation): rank correlation = .986
10
317 1 16(5,5,6) 1 15(5,4,6)
325 6 11 (4,4, 3) 6 9(3,3,3)
327 5 13(4,4,5) 5 10(3,3,4)
366 2.5 15(5,5,5) 3 13(4,4,5)
371 2.5 15(5,5,5) 2 14(5,4,5)
372 4 14(5,4,5) 4 12(4,4,4)
-------------------------------------------------------
y (response): rank correlation = .986
11
317 1 15(5,5,5) 1 15(5,4,6)
325 5 12(4,4,4) 5 9(3,3,3}
327 5 12(4,4,4) 5 9(3,3,3)
366 2 14(4,5,5) 2.5 13(4,4,5}
371 3 13(4,4,5) 2.5 13(5,3,5}
372 5 12(4,4,4} 5 9(3,3,3)
- - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
y (total): rank correlation = 1.000
. ;
317
325
327
366
371
372
1
6
5
2.5
2.5
4
69
52
54
65
65
63
1
6
5
2.5
2.5
4
66
42
49
59
59
50
tz
a
Judge A was Mr. Wun-l Chang; Judge B was Miss Josie Chen.
b
R = response speed; A = accuracy of pronunciation;
C = correctness in r n e a n i n ~ .
51
TABLE 5
SCORES OF R AND A SilllllED OVER
Y
AND
Y
7 8
Judge A Judge B
R A R A
317 (12 , 10) (12 , 8)
325 (10 , 8) ( 8 , 6)
327 ( 8 , 8) ( 8 , 4)
366 (12 , 10) (10 , 9)
371 (10 , 8) ( 8 , 5)
372 (12 , 10) (10 , 8)
Uean (10.7, 9.0) ( 9.3, 6,7)
R A
Mean of the two judges: (10.0, 7.8)
52
TABLE 6
SCORES OF R, A, AND C SU!:IMED OVER
Y ,
Y
, AND
Y
9 10 11
Judge A Judge B
~
;1
R A C R A C
317 (15 , 15 , 17) 06 , 12 , 17)
325 (11 , 12 , 9) ( 9 ,
9 , 9)
327 (13 , 11 , 14) 01
,
10
, 12)
366 (14 , 14 , 15) 03
, 12 , 15)
371 (15 , 14 16) (16 , 11 , 16)
372 (14 , 13 , 14) (10 , 11 , 11)
Mean (13.7, 13.2 ,14.2) (12.5, 10.8 ,13.3)
R

C
ltean of two judges: 03.1, 12.0, 13.7)
53
too much to ask for a perfect pronunciation in
teaching, and from the point of view that language is for'communication,
the teaching of this course on sound production is reasonably good even
though there may be a need for more concentration on the subject matter
of pronunciation.
The mean score on variable of y (interest in Mandarin
12
after finishing the course) was 16.33 (out of 20). This means that the
students had a relatively high interest in learning after finishing
this course.
Also the mean score on y (attitude toward CAl curriculum in
13
teaching Iffindarin after finishing the course) was 23 (out of 30) which
indicates that the students had a relatively positive attitude toward
the CAl curriculum in teaching Mandarin conversation after taking this
course. From the mean scores on y and y , we may conclude that the·
12 13
course was relatively successful. At least the course did not
discourage the students' interest in learning Mandarin or produce
negative attitudes toward the CAl llandarin conversational curriculum.
It must be remembered, however, that the sample was biased because
information on y and
12
course is not available.
y on the students who did not finish the
13
Let us look next at the students' evaluation of this course. The
evaluation data are presented Table 3. For z (Do you feel that the
1
material presented was worth learning?), the mean was 3.33 (out of 4);
(Were the handouts clear and well organized?), the mean was
(Were the parts of lesson over the phone well organized?),
for z
2
3.17; for z
3
the mean was 3; on z
4
(Were the exercises valuable in their own

right?), the mean was 3.17; for z (Was it worth spending a long time
5
on Mandarin phonology?), the mean was 2.83; for
convenience of learning at home or in the office
z (Was the
6
worthwhile to you?) ,
the mean was 3.33; for z (Was the convenience of being able to use
7
the program any time worthwhile to you?), the mean was 3.67; for
z (Was it helpful to talk to Peter after a short period of learning?),
8
the mean was 3.67; for z (Do you feel comfortable about this way of
9
learning?),·the mean was 3.17; and for z (What is your over all
10
evaluation about this course?), the mean was 3.17.
From the mean scores, we can See that there were no unfavorable
scores on any of the items. Most of the items had a mean of 3 or
Slightly above. However, the means for z and
6
closes to the maximum scores. The students seemed
z
7
to
were higher and
enjoy very much
being able to learn at home, in the office, or any place with a push-
button telephone any time that the computer was working which was
considered a merit of this course. Also, the mean of z was very
8
high, indicating that students needed more chances to talk to a native
Mandarin speaker to practice pronunciation. This will be facilitated
by computer recognition of human speech. At present such recognition
is beyond our technical capacity, but when a major breakthrough occurs
the enormous potential of a CAl curriculum in teaching foreign-language
Conversation will be fully realized. Until that time, occasional
contact between students and a native Mandarin speaker is necessary in
order to have effective teaching in a CAl Mandarin conversational
course.
On z, three students scored 2 (Fair), one student scored 3 (Yes),
5
r
,
,
55
and two students scored 4 (Definitely). The students scoring 4 seemed
to realize the importance of the learning of Mandarin phonology to the
learning of Mandarin conversation. After learning all the phonological
sounds and rules of llandarin, the students could pronounce any
vocabulary item correctly, even without the hearing the model sounds
before, just by looking at the romanized representation of the Chinese
characters. But the lessons on the phonology might have been a bit
lengthy and students might have felt bored, because all the students
scoring 2 had higher scores on oral production than the ones scoring 4.
For the students with better language aptitude, the time devoted to
learning phonology eould have been shortened. If they spent too much
time on the phonology they had already learned, they could begin to
feel bored.
All the students appeared to feel comfortable about this new way
This z •
9
implies that this way of learning (reading the handout first and then
of learning, as indicated by the mean score of 3.17 on
,
spending 25 minutes on the telephone) was acceptable to the adult
student.
The mean for z was 3.17, and all the students judged the
10
course "Good". There were no scores of 2 (Fair) or 1 (Poor). The
students' evaluation of this course was positive and encouraging.
F. Data Analysis
The following data analysis was to investigate possible
relationships between the variables.
Correlations between recognition and production were as follows:
for phonological elements r = .1598, for tones r =-.8204, for
vocab,ulary r = .1943, for sentence translation r = .5754, and for
response r = -.2197. These product-moment correlations indicate that
recognition and production of sounds may involve different skills.
The correlation of the production of phonological elements
are resonably high (r = .7937*). and tones (y)
8
the production of phonological
(y )
7
This indicates that
elements and tones may use a similar
skill. The correlation of the productions of vocabulary (y) and
9
sentence (y ) is .8879**, which is also high and indicates that the
10
productions of vacabulary and sentence require a similar skill,
translation of English into l1andarin. Also the correlation is .8693**
for production of sentence (y ) and response (y ). The high
10 11
correlation indicates that the production of sentence and response may
take same skill, that is, the production of a sentence.
The fact that some persons felt the course was interesting (y )
12
might be related to the fact that they could work on the lessons at any
and might be due to talking to me after a short period of
b.etween the lessons. The
is .7906* and z
7
and y
12
z is .7906*.
8
had longer inteval
The correlation between (z ).
8
and bet"een y
12
Older persons
time (z)
7
learning
------------------
*
**
significant at the 10% level.
significant at the 5% level.
r = .7293
r = .8113
with df = 4.
with df = 4.
T
i
!
correlation between of x and x
57
is .7695*. The older person may
4 16
like to take course at a more comfortable pace while the younger person
may prefer to finish the course quickly.
I
The person who felt comfortable with this new way of l e a r n i n ~ had
a better evaluation on the course. The correlation between z and
9
z is 1.0000**.
10
Again. a word of caution: the sample size was small and the above
observations are only tentative and meant to serve as possible
guidelines for future studies.
I.
G. Formative evaluation.
In providing a formative evaluation of this curriculum three
points should be noted: the strengthening of students on the
production of tones, the correction of errors in the curriculum, and
more student control of the lessons.
Strengthening of students ~ . ~ production of tones. During the
first few meetings 'nth the students, non-Cantonese students appeared
to have difficulty with the pronunciation of tones of non-monosyllables;
and so at later meetings, emphasis was placed on the pronunciation of
tones and the students were requested to pronounce the four tones not
only forward but also backwards (usually the students were required to
pronounce the four tones only forward). It appeared that students made
some improvement in the production of tones after special attention was
given to it, but further study is needed to substantiate the statement.
Correction of errors in ~ curriculum. Even though the handouts
and lessons over the telephone had been checked two or more times, SOme
errors were detected by the first students attempting the lessons.
Corrections were made immediately after the students had informed me
of the errors so that the lessons presented the other students would be
free of errors.
More student control over the lessons. Some of the students felt
----
that they did not have enough control over the lessons because they
could hear only the sounds given by the lessons and could not get the
sounds that they wanted to hear a second time. The Mandarin sound
dictionary (Appendix F) was created for this purpose; students could
59
hear any ~ f u n d a r i n phonological sound as many times as they wish. Plans
for a Mandarin vocabulary dictionary were abandoned as there are only
12 keys on the phone dial and codings for each vocabulary would have
been very complicated.
CHAPTER 6
LEARNING MODELS
A. Models
Four different learning models were constructed separately from
the results of all the multiple choice tests in the course and were
evaluated according to their fits to these results. The models were
applied to the data.for each individual student and from the goodness
of fit of each model to the data, we were able to tell how a student
learns.
In the following are presented the axioms for the four models.
The identification and trial axioms are the same for all four models
and are presented first.
Identification Axioms
II. There is a finite number of states in a given order, denoted
by O,l, .•. ,i, ... ,n.
12. Every student starts from state O.
Trial Axioms
Tl. For each state i, there are m trials, which are denoted
i
by l, ,j, ... ,m.
i
T2. Each trial contains r subtrials, which are denoted by 1,.
i
.• ,k, ••. ,r ..
i
T3. Exactly one stimulus is sampled on each subtrial.
60
~ ! ! I . !!l!!!II__....... _
61
T4. There are r stimuli for each trial and they are randomly
i
assigned to the subtrials.
SIMPLE MODEL(Model 1)
Response Axiom
Rl. Probability of success for each subtrial is independent of
the order of the subtrials and the number of trials and states. i.e••
p = P.
~ k
where 1
=
1,2» .•• ,n.
j
=
t,2, ... ,m

1
k
=
1,2, ... ,r .
i
Mastery Criterion Axioms
Cl. Criterion of mastery of a given state for all students. (or
decision rule on Whether a student will stay in the same state or be
promoted to the next state): A student who scores at least 80%(r ) in
i
a given trial of state i 1s considered as having mastered state i;
otherwise. the student has not mastered state i. If a student has
not mastered state i. he will stay at state i and will be given
another trial. If a student has mastered state i. he will go to
state (i + I).
C2. The probability of going from state (i - 1) to state i at
the end of a trial is C. where i = 1.2.3••••• n.
i
Here state corresponds to frame for each lesson. and n is total
62
number of frames in the curriculum. Trial corresponds to the
number of times the students do the same exercise. Trial 1 -means
that the student does the exercise the first time; trial 2 means
that the student does the same exercise the second etc.
Subtrials correspond to the order of items presented in the exercise.
- Model 1 simply says that a student does not make progress as the
subtrials or trials proceed. It means that the student is not able
to learn. which may be because either the curriculum is too difficult.
It also may be that student has a low language aptitude.
SINGLE OPERATOR LINEAR MODEL (Model 2)
Response Axioms
R1. All stimuli in the jth trial of any state have the same
probability' p
j
for all i and
of
k.
being responded to correctly. i.e•• p = P
ijk j
R2. A student who fails to respond to a stimulus correctly on
the jth trial. by reinforcement his probability p of
j+l
to the same subtrial correctly on the (j + 1)th trial is increased.
This increased probability is
p = a(p) + (1 - a).
j+l j
where j = 1.2.3••••• {m - 1).
i
Mastery Criterion Axioms
C1. Same as Axiom C1 of Model 1.
Model 2 says that student will learn as trials proceed but will
not learn as subtrials proceed. Since the stimuli present for each
subtrial ate not necessarily related. I think this model will probably
describe student learning most appropriately.
SERIAL EFFECT MODEL (Model 3)
Response Axioms
Rl. All stimuli in the kth subtrial of any trial in any state
have the same probability p of being responded to correctly. i.e ••
k
p = P
ijk k
for all i and j.
R2. The probability of success in the (k + l)th subtrial of any
trial is ,greater than in the kth subtrial of the same trial. i.e••
p = b(p ) + (1 - b).
k+l k
where k = 1.2••••• (r - 1).
i
Mastery Criterion Axioms
Same as in Uodel 1.
Model 3 says that a student learns as subtrials proceed and that
he will not learn as trials proceed. As stated before the stimuli
for each subtrial are not necessarily connected; therefore it does not
look likely that the model will fit the data very well. If it turns
out that the model fits the data. then my statement about the
connections among stimuli for each subtrial is wrong.
64
SINGLE OPERATOR LINEAR AND SERIAL EFFECT MODEL (Model 4)
Response Axioms
Rl. The probability of success on the kth sub trial of the jth
trial is the same no matter what the state is, i.e.,
all 1.
p = P
ijk jk
for
R2. The probability of success in the (k + l)th subtrial of the
jth trial is greater than in the kth subtrial of the same trial,
i.e .•
P
j,k+l
= b(p ) + (1 - b),
jk
where j = 1,2, ••• ,m and
i
k = 1,2, ••• ,(r 1).
i
R3. A student who fails to respond to a stimulus correctly on the
kth subtrial of the jth trial, by reinforcement his probability
p of responding correctly to the same subtrial in the (j + l)th
j+l,k
trial is increased. This increased probability is
p = a(p ) + (1 - a),
j+l,k jk
where j = l,2,3, ••• ,(m -1)
i
k = 1,2,3, ••• ,r •
i
Mastery Criterion Axioms
Cl. Same as Cl for Modell.
This model is a combination of Hodel 2 and Model 3. The model
says that a student will learn as trials and subtrials proceed. This
65
model implies both that the stimuli for each subtrial are connected and
that the degree of difficulty of the material in the curriculum is
adequate for the student.
Also, if either Model 2 or Model 3 fails to fit the data well this
model will not fit the data well either because this model is a
combination of the two.
From the above discussion, we see each model has its own interest.
By fitting the models to the data, we can see whether the student
learns as the trials or as the subtrials proceed. In addition, from
the size of the parameters a and b, we can see how fast the student
learns as the trials or subtrials proceed.
T
,
66
B. Estimation of parameters.
The least-squares method will be used to estimate all of the
parameters in the four models. Maximum-likelihood estimators will not
be used since the maximum likelihood functions for Models 1, 2, 3 and 4
are extremely complicated. The parameters to be estimated for each
model are:
Model 1: p
}rodel 2: p, a
Model 3:
P.
b
Model 4:
P.
a, b.
Let
, {l
x -
ijk-
o
if a student's answer is incorrect.
if a student's answer is correct; .
where i
=
0,l.2••••• n (index for state).
j
=
1,2,· ... ,m (index for trial),
i
k
=
1,2, ... ,r (index fo r subtrial).
i
Also let p{x
=
1)
=
q,
ijk
P(x
=
0)
=
1
- q
= p.
ijk
Hodel 1:
Let L =222: (x
ijk ijk
2
q) •
After taking the derivative of L with respect to q, we have:
67
q = (HI x ) / (L2l- 1) •
ijk ijk ijk
Model 2:
2
Let L =2}} (x - a q).
ijk ijk
After taking derivatives of L with respect to q and a, we have:
j-l
q = [211x a (1
ijk ijk
2
- a )]
ik
2m
- a )] (1)
j-2
1:2:.2. x (j-l)a
ij=2k ijk

- aq (j - i)a
ij=2k
= 0
(2)
Substitue q of equation 1 in q of equation 2 and solve for a.
Sometimes, it is impossible to find the exact root of a for equation
1. I use Newton"s method of root approximation to estimate a. I then
substitute the value of a in equation 1 and solve for q.
Hodel 3:
k-l 2
Let L = (x - b q).
ijk ijk
After taking derivitives of L with respect to a and q, we have:
k-1
q=[2Z2x b (1
ijk ijk
2
- b ) 1/ ri2. (1
ij
2r
- b ) 1.
(3)
2(k-2)
- bq 2:i2-. (k - l)b
ijk=2
-ZZ:2.
ijk=2
k-2
x (k - 1)b
ijk
= o. (4)
Substitute q of equation 3 in q of equation 4 and solve for
b. I then substitute the value of b back into equation 3 and solve
for q.
T
,
': 68
Hodel 4:
j-l k-l 2
Let L = 2:n (x - a qb ) •
ijk ijk
Again, after taking derivatives of L with respect to a, band
q, we have:
j-l k-l
a b )(1
ijk ijk
2
- a ) (l
2

i
2m 2r
- a )(1 - b)].
(5)
k-l
.:r L1. x b (j-
. ij=2k ijk
j-2
1)a
2 (j-2) 2 (k-1)
b =0.
ij=2k
(6)
= o.

ijk=2
j-l k-2 2(j-1) 2(k-Z)
x a (k - l)b - (k - l)a b
ijk ijk=2
(7)
Substitute q of equation 5 into equation 6 and equation 7. Then
solve for 'a and b simultaneously. Again, an approximation method
estimation will be used (sometimes, by trial and error method). After
the values of a and b are found, suhstitute the values of a and b
back into equation 5 and solve for q.
Equations.2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 look formidable. But after
.. --
substitution of 0 and 1 for x ,
ijk
All the above calculations are done
the equations look much
with the computer.
T
69
c. Evaluation of the Models
Two statistics calculated from the actual data will be compared
with their theoretical counterparts of the four models. The two
statistics are:
U
Ak
A
= L (T I
j=1 jk
c ),
jk
where
T = the total number of errors on subtrial k in
jk
trial j over all states,
C = total number of appearances of subtrial k in
jk
trial j over all all states,
U = the sum of the proportion of total errors for the
Ak
first A trials for some fixed k (or subtrial),
V(U ) = the variance of U
Ak Ak
Since the data for the first five subtrials and the first two
trials are more complete, I only calculate
1,2,3,4 and 5 and A = 1,2.
Let me explain more about tham:
U and
Ak
V(U )
Ak
for k =
T =
jk
2.x
i ijk
E(T )
jk
= E(2.x ) =
i ijk
C
jk
E(x )
ijk
E(T IC ) =
jk jk
E(x )
ijk
A-I A
+ a q = q[(l - a )/(1 - all
I
1
,
~
70
A
E(U ) = Z.E(x )
Ak j=l ijk
Modell: E(U ) = Aq
Ak
Model 2: E(U ) = q + aq +
Ak
k-l
Model 3: E(U ) = Aqb
Ak
k-l k-l
Model 4: E(U ) = qb + aqb +
Ak
A-1 k-1
+ a qb
I
!
k-l A
= qb [(1 - a )/(1 - all
Model 1: V(U ) = Aq(l - q)
Ak
I
I
I
t
A
V(U ) = V( 2. x )
Ak j=1 ijk
over the trials is assumed.)
A
= L Vex )
j=l ijk
(Here, independence
A j-l j-l
Model 2: V(U ) =2.a q(l
- a
q)
Ak j=1
k-l k-l
Model 3: V(U ) = Aqb (l
- qb
)
Ak
A j-1
k..;l
j-l k-l
Model 4: V(U ) =2.a qb (1 - a qb )
Ak j=l
T
,
11
71
D. The Fit of the Models
The models were fitted for each student, and the estimated values
of the parameters show how effectively the student learned. The
estimations of the parameters and the expected values from the
resulting fitted models were compared with the observed values for each
student.
Student 317:
Model 1: Simple liodel
p
=
.9301075
jk
Model 2: Single Operator Linear Hodel
p = .9296552, a = .7107843
j Expected Observed
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - _ .
1
2
•9296552
.9500000
.9298487
.9500000
Model 3: Serial Effect Model
p = .9024364, b = .9303846
\
, i k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Expected
.9024364
.9092284
.9155475
.9214267
.9268966
.9319857
.9367206
.9411258
.9452243
.9490376
Observed
.9047619
.9285714
.9523810
.9404762
.9166667
.8902439
.9538462
.9375000
.9629630
.9166667
72
In Model 2, a = .7107843. This implies that student 317 had a
fast learning speed. If he missed some of the items on the first trial,
he took care of most of those items on the second trial.
In Model 3, b = .9303834. This implies that either Student 317
does not learn much as the subtrials move on or the difficulty
associated with each stimulus is different even with the random
assignment of the stimuli to the subtrials of each trial.
Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model
a = .8390610, b = .9634405, p = .9186229
p = .8390610 X P + .1609390
j j-l
p = .9634405 X P + .0365595
k k,..l
for fixed k
for fixed j
74
TABLE 8
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U FOR STUDENT 317
Ak
j k Observed Model 1 !lodel 2 Model 3 Model 4
1
. 1
.085366 .069612 .070345 .097564 .081377
1 2 .073171 .069612 .070345 .090772 .078402
1 3 .048780 .069612 .070345 .084453 .075536
1 4 .060976 .069612 .070345 .078573 .072774
1 5 .085366 .069612 .070345 .073103 .070114
2 1 .585366 .139224 .120345 .195127 .149657
2 ·2 .073171 .139224 .120345 .181543 .144186
2 3 .048780 .139224 .120345 .168905 .138915
2 4 .060976 .139224 .120345 .• 157147 .133836
2 5 •085366 .139224 .120345 .146207 .128943 .
75
TABLE 9
CmlPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED V( U ) FOR STUDENT 317
Ak
j k Observed Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 !1ode1 4
1 1 .078079 .064766 .065396 .088045 .074755
1 2 .067817 .064766 .065396 .082532 .072255
1 3 .046401 .064766 .065396 .077320 .069830
1 4 .057258 .064766 .065396 .072400 .067478
1 5 .078079 .064766 .065396 .067759 .065198
2 1 .328079 .129532 .112896 .176090 .138373
2 2 .067817 .129532 .112896 .165064 .133712
2 3 .046401 .129532 .112896 .154641 .129192
2 4 .057258 .129532 .112896 .144799 .124811
2 5 .078079 .129532 .112896 .135519 .120566
i
76
From Table 7. 8 and 9. the data on Hodel 2 and !lodel 3 show that
the best fit to -the observed data is provided by Hodel 2. In Model 2.
the expected and obserJed probabilities are very close. lfodel 4 did
not provide a very good fit to the data. This may be caused by the
poor fit of Hodel 3 to the data. If both Hodel 2 and Model 3 have a
good fit. then Model 4 will have much better fit. The poor fit of
Model 3 to the data is expected because the degrees of difficulty for
each item (or stimulus) are not necessarily the same. Since Model 2
has the best fit. we can see that Student 317 did learn very well over
the trials.
None of the models fits well on U and variance of U because
Ak Ak
the C are too small. All the C are 2. which is not enough to
2k 2k
generate a good fit of the models to the data.
Review lessons
Modell: Simple Uodel
p = .9182283
Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model
p = .9183674.
\
a = .999999999
- ~ " " " ' - -
j
1
2
3
expected
.9183674
.9183674
.9183674
observed
.9260700
.8656716
.7777778
77
Model 3: Serial EUect !lodel
p = .8849805, b = .9349897
.k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
expected
.8849805
.8924579
.8994493
.9059861
.9120980
.9178125
.9231556
.9281512
.9328222
.9371894
observed
.9166667
.9166667
.9333333
.9333333
.8166667
.9000000
.8983051
.8813559
.9827586
1.0000000
In comparing the review lessons with the nonreview lessons, we see
that: p in Models 1. 2. and 3 for the review lessons is lower than for
the non-review lessons; the values of a in l!odel 2 and the values of
b in Model 3 for the review lessons are higher than for the nonreview
lessons. These imply that Student 317 did not learn as well in the
review lessons as he did in the nonreview lessons at the beginning of
the lessons. but then he picked up slowly as the trials and subtrials
went on. I think this might be due to the forgetting effect and the
feeling of being bored to have to learn something that one has already
learned before.
Student· 325:
Model 1:. Simple Model
p = .9011407
j,k
T
I
78
~ I D d e l 2: Single Operator Linear Model
p = .8878788.
1
a = .6973245
j
1
2
3
4
5
Expected
.8878788
.9218151
.9454798
.9619817
.9734889
Observed
.8873995
.9259259
.9275362
.9714286
1.0000000
Hodel 3: Serial Effect lIodel
p = .8432740. b = .8922922
k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Expected
.8432740
.8601546
.8752171
.8886572
.9006496
.9113504
.9208987
.9294185
.9370207
.9438041
observed
.8260870
.8869565
.9130435
.8869565
.9043478
.9203540
.9565217
.9090909
.9090909
.8970588
In lIodel 2. a = .6973245. This implies that Student 325 has a
fast learning rate over trials. In Model 3. b = .8922922. This
implies that Student 325 learned little as the subtrials moved on or
the difficulty associated with each stimulus was different. Here, we
can see that the smaller the value of a or b the faster the
learning rate is over the trials or subtrials.
' 3 § t t ~ j
~
1':1
79
Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Ilodel
a = .7005918
b = .9196347
p = .8455833
p = .7005918 X p + .2994082
j j-1
p = .9196347 X p + .0803653
k k-1
for a fixed k
for a fixed j
T
80
TABLE 10
COUPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED PROBABILITIES FOR STUDENT 325
j k Observed Hodel 4 l10del 3 Hodel 2 1 T C
jk jk
1 1 .7976191 .8455833 .8432740 .8878788 .9011407 17 84
1 2 .8928571 .8579930 .8601546 .8878788 .9011407 9 84
1 3 .9047619 .8694055 .8752170 .8878788 .9011407 8 84
1 4 .8690476 .8799007 .8886571 .8878788 .9011407 11 84
1 5 .8690476 .8895526 .9006496 .8878788 .9011407 11 84
1 6 .9146342 .8984287 .9113504 .8878788 .9011407 7 82
1 7. .9692308 .9065915 .9208987 .8878788 .9011407 2 65
1 8 .8888889 .9140983 .9294185 .8878788 .9011407 7 63
1 9 .8888889 .9210018 .9370207 .8878788 .9011407 6 54
1 -10 .8913044 .9273505 .9438041 .8878788 .9011407 5 46
2 1 .9000000 .8918169 .8432740 .9218151 .9011407 2 20
2 2 .8500000 .9005111 .8601546 .9218151 .9011407 3 20
2 3 .9000000 .9085065 .8752170 .9218151 .9011407 2 20
2
4 .9000000 .9158595 .8886571 .9218151 .9011407 2 20
2
5 1.0000000 .9226214 .9006496 .9218151 .9011407 0 20
2 6 .9000000 .9288400 .9113504 .9218151 .9011407 2 20
2
7 .8823529 .9345588 .9208987 .9218151 .9011407 2 17
2
8 1.0000000 .9398180 .9294185 .9218151 .9011407 0
16
2
9 1.0000000 .9446545 .9370207 .9218151 .9011407 0 14
2
10 .9230769 .9491024 .9438041 .9218151 - .9011407 1 13

m
T
,
,
81
TABLE 11
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U FOR STUDENT 325
Ak
j k Observed Model 1 Model 2 l10del 3 Model 4
1 1 .202381 .098859 .112121 .156726 .154417
1 2 .107143 .098859 .112121 .139845 .142007
1 3 .095238 .098859 .112121 .124783 .130595
1 4 .130952 .098859 .112121 .111343 .120099
1 5 .130952 .098859 .112121 .099350 .110447
2 1 .302381 .197719 .190306 .313452 .262600
2 2 .257143 .197719 .190306 .279691 .241496
2 3 .195238 .197719 .190306 .249566 .222088
2 4 .230952 .197719 .190306 .222686 .204240
2 5 .130952 .197719 .190306 .198701 .187826
82
TABLE 12
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED V(U ) FOR STUDENT 325
Ak
j k Observed Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
1 1 .161423 .089086 .099550 .132163 .130572
1 2 .095663 .089086 .099550 .120289 .121841
1 3 .086168 .089086 .099550 .109212 .113540
1 4 .113804 .089086 .099550 .098946 .105675
1 5 .113804 .089086 .099550 .089480 .098249
I
2 1 .251423 ,178172 .171622 .264326 .227052
2' 2 .223163 .178172 .171622 .240577 .211432
I
2 3 .176168 .178172 .171622 .218424 .196662
2 4 .203804 .178172 .171622 .197891 .182736
2 5 .113804 .178172 .171622 .178960 .169'540
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
,
!
I
,
I
d 2 - ~ * _
T
I
,
From Table 10, 11 and 12, the best fit of the expected
probabilities to the observed probabilities is provided by !fudel 4.
This is because the student learns over the trials and subtrials even
though b is a bit high. The best fit of U is Model 4 as expected,
Ak
because Uodel 4 has the best fit of expected probabilities to the
observed probabilities. Also, the best fit of V(U ) is Model 4, even
Ak
though none of the models has a good fit. This may be because the
independent assumption is too strong.
Review lessons
lfudel 1: Simple Uodel
p = .8793104
jk
Model 2: ,Single Operator Linear Hodel
p = .9319759, a = .5245632
j Expected observed
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1
2
3
.9319759
.9643171
.9812820
.8705179
.9264706
1.0000000
Undel 3: Serial Effect Uodel
p = .8298287, b = .9330568
T
!
,
k Expected observed
84
- ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
.8298287
.8412205
.8518497
.8617674
.8710211
.8796554
.8877116
.8952286
.9022423
.9087865
.8474576
.8474576
.9322034
.8813559
.8135593
.9152542
.8620690
.8965517
.8947368
.8863636
From Model 2 of the review lessons, p = .9319759, which is higher
than the corresponding p (= .8878788 ) of nonreview lessons. This
implies that Student 325 has not fogotten much when he did the review
lessons. Also in model 2 of review lessons, a = .5245632, which is
lower than the a (= .6973245) of nonreview lessons. This indicates
that the student who did not forget much recalled more quickly as
trials went on. Student 325 did not learn much on both review lessons
and nonreview lessons as subtrial went on.
Student 327:
Modell: Simple Model
p = .8347826
jk
Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model
p = .8344227, a = .999999999
,.
,
{
j
1
2
3
4
Expected
.8344227
.8344227
.8344227
.8344227
Observed
.8707015
.7211539
.6093750
.8400000
Model 3: Serial Effect Model
p .. .7821643, b.. .9488585
k expected observed
- - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
.7821643
.7933048
.8038755
.8139056
.8234227
.8324531
.8410217
.8491521
.8568667
.8641867
.8058252
.8640777
.8252427
.8349515
.8155340
.8118812
.8518519
.8625000
.9000000
.7796610
The large value of a in Model 2 and the value of b in Model 3
imply that Student 327 did not learn much as trials and subtrials went
on.
Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model
a
..
.6589000, b
..
.9999000, p
..
.8404119
p
..
•6589000 X P + .3411000 for fixed k
j j-l
p
..
.9999000 X P + .0001000 for fixed j
k
k-1
87
TABLE 14
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U FOR STUDENT 327
Ak
j k Observed ~ l o d e l 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
1 1 .158537 .165217 .165577 .217836 .159588
1 2 .085366 .165217 .165577 .206695 .159572
1 3 .121951 .165217 .165577 .196125 .159556
1 4 .121951 .165217 .165577 .186094 .159540
..
1 5 .146341 .165217 .165577 .176577 .159524
2 1 .182927 .330435 .331155 .435671 .264741
2 :! .121951 .330435 .331155 .413391 .264714
2 3 .170732 .330435 .331155 .392249 .264688
2 4 .170732 .330435 .331155 .372189 .264661
2 5 .182927 .330435 .331155 .353155 .264635
1
I
88
TABLE 15
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED V(U ) FOR STUDENT 327
Ak
j k Observed Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
1 1 .133403 .137921 .138161 .170383 .134120
1 2 .078079 .137921 .138161 .163972 .134109
1 3 .107079 .137921 .138161 .157660 .134098
1 4 .107079 .137921 .138161 .151463 .134087
1 5 .124926 .137921 .138161 .145398 .134076
2 1 .157198 .275841 .276323 .340767 .228215
2
2-
.113325 .275841 .276323 .327945 .228196
2 3 .153480 .275841 .276323 .315319 .228177
2 4 .153480 .275841 .276323 .302927 .228158
2 5 .160173 .275841 .276323 .290796 .228139
T
VJ
89
Table 13, 14 and 15 show that ~ i l l d e l 1 had the best fit to the
data. This implies that Student 327 did not learn much over trials and
subtrials.
Review lessons
lIodel 1: Simple lfodel
p = .9041353
jk
Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model
p = .9037736, a = .9999999
j Expected Observed
-------------------------
1
2
.9037736
.9037736
.9043825
.9000000
model.3: Serial Effect Model
p = .8555886, b = .9159727
~ ..
k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Expected
.8555886
.8677231
.8788380
.8890189
.8983444
.9068862
.9147103
.9218770
.9284415
.9344543
Observed
.8888889
.8867925
.8888889
.9259259
.8518519
.9245283
.9056604
.9811321
.8846154
.9512195
'i' +
90
Comparing the review lessons and nonreview lessons, the values for
p in lilldel 1, Model 2, and Model 3 for review lessons are higher than
for the nonreview lessons. This implies that the student did not

forget much when he did the review lessons. But the values of a and
b in Model 2 and Model 3, repectively, are as large as those for non-
review lessons. Student 327 did not recall fast as trials and
subtrials went on.
Student 366:
Modell: Simple Hodel
p = .7962227
jk
Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model
p
=
.7958167,
a ..
.9999999
j
1
2
3
4
Expected
.7958167
.7958167
.7958168
.7958168
Observed
.8321871
.8255034
.5250000
.5500000
Model 3: Serial Effect Model
p = .1132131, b" .9277591
k Expected
Observed
91
-------------------------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
.7132131
.7339309
.7531519
.7709845
.7875288
.8028779
.8171181
.8303297
.8425868
.8539585
.6818182
.8108108
.8198198
.7927928
.8108108
.7981651
.8241758
.8222222
.8461539
.7681160
Both the values of a and the value of b in Model 2 and Model 3
respectively. are large. The student did not learn much as trials and
subtrials went on. The student claimed that she had hearing difficulty.
This may account for the large values of a and b.
Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model
a = .9999999. b = .9143271.
p = .9999999 X P + .0000001
j j-l
p = .9143271 X P + .0856729
k k-1
p. = .7818638
for a fixed k
for a fixed j
ncass; M 2£.0
. ~
92
~
TABLE 16
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED PROBABILITIES FOR STUDENT 366
j k observed Model 4 Model 3 Model 2 Model 1 T C
jk jk
1 1 .7901235 .7818638 .7132131 .7958167 .7962227 17 81
1 2 .8292683 .8005522 .7339308 .7958167 .7962227 14 82
1 3 .8536585 .8176394 .7531519 .7958167 .7962227 12 82
1 4 .8170732 .8332628 .7709844 .7958167 .7962227 15 82
1 5 .8292683 .8475477 .7875287 .7958167 .7962227 14 82
1 6 .7875000 .8606087 .8028778 .7958167 .7962227 17 80
1 7 .8253968 .8725507 .8171181 .7958167 .7962227 11 63
1 8 .8709678 .8834697 .8303297 .7958167 .7962227 8 62
1 9 .9038462 .8934532 .8425868 .7958167 .7962227 5 52
1
10' .8695652 .9025814 .8539585 .7958167 .7962227 6 46
2 1 .6250000 .7818638 .7132131 .7958167 .7962227 6 16
2 2 .8125000 .8005522 .7339308 .7958167 .7962227 3 16
2 3 .8750000 .8176395 .7531519 .7958167 .7962227 2 16
2
4 .9375000 .8332628 .7709844 .7958167 .7962227 1 16
2 5 .8750000 .8475477 .7875287 .7958167 .7962227 2 16
2 6 1.0000000 .8606087 .8028778 .7958167 .7962227 0 16
2
7 .8000000 .8725508 .8171181 .7958167 .7962227 3 15
2
8 .7333333 .8834697 .8303297 .7958167 .7962227 4 15
2
9 .8461539 .8934532. .8425868 .7958167 .7962227 2 13
2
10 .7000000 .9025814 .8539585 .7958167 .7962227 3 10
't-.
I
J
,
93
TABLE 16
OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U· FOR STUDENT 366
Ak
j k Observed Uodel 1 Uodel 2 Hodel 3 Uodel 4
1 1 .209871 .203771 .204183 .286787 .218136
1 2 .170732 .203771 .204183 .266069 .199448
1 3 .146341 .203771 .204183 .246848 .182361
1 4 .182927 .203717 .204183 .229016 .166737
1 5 .170732 .203717 .204183 .212471 .• 152452
2 1 .283951 .407555 .408367 .573574 .436272
2 2 .207317 .407555 .408367 .532138 .398896
2 3 .170732 .407555 .408367 .493696 .364721
2 4 .195122 .407555 .408367 .458031 .333474
2 5 .195122 .407555 .408367 .424943 .304905
94
TABLE 17
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED V(U ) FOR STUDENT 366
Ak
j k Observed Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
1 I .165828 .162252 .162492 .204540 .170553
1 2 .141582 .162252 .162492 .195276 .159668
1 3 .124926 .162252 .162492 .185914 .149105
1 4 .149465 .162252 .162492 .176567 .138936
1 5 .141582 .162252 .162492 .167327 .129211
2 1 .234415 .324504 .324985 .409080 .341106
2 2 .176829 .324504 .324985 .390553 .319337
2 3 .148721 .324504· .324985 .371828 .298210
2 4 .161511 .• 324504 .324985 .353135 .277872
2 5 .165378 .324504 .324985 .334654 .258421
95
From above three Tables, again Model 4 fit best even though none
of the models fit the data well. The large values of a and b
explain it.
Review lessons
Modell: Simple Model
p = .8498452
jk
Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model
p = .8493789, a = .9999999
j Expected Observed
---------------------------
1
2
3
4
.8493789
.8493789
.8493789
.8493789
.8463035
.8859649
.5555556
.8888889
Model 3: Serial Effect Model
p = .7391720, b = .8716864
k Expected Observed
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
.7391720
.7726398
.8018132
.8272432
.8494103
.8687330
.8855763
.9002584
.9130566
.9242126
.7272727
.7878788
.8484849
.8333333
.8787879
.9090909
.8281250
.9062500
.8888889
.9166667
The values of p in tilldel 1, 2, and 3 for the review lessons are
higher than for the nonreview lessons. This implies the student did
not forget much when he did review lessons. Again the values of a
and b for the review lessons are large.
Student 371:
Modell: Simple Model
p = .9380282
jk
Model 2: Single Operator Linear lIodel
p == .9361393, a = .00000001
Expected Observed
------------------------------
1
2
.9361393
1.0000000
.9363242
1.0000000
Model 3: Serial Effect lIodel
p = .9178340, b = .9471863
I
!
1
k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Expected
.9178340
.9221735
.9262838
.9301770
.9338646
.9373575
.9406659
.9437995
.9467677
.9495791
Observed
.9125000
.9625000
.9250000
.9125000
.9500000
.9871795
.9354839
.9500000
.9411765
.9333333
97
The values of p in Models I, 2, and 3 are quite high. This
indicates that the student had a good start. In addition, she picked
up very fast as trials went on by showing a = .0000001. She did not,
however. learn much as the subtrials went on.
Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model
a = .9999999, b = .9999999, p = .9378531
p = .9999999 X p + .0000001
j j-l
p = .9999999 X P + .0000001
k k-l
for fixed k
for fixed j
T
- ~
98
,
!
TABLE 19
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED PROBABILITIES FOR STUDENT 371
j k Observed Model 4 }lodel 3 Model 2 Model 1 T C
jk jk
1 1 .9102564 .9378531 .9178340 .9361393 .9380282 7 78
1 2 .9615385 .9378531 .9221735 .9361393 .9380282 3 78
1 3 .9230769 .9378531 .9262838 .9361393 .9380282 6 78
1 4 .9102564 .9378531 .9301770 .9361393 .9380282 7 78
1 5 .9487180 .9378531 .9338646 .9361393 .9380282 4 78
1 6 .9868421 .9378532 .9373575 .9361393 .9380282 1 76
1 7 .9333333 .9378532 .9406659 .9361393 .9380282 4 60
1 8 .9482759 .9378532 .9437995 .9361393 .9380282 3 58
1 9 .9387755 .9378532 .9467677 .9361393 .9380282 3 49
1 10 .• 9318182 .9378532 .9495791 .9361393 .9380282 3 44
2 1 1.0000000 .9378531 .9178340 1.0000000 .9380282 a 2
2. 2 1.0000000 .9378531 .9221735 1.0000000 .9380282
0 2
2 3 1.0000000 .9378531 .9262838 1.0000000 .9380282 0 2
2 4 1.0000000 .9378531 .9301770 1.0000000 .9380i82 0 2
2 5 1.0000000 .9378532 .9338646 1.0000000 .9380282 0 2
2
6 1.0000000 .9378532 .9373575 1.0000000 .9380282 0 2
2
7 1.0000000 .9378532 .9406659 1.0000000 .9380282
0 2
2
8 1.0000000 .9378532 .9437995 1.0000000 .9380282 0 2
2
9 1.0000000 .9378532 .9467677 1.0000000 .9380282 0 2
2
10 1.0000000 . .9378532 .9495791 1.0000000 .9380282 0 1
i
I
I
I
I
,
99
99
T
,
I
I
i
!
:..vv
100
TABLE 21
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED f u ~ EXPECTED V(U } FOR STUDENT 371
Ak
j k Observed Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
1 1 .081690 .058131 .059783 .075415 .058285
1 2 .036982 .058131 .059783 .071770 .058285
1 3 .071006 .058131 .059783 .068282 .058285
1 4 .081690 .058131 .059783 .064948 .058285
1 5 .048652 .058131 .059783 .061761 .058285
2 1 .081690 .116263 .059783 .150829 .116569
2 2 .036982 .116263 .059783 .143539 .116569
2 3 .071006 .116263 .059783 .136564 .116569
2 4 .081690 .116263 .059783 .129895 .116569
2 5 .048652 .116263 .059783 .123523 .116569
-v-
I
I
1
101
From Table 19, 20 and 21, Hodel 2 had a slightly better fit to the
data than the other models. This may be because the value· of a in
Hodel 2 is extremely small.
Review lessons
Model 1: Simple Model
p = .9302326
jk
lwdel 2: Single Operator Linear Hodel
p = .9299065, a = .99999999·
j
1
2
Expected
.9299065
.9299065
Observed
.9318735
.8947368
Model 3: Serial Effect Model
p = .8623807, b = .8308796
k Expected Observed
--------------------------
1 .8623807 .8409091
2 .8856550 .9318182
3 .9049930 .8863636
4 .9210607 .9545455
;"'
5 .9344109 .9318182
6 .9455034 .9545455
7 .9547199 .9302326
8 .9623777 1.0000000
9 .9687404 .9523810
10 .9740270 .9333333
~
I
I
I
I
I
102
The values of p in Models 1, 2, and 3 are smaller for the review
lessons than for the nonreview lessons. This may be caused by
forgetting. Also the values of a and b for review lessons are
larger than the nonreview lessons. This may be due to having to learn
something that the student had already learned before.
Student 372:
Model 1: Simple Model
p = .8427948
jk
Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model
a = .9999999 p = .8434783,
I
I
I
i
I
j
1
2
3
4
Expected
.8434783
.8434783
.8434783
.8434783
Observed
.8723995
.7410714
.6718750
.8947368
Model 3: Serial Effect Model
p = .7957603, b = .9536281
1
>t
i
k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Expected
.7957603
.8052313
.8142631
.8228761
.8310897
.8389224
.8463918
.8535149
.8603077
.8667855
Observed
.8155340
.8737864
.8446602
.8446602
.8235294
.8100000
.8641975
.8750000
.8985507
.7758621
103
The large values of a and b in Model 2 and Model 3. respectively
implies the student did not pick up much as trials and sbutrials went
on.
!lodel 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model
a = .99999999. b = .99999999. p = .8434783
p = .9999999 X p + .0000001
j j-1
p = .9999999 X P + .0000001
k k-1
for a fixed k.·
for a fixed j
1
104
,
i
TABLE 22
I
,
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED PROBABILITIES FOR STUDENT 372
j k Observed Hodel 4 Model 3 Hodel 2 Model 1 T C
jk jk
1 1 .8414634 .8434783 .7957603 .8434783 .8427948 13 82
1 2 .9146342 .8434783 .8052313 .8434783 .8427948 7 82
1 3 .8902439 .8434783 .8142631 .8434783 .8427948 9 82
1 4 .8780488 .8434783 .8228760 .8434783 .8427948 10 82
1 5 .8518519 .8434784 .8310896 .8434783 .8427948 12 81
1 6 .8227848 .8434784 .8389223 .8434783 .8427948 14 79
1 7 .9193548 .8434784 .8463918 .8434783 .8427948 5 62
1 8 .9016393 .8434784 .8535149 .8434783 .8427948 6 61
1 9 .9215686 .8434784 .8603077 .8434783 .8427948 4 51
1 10 .7777778 .8434784 .8667855 .8434783 .8427948 10 45
2 1 .8333333 .8434783 .7957603 .8434783 .8427948 2 12
2 2 .7500000 .8434783 .8052313 .8434783 .8427948 3 12
2 3 .6666667 .8434783 .8142631 .8434783 .8427948 4 12
2 4 .6666667 .8434784 .8228760 .8434783 .8427948 4 12
2 5 .7500000 .8434784 .8310896 .8434783 .8427948 3 12
2 6 .8333333 .8434784 .8389223 .8434783 .8427948 2 12
2 7 .5454546 .8434784 .8463918 .8434783 .8427948 5 11
2 8 .8181818 .8434784 .8535149 .8434783 .8427948 2 11
2
9 .9000000 .8434784 .8603077 .8434783 .8427948 1 10
,
2
10 .6250000 .8434785 .8667855 .8434783 .8427948 3 8
T
I
I
!
105
TABLE 23
i
COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U FOR STUDENT 372
!
Ak
I
--,'J
j k Observed Modell Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
' ~
j
1 1 .158537 .157205 .156522 .204240 .156522
"i
.

1 2 .085366 .157205 .156522 .194769 .156522
1 3 .109756 .157205 .156522 .185737 .156522
1 4 .121951 .157205 .156522 .177124 .156522
1 5 .148148 .157205 .156522 .168910 .156522
2 1 .182927 .314410 .313043 .408479 .313043
--'\'1;,1
2 2 .121951 .314410 .313043 .389537 .313043
2 3 .158537 .314410 .313043 .371474 .313043
2 4 .170732 .314410 .313043 .354248 .313043
2 5 .185185 .314410 .313043 .337821 .313043
4
106
TABLE 24
COHPARISON OF OBSERVED k'lD EXPECTED V(U ) FOR STUDENT 372
Ale
j k Observed Model 1 Hodel 2 Model 3 Model 4
1 1 .133403 .132492 .132023 .162526 .132023
1 2 .078079 .132492 .132023 .156834 .132023
1 3 .097710 .132492 .132023 .151239 .132023
1 4 .107079 .132492 .132023 .145751 .132023
1 5 .126200 .132492 .132023 .140380 .132023
2 1 .157198 .264984 .264045 .325052 .264045
2 2 .113325 .264984 .264045 .313668 .264045
2 3 .144111 .264984 .264045 .302477 .264045
2 4 .153480 .264984 .264045 .291502 .264045
2 5 .161866 .264984 .264045 .280759 .264045
1
'I
t
107
Model 4 fit the data slightly better than the other models, but
none of the models had a g o o ~ fit to the data.
Review lessons
Model 1: Simple Model
p = .9041353
jk
Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model
p = .9007491, a = .9999999
j
1
2
Expected
.9007491
.9007491
Observed
.9043825
.9000000
Model 3: Serial Effect Model
p = .8575468, b = .9288673
k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Expected
.8575468
.8676799
.8770922
.8858350
.8939558
.9014990
.9085057
.9150139
.9210592
.9266745
Observed
.9090909
.8888889
.8727273
.9259259
.8518519
.9056604
.8867925
.9811321
.8846154
.9512195
1
108
The values of p in models 1, 2, and 3 for the review lessons are
higher than for the nonreview lessons. this may be because the student
did not forget much when he did review lessons. The values of a and
b for review lessons are still very large.
' ~ ~ ! i 1 a ! i J o ~
[
1
1
j
J
-I
I
I
!
!
I
,
" ~ f
I
i
I
i
I
.J
,
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION
Even though the data in the summative evaluation are not quite
sufficient to generate a strong conclusion about the CAl experimental
course in Mandarin conversation, they can still provide us some
indication of the strengths o ~ the course. The course was quite
successful in teaching recognition of sounds but only reasonably
successful in teaching the production of sounds. However, if we regard
language mainly as a means of communication and consider that perfect
pronunciation is not necessary for effective communication, then we
need not ask for perfect pronunciation in foreign-language teaching.
In this case, the course was pragmatically successful also in teaching
sound production.
From the students' point of view, they very much enjoyed receiving
the lessons at home, in the office, or any place having a push-button
telephone whenever the computer was available. Considering-all of my
students who had been away from school for a while and were eager to
learn something interesting, but had only limited time available, the
flexibility of the place and time of learning really fit their need.
This idea of flexibility in the place and time of learning seems worth
pushing forward. As a matter of fact, it is quite natural to
incorporate this idea into an adult education program.
Also, the students felt comfortable about this new way of learning,
reading the handouts first and then working on the telephone. This way
of learning is drastically different from classroom learning. I am
glad that the students could adjust to and feel at ease with this non-
109
i
i
I
I
,
f
no
traditional way of learning.
The students indicated that they needed more chance to talk to a
native speaker in order to practice pronunciation. This will be
facilitated once computer recognition of human speech is accomplished.
At present, the development of speech recognition by the computer is
still at the beginning stage; when a major breakthrough occurs, the
enormous potential of a CAl curriculum in teaching foreign-language
sound production will be fully recognized. Until that time, the
occasional contact between students and a native speaker is necessary
in order to effectively teach a CAl Mandarin conversational course.
From the fit of the learning models, we can see that, in general,
llodel 2 fits better than Model 3 and Model4. Since Model 4 is a
combination of Model 2 and ~ I D d e l 3, if Model 3 does not fit well, then
neither does Model 4.
The better fit of Model 2 seems to indicate that the students
learned effectively from trial to trial. Most of them learn rapidly
after their first trial. Comparing the values of parameter a in
Model 2 between text and review lessons, there is no definite pattern.
Those .mo did well in review lessons, i.e., who did not need a lot of
review, could be either a fast learner or a slow learner in the text.
Others who needed a lot of practice in review lessons also could be a
fast learner or slow learner. In other words, the retention, which was
shown by the amount of practice in review lessons, has nothing to do
with how fast they learned in the text.
It seems that no one learned fast when he went from subtrial to
subtrial (or item to item). This may be caused by the differing degree
1
i
,I
:
,
I
,
~
I

,
,
,
,
j
,
~
III
of difficulty of the stimuli in a given trial. Even t h o u ~ h the stimuli
have been randomly assigned to the sub trials for each trial, the effect
of the different degrees of difficulty has not been completely
eliminated.
112
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barrutia, R. Language learning and machine teaching.
Philadelphia: The Center for Curriculum Development, 1969.
Atkinson, R. C., Bower, G., & Crothers, E. J. An introduction
!£ mathematical learning theory. New York: Wiley, 1965.
Altman, H. B., &Politzer, R. Conference jndividualizing
foreign language instruction. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare, office of
Education, Institute of International, 1971.
Carroll, J. B., Programmed self-instruction in lfundarin Chinese:
observations of student progress automated audio-
visual instructional Wellesley, Mass.: Language
Testing Fund, 1963.
an overview.
- '
Birkmaier, E. M. Foreign language education:
Skokie, Ill.: National Textbook Co., 1973.
Clark, J. D. Measurement implications of recent trends in foreign
language teaching. In D. L. Lange & C. J. James (Eds.),
Foreign language education: A reappraisal. Skokie, Ill.:
National Textbook Co., 1972.
[2]
16]
[3]
[l]
[5]
14]
I
I
I
!
I
i
,
17] Cronbach, L. J. Course improvement through evaluation. In A.
David (Ed.), Curriculum evaluation: commentaries purpose,
process product. Lexington, Mass.: Heath, 1974.
[8] Cronbach, L. J. Essentials of psychological testing (3rd Ed.).
New York: Harper & Row, 1970
19] Hancock, C. R.
D. L. Lange
education:
co., 1972.
Student aptitude, attitude and motivation. In
and C. J. James (Eds.), Foreign language
A reappraisal.' Skokie, Ill.: NationalTextbook
110] Hatfield, W. N. Foreign language program evaluation. In E. M.
Birkmaier (ed.), Foreign language educat,ion: overview.
Skokie, Ill.: National Textbook Co., 1973.
[11] Jakobovits, L. A. Foreign language learning:
analysis of issues. Rowley, llass.: Newbury House, 1970.
[12] Lange, D. L., &
reappraisal.
James, C. J. Foreign language education: A
Skokie, Ill.: National Textbook Co., 1972.
[133" Lysaught, J'. P" & Williams" C. M. A guide to programmed
instruction. New York: Wiley, 1963
& S!'H2
113
114] Ornstein, J., Ewton, R. W. Jr., &Mueller, T. H. Programmed
instruction and educational technology in the language
teaching field: ~ aporoaches to old problems.
Philadelphia: The Center for Curriculum Development, 1971.
115] Payne, D. A. Curriculum evaluation: Commentaries ~ purpose,
process, product. Lexington, !lass.: D. C. Heath, 1974
116] Politzer, R. L. &Weiss, L.
language. Philadelphia:
Development, 1972.
Improving achievement in foreign
The Center for Curriculum
[l7] Suppes, P., Jerman, M., & Brian, D. Computer-assisted
instruction: Stanford's 1965-1966 arithmetic program. New York:
Academic Press, 1968.
118] Suppes, P., &Morningstar, It. Computer-assisted instruction ~
Stanford, 1966-1968: data, models, and evaluation of the
arithmetic programs. New York: Academic Press, 1972-.-
[19] Suppes, P., &Atkinson R. C.
multiperson interaction.
Press, 1960.
Markov learning models for
Stanford calif.: Stanford University
[20] Suppes, P., Fletcher, J. D., & Zanotti, M. Models of individual
trajectories in computer-assisted instruction. (Tech. Rep.
214). Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University, Institute for
Mathematic1 Studies in the Social Science, 1973.
[21] Suppes, P., &Wu, P. E. S. Analysis of Ling1ing's corpus.
Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University, 1977.
122] Valette, R. M., Testing. In E. M. Birkmaier (Ed.).
language education: An overview. Skokie, Ill.:
Textbook Co., 1973.
Foreign
National
[23] Walker, H. M., &Lev, J. statistical inference. New York:
Holt, Rinehart &Winston, 1953.
[24] Weiss, C. H. Evaluation research: Methods
effectivenes!!.. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.:
of Assessing program
Prentice-Hall, 1972.
114
APPENDIX A
CONTENTS OF THE TEXT
INTRODUCTION
TIPS WHEN YOU ARE ON THE TELEPHONE
1. UANDARIN PHONOLOGY I
I. 2. UANDARIN PHONOLOGY II
3. B. p. U. F. A. O. E. U
4. SPELLING PRACTICE
5. TONES OF MANDARIN
6. D. T. N. L. AO. OU
1
1
i
j
I
7. SPELLING AND TONE PRACTICE
,
8. NEUTRAL TONE
9. REVIEW
10. SENTENCE PATTERNS
11. G. K. H; AN. EN. ANG. ENG. ER
12. SPELLING AND TONE PRACTICE
13. ZH. CR. SH. R. Z. C. S, AI. EI
14. SPELLING AND TONE PRACTICE
15. SENTENCE PATTERNS
16. ~ . Q. x. I. V
17. SPELLING AND TONE PRACTICE
18. REVIEW
19. REVIEW
20. I AS A BEGINNING FINAL
21. U AND V AS BEGINNING FIANLS
22. REVIEW
;
23. REVIEW
'I
I
24. GREETING I
25. GREETING II
26. NAHE I
';1
'I
27. NAHE II
28. VISITING I

I
!
I
29. VISITING II
1
30. REVIEW
31• MAKING A PHONE CALL I
.> ' ' ' ' ~
32. MAKING A PHONE CALL II
'"I
33. HOHETOWN I
!
:1
34. HOHETOWN II
,
35.
,
FAl1ILY I
I
36. FAHILY II
1
l
37. REVIEW
;
38. REVIEW
39. LANGUAGE I
40. LANGUAGE, II
41- CHINESE FOOD I
42. CHINESE FOOD II
43. CHINESE RESTAURANT I
44. CHINESE R E S T A ~ ~ T II
45. REVIEW
46. COUNTING I
47. COUNTING II
lLJ
115
48. DATE I
49. DATE II
50. SHOPPING I
51. SHOPPING II
52. REVIEW
53. REVIEW
54. REVIE'.l'
55. REVIEW
t
i
I APPENDIX:
I
I
,
A. VOCABULARY LIST 1
I
B. VOCABULARY LIST 11
I
i
C. VOCABULARY LIST III
1
I
D. PATTERN LIST
,j
;
E. PHONOLOGICAL SOUND DICTIONARY
,
F. FIGURES
n6
117
APPENDIX B
HANDOUT SHEET OF INTRODUCTION TO THE CURRICULill1
pushing buttons on the dial.
Students listen on the telephone and answer questions by
Before picking up the phone, each about 35-45 minutes.
terminals are used as the teaching medium so that students
student is required to read a handout to describing what
can conveniently learn at home rather than coming to school.
3. Learning procedure for each lesson: Each lesson lasts for
2. Facility: push-down button telephones rather than computer
1. Purpose: to teach daily Handarin conversation.
INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPUTERIZED M & ~ D A R I N (OFFICIAL CHINESE) COURSE:
},
!
,
j
Will be taught over the phone. The handout requires about
5-10 mimutes to read, and then the student spends about 25-35
minutes, depending on his personal learning rate, on the
phone.
4. Number of lessons: 55. The course is intented for a period of
two months, so we suggest that you take one lesson a day.
5. Contents: Lesson land 2 are reading lessons to introduce basic
phonological knowledge that is necessary to pronounce accurate
Mandarin. Lesson 3 to 23 introduce phonological elements and
tones of Mandarin, while lesson 24 to 60 are conversational.
6. EXercise: Each lesson has several exercises. In order to pass
an exercise, you need to answer at least 80 %of the problems
118
correctly; otherwise, you are required to do the exercise again
till the 80 % standard is reached.
SIX TIPS WHEN YOU ARE ON THE PHONE:
1. Bell sound: Each time you hear a bell sound, you must type
'u' on the dial to continue the lesson or else the lesson
will stop.
2. Replay of Mandarin sounds: Any liandarin sound (phonological
element, vocabulary, phrase or sentence) that is not clear to
you hear a Mandarin sound you can type either '*#' to rehear
'u' has the same
I
you can be replayed instantly by typing '*q'.
the sound, or 'u' to continue the lesson.
That is,· after
funtions as the 'carriage-return' key in the computer terminal.
3. Response time limit: When you are requested to give a response,
you must respond within 90 seconds, or else the lesson will
automatically stop and you will have to start the lesson all
over again. This is to assure that no unattended phone
will be on the line.
4. Response to question: Each response you make to problems in
exercises must be followed directly by 'u' to show that you
have typed in the answer.
5. Deleting mistyped answer: Each time you enter a wrong number
when answering a question, simply type '0' to delete the
'44if
I
!
I
i
~
1
119
mistyped number, then type the number for the correct answer.
The correction can only be made before you type' ii' (which
shows that you have typed in the answer as explained in 4).
After you have typed '#', it is too late to make any changes.
6. Disconnecting the line: After you have finished a lesson, you
should wait for about 20 seconds for the line to disconnect
automatically before you hang up the phone.
120
APPENDIX C
SAMPLE LESSONS, LESSONN 35 AND 36
LESSON 35
TEXT:
FAMILY I
-t
,
.
A: NI3 JIAI YOU3 SHEN31fEO REN2? HOW MANY MEllBERS OF YOUR FAt'1ILY
ARE THERE?
B: YOU3 BA4BAO. MAIMAO. GEiGEO, JIE3JIEO. NI3 JIAi YOU3 SHEN3MEO
REN2? I HAVE A FATHER. MOTHER, ELDER BROTHER, ELDER SISTER.
HOW UAt'lY MEl1BERS OF YOUR FAMILY ARE THERE?
A: YOU3 TAI4TAI4. LIANG3 GEO XIA03HAI2. I HAVE A WIFE TWO CHILDREN.
B: HA03 FU2QI4! YOU HAVE GOOD FORTUNE!
A: NA2LI3! NALI3! NOT AT ALL! NOT AT ALL!
NOTE: ( I ) ~ FOR CHINESE THE AGE ORDER A1l0NG BROTHERS AND SISTERS IS VERY
IMPORTANT. FOR BROTHER OLDER THAN YOU, YOU CALL HIM GEiGEO;
FOR SISTER OLDER THAN YOU,YOU CALL HER JIE3JIEO. WE WILL
TEACH YOUNGER BROTHER AND SISTER IN THE NEXT LESSON. USUALLY,
ELDER BROTHER AND SISTER CALL THEIR YOUNGER BROTHER AND SISTER
BY THEIR FIRST NAMES. BUT YOUNGER BROTHER AND SISTER CALL OLDER
BOTHER AND SISTER "GEIGEO" AND "JIE3JIEO". IT IS NOT TOO
POLITE TO CALL OLOER BROTHER AND SISTER BY THEIR FIRST MAllES.
(2). IN ENGLISH, THER IS NOTHING BETWEEN A Nill1BER AND A NOUN.
FOREXAI1PLE. ONE BOOK, TWO SONS, ETC.. HOWEVER, IN liANDARIN,
THERE IS SOMETHING, NOUNS CLASSIFIER, BETWEEN A NUMBER AND A
NOUN. FOR EXAI1PLE, YII ZHII YANi.(ONE CIGRETTE) WHERE ZHIi
i
I
I
i
J

I
1t.1
121
IS A NOUN CLASSIFIER. THIS NOUN CLASSIFIER DOES NOT HAVE
BUT IT MUST BE THERE BETWEEN A NUMBER AND A NOUN.
DIFFERENT GROUPS OF NOUN HAVE DIFFERENT NOUN CLASSIFIERS.
THERE IS NO RULE WHICH TELLS WHAT KIND OF NOUN SHOULD HAVE
WHAT KIND OF NOUN CLASSIFIER. THE ONLY THING YOU CAN DO IS TO
11EMORIZE WEll. FORTUNATELY, THERE ARE NOT TOO MANY NOUN
CLASSIFIERS.
(3). IN ENGLISH, WHEN YOU LIST A SEQUENCE OF THINGS, OR NAMES,
YOU ALWAYS PUT 'AND' BEFORE THE LAST ONE. THIS IS NOT THE CASE
IN CHINESE. IN CHINESE, YOU SIMPLY LIST THE SEQUENCE WITHOUT
, AND'. THE SECOND SENTENCE OF THE TEXT IS AN EXAI1PLE. THERE
IS NO 'AND'!HAN4! BEFORE !JIE3JtEO!.
(4). CHINESE THINK THAT HAVING SONS AND DAUGHTERS IS A GOOD
,
FORTUNE. CHINESE IS A FAMILY-CENTERED SOCIETY. WHEN A FAMILY
HAVE SONS AND DAUGHTERS, THE FAInLY WILL CONTINUE. TO CONTINUE
THE FAMILY IS MOST IMPORTANT THING TO THE FAUILY. THEREFORE,
WHEN YOU KNOW A CHINESE HAS SONS AND DAUGHTERS, YOU CAN SAY TO
HIM (OR HER) !HA03 FU2QI4! (YOU HAVE A GOOD FORTUNE!).
(5). !NA2LI3!(NOT AT ALL) IS ONE OF THE MOST OFTEN USED
EXPRESSIONS. TO AMERICAN, WHEN SOMEONE PAYS YOU A COMPLIHENT,
YOUR RESPONSE TO HIM "THANK YOU". THIS IS NOT THE CASE IN
CHINESE. TO CHINESE, WHEN SOMEONE PAYS YOU A COHPLIl1ENT, YOUR
RESPONSE TO Hli'! IS "NOT AT ALL! !NA2LI3!", NOT "THANK YOU
!XIE4XIEO NI3!".
I
I
I
i_
122
PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING INSTRUCTION BEFORE YOU PICK UP THE PHONE.
IN THE PHONE, THE LESSON IS PRESENTED IN FIVE PARTS IN THE'FOLLOWING
ORDER:
1. VOCABULARY:
REN2--HAN, HEN
GE1GEO---ELDER BROTHER
JIE3JIEO---ELDER SISTER
TAI4TAIO--WIFE, ALSO HRS (SEE LESSON 27)
LIANG3--TWO
GEO--A NOUN CLASSIFIER. SEE NOTE (2).
XIA03HAI2--CHILD
FU2QI4--FORTUNE
NA2LI3--NOT AT ALL
THE WAY TO LEARN THESE VOCABULARY IS THE SM1E AS IN PART 1 OF LESSON
24: PRACTICING THE PRONUNCIATIONS OF ALL THE VOCABULARY FIRST. THEN DO
THE FOLLOWING TWO SEQUENCES OF PRACTICES FOR ,EACH VOCABULARY.
(A) HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION -- HEAR HANDARIN - REPEAT
!{ANDARIN - HEAR l ~ N D A R I N -- REPEAT MANDARIN.
(B) HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION -- SPEAK CORRESPONDING HANDARIN
-- HEAR l ~ D A R I N -- REPEAT HANDARIN.
WE WILL DO SEQUENCE (A) FOR ALL THE VOCABULARY FIRST, THEN SEQUENCE (B)
2 SIMPLE VOCABULARY EXERCISE:
123
THE EXERCISE IS TO SEE HOW WELL YOU HAVE LEARNED THE VOCABULARY IN
THE LAST PART. THE STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLEH ARE THE SAME AS PART 2
LESSON 24.
PLEASE FOLLOW THE EXACT STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLEH. FOR YOUR
BENEFIT. PLEASE DON'T LOOK AT THE LAST PART WHEN YOU ARE ANSWERING
THE QUESTIONS.
THERE IS NO PRACTICE PROBLD1 FOR THIS EXERCISE.
3. LEARNING TO SPEAK:
YOU WILL LEARN TO SPEAK EACH SENTENCE OF THE TEXT. WE WILL GO
OVER IT SENTENCE BY SENTENCE SLOWLY. TWO SEQUENCES OF PRESENTATION
FOR EACH SENTENCE ARE:
(A). HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION---HEAR MANDARIN---REPEAT MANDARIN---
HEAR MANDARIN---REPEAT
(B). HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION---SPEAK CORRESPONDING MANDARIN---HEAR
MANDARIN-REPEAT MANDARIN.
WE WILL DO SEQUENCE (A) FOR ALL THE SENTENCES FIRST. THEN SEQUENCE (B).
4. CONVERSATION:
THIS TIME YOU WILL LEARN TO CONVERSE WITH US. THIS PART HAS TWO
SECTIONS:
(l) SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION IS: HEAR FIRST SENTENCE A (FIRST SENTENCE
SPOKEN BY PERSON WITH FIRST SENTENCE B---HEAR FIRST
SENTENCE B---REPEAT FIRST B---HEAR SECOND SENTENCE A---
ANSWER WITH SECOND SENTENCE B---HEAR SECOND SENTENCE B---REPEAT
i
I
.A
124
SECOND SENTENCE B--- ••••
(2) SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION IS: SPEAK FIRST SENTENCE A (IF YOU CAN NOT
RalEMBER IT. LOOK AT THE TEXT OF THE LESSON.)---HEAR FIRST
SENTENCE A--REPEAT FIRST SENTENCE A..,--HEAR FIRST SENTENCE B---
ANSWER WITH SECOND SENTENCE A--HEAR SECOND SENTENCE A---REPEAT
SECOND SENTENCE A--"HEAR SECOND SENTENCE B--- ...•
s. SIMPLE CONVERSATION EXERCISE:
THIS TlllE YOU WILL HEAR A }1ANDARIN SENTENCE AND TELL US WHICH IS THE
MOST APPROPRIATE SENTENCE TO FOLLOW. THE STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLEM ARE
THE SAME AS IN PART 5 OF LESSON 24. THERE IS NO PRACTICE PROBLEM
FOR THIS EXERCISE.
NOW. PLEASE PICK UP YOUR TELEPHONE.
***ASSIGNMENT: (1) MF1lORIZE THE WHOLE TEXT BY HEART.
LESSON 36 FAHILY II
1
2
5
THIS LESSON IS EXTENSION OF THE LAST LESSON. WE WILL REVIEW THE
LAST LESSON FIRST, THEN SOMETHING NEW. PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING
INSTRUCTION BEFORE YOU PICK UP THE PHONE. THE LESSON IS DIVIDED INTO
SIX PARTS IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
1. REVIEW:
YOU WILL REVIEW THE TEXT OF THE LAST LESSON. WE WILL GO OVER IT
SENTENCE BY SENTENCE. SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION FOR EACH SENTENCE IS:
HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION---TELL THE CORRESPONDING MANDARIN---HEAR
MANDARIN--REPEAT MA.'lDARIN. WILL ONLY GO OVER ALL THE SENTENCES
ONCE.
2. VOCABULARY:
DI4DIO---YOUNGER BROTHER
MEI4MEIO--YOUNGER SISTER
ER2ZIO--SON
ZU3FU4--GRANDFATHER

ZHE4--THIS
NA4-THAT
DONGIXII--THING
THE WAY TO LEARN THESE VOCABULARY IS THE SAME AS PART 1 OF LAST
LESSON: PARCTISE THE PRONUNCIATIONS OF ALL THE VOCABULARY BY YOURSELF
FIRST, THEN DO THE FOLLOWING TWO SEQUENCES OF PRACTICES FOR EACH
l26
VOCABULARY•
(A) HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION - HEAR llANDARIN -- REPEAT
llANDARIN - HEAR MANDARIN -- REPEAT IIANDARIN.
(B) HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION -- SPEAK CORRESPONDING llANDARIN
-- HEAR MANDARIN -- REPEAT HANDARIN.
WE WILL DO SEQUENCE (A) FOR ALL THE VOCABULARY FIRST, THEN SEQUENCE (8)
3. SIlIPLE VOCABULARY EXERCISE:
THE EXERCISE IS TO SEE HOW WELL YOU HAVE LEARNED THE VOCABULARY IN
THE LAST PART. THE WAY TO DO THE EXERCISE IS COllPLETELY THE SAME AS
PART 2 OF LESSON 24.
PLEASE FOLLOW THE EXACT STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLE/f. FOR YOUR
BENEFIT, PLEASE DON'T LOOK AT THE LAST PART WHEN YOU ARE
ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.
THERE IS NO PRACTICE PROBLEM FOR THIS EXERCISE.
4. PATTERN PRACTICE:
YOU WILL LEARN FOUR SIHPLE PATTERNS:
(A) XXX SHI4 SHEI2?--WHO IS XXX?
TAl SHI4 SHEI2? WHO IS HE(SHE)?
NI3 SHI4 SHEI2? WHO ARE YOU?
WU2YI1X1l SHI4 SHEI2? WHO IS YIXI WU?
L13 XIANlSHENGl SHI4 SHEI2? WHO IS IIR. LI?
GA01XIANlSHENGl SHI4 SHEI2? WHO IS 1IR. GAO?
TAlllEN2 SHI4 SHEI2? WHO ARE THEY?
j
'I
I
l27
(B) XXX SHI4 SHEN3tIEO?---WHAT IS XXX?
ZHE4 SHI4 SHEN3MEO? WHAT IS THIS?
NA4 SHI4 SHEN3MEO? WHAT IS THAT?
JIl SHI4 SHEN3I1EO? WlLn IS WHAT?
YANI SHI4 SHEN3MEO? IffiAT IS CIGARETTE?
JIU3 SHI4 SHEN3I1EO? WHAT IS WINE?
(C) XXX SHI4 SHEN3MEO XXX?---WHAT IS XXX OR WHO IS XXX
TAl SHI4 REN2---WHO IS HE(OR SHE)?
NI3 SHI4 SHEN3MEO ARE YOU?
NA4 SHI4 SHEN3MEO DONG1XIl? WHAT KIND OF THING IS THAT?
(SAME UEANING AS WHAT IS THAT?)
ZHE4 SHI4 SHEN3MEO DONGlXIl? WHAT KIND OF THING IS THIS?
(SAME MEANING AS WHAT IS THIS?)
NOTE: SHEN3MEO(WHAT) IN PATTERN (B) IS USED AS AN INTERROGATIVE
PRONOUN; IN PATTERN (C) IT IS USED AS AN INTERROGATIVE
ADJECTIVE. AS FAR AR MEANING BOTH PATTERNS CAN BE USED
INTERCHANGEABLY BUT PATTERN (B) IS MORE POLITE THAN
PATTERN (C). FOR EXAMPLE, INI3 SHI4 SHEI2?1 IS MORE POLITE
THAN INI3 SHI4 SHEN3MEO REN2?1. HOWEVER, THE MOST POLITE
EXPRESSION IS !QING3WEN4 NI3 SHI4 SHEI2?! (MAY I ASK WHO
ARE YOU?)
(D). XXX SHI4 XXX.---XXX IS
TAl SHI4 W03YIlXIl. HE IS YIXI WU.
THIS SHI4 GU03ZHII. THIS IS JUICE.
WU2 XIA02JIE3 SHI4 TAl. MISS. WU IS SHE.
NA4 SHI4 CHA2. THAT IS TEA.
THE WAY TO PRACTICE EACH PATTERN IS THE SAME AS PREVIOU LESSONS:
SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION IS: HEAR A FILLER---COMPLETE THE SENTENCE---
LISTEN TO THE COMPLETED THE COMPLETED SENTENCE.
128
5. SIMPLE TRANSLATION EXERCISE:
THE EXERCISE IS TO SEE HOW WELL YOU HAVE LEARNED ON THE LAST PART.
THIS TIME YOU WILL HEAR AN ENGLISH SENTENCE AND TELL US WHICH IS THE
HOST APPROPRIATE HANDARIN TRANSLATION FOR THAT SENTENCE. THE STEPS TO
DO EACH PROBLDI ARE THE SA}IE AS IN PART 5 OF LESSON 25.
PLEASE FOLLOW THE EXACT STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLDI. FOR YOUR
BENEFIT. PLEASE DON'T LOOK AT THE TEXT OF THIS LESSON WHEN YOU
ARE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.
THERE IS NO PRACTICE PROBLEH FOR THIS EXERCISE.
6. USE OF POSSESSIVE ADJECTIVE:
THE POSSESSIVE ADJECTICE ARE W03DEO (HY), NI3DEO (YOUR. SINGULAR).
TAlDEO (HIS AND HER).
WHEN THE POSSESIVE ADJECTIVE IS FOLLOWED BY A FA}lILY MnIBER. THE
DEO IS DELETED. WHEN THE POSSESIVE ADJECTIVE IS FOLLOWED BY OTHER
KINDS OF NOUN. THE DEO IS KEPT. FOR EXAMPLE. 'HY FATHER' SHOULD BE
SAID ASW03 BA4BAO INSTEAD OF W03DEO BA4BAO. 'HY BOOK' SHOULD BE
SAID AS W03DEO SHUl. MORE EXAMPLES ARE GIVING IN THE FOLLOWING.
10103
NI3 +
TAL
ZU3FU4
ZU2J.'lU3
BA4BAO
}lAlMAO
TAI4TAIO
XIA1HSHENGl
GElGEO
JIE3JIEO
DI4DIO
MEI411EIO
ER2ZIO
JIAl(HOME. FAIllLY)
W03DEO
NI3DEO +
TAiDEO
XUE2XIA04
TU2SHUlGUAN3
JIA04SHI4
BAN4GONGlSHI4
YANl
SHUl
DOAl
DONGlXIl
XIA03HAI2
BA04ZHI3
ZA2zHI4
JIU3
129
NOTE:
(1). XIA03HAI2(CHILD) IS EXCEPTION. YOU SHOULD USE W03DEO. NI3DEO
AND TAiDEO BEFORE XIA03HAI2.
(2). JIAl IS ANOTHER EXCEPTION. WHEN YOU SAY "MY HOME". YOU SHOULD
SAY "W03 JIA1" INSTEAD OF "W03DEO JIA1". OR WHEN YOU SAY "HER FAllILY".
YOU SHOULD SAY "TAl JIA1" INSTEAD OF "TAlDEO JIA1". ETC••
(3). WHEN YOU USE W03I1EN2DEO(OUR). TAlMEN2DEO(THEIR), AND NI3I1EN2DEO
(YOUR, PLURAL), THE DEO WILL NOT BE DELETED NO IfATTER WHAT KINDS OF
NOUN FOLLOW THEIl.
(4). !XIANISHENG1! HERE MEANS HUSBAND. 'ALSO SEE LESSON 26.
THERE WILL BE NO PRACTICE FOR THIS PART. BUT WE WILL HAVE AN
EXERCISE FOR YOU TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU HAVE LEARNED FROM THIS PART.
NOW, PLEASE PICK UP YOUR TELEPHONE.
,
130
APPENDIX D
VOCABULARY LIST
*
BAI---EIGHT---5
BA4--FATHER---5
MAI---MOTHER---5
MA3---HORSE---5
1IA4--BLAME---5

TAI---HE. SHE. HIU. AND HER---7
DAOI---KNIFE---7
DA04-GO TO--7
LA03--0LD--7
DA3-"-BEAT---7
DA4--BIG. LARGE--7
BA4BAO--FATHER-8
MAI11AO---MOTHER--8
GAOI--TALL---I2
DENG3---WAIT FOR--12
KAN4---t'ATCH. READ--12
KUI--CRY-12
MANG2--BUSY-.-12
SHUI--BOOK--14
ZAI4---IS AT, AM AT, ARE AT, WERE AT--14
AI 3-"--SHORT--I 4
AI4---LOVE-14
MAI3--BUY-14
MAI4--SELL--14
JII--CHICKEN---17
QII--SEVEN--17
QV4--GO TO-17
XI3-"-WASH--17
YA04---WANT--20
YANI--CIGARETTE--20
JIAI---HOME--20
NI3-"--YOU(SINGULAR)---20
W03-"--I. 11E---21
YONG4-USE--2I
YU2--FISH---2I
DUOI--MANY. MUCH---2I
* Number On the righthand side is the lesson number.
I
I
j
131
CHUANI---WEAR---21
YU3---RAIN---21
ZA03---GOOD MORNING---24

HA03---FINE---24
MAO--QUESTION llARKER---24
XIE4XIEO---THANK--24
ZAI4JIAN4---GOODBYE---24
TAI---HE, SHE, HIM, HER---25
W03--I, M&--25
W03MEN2--WE, US--25
NI31iEN2--YOU(PLURAL)---25
TAlHEN2--THEY, THEM--25
WAN3ANl--GOOD NIGHT---25
QING3WEN4---1LAY I ASK---26
GUI4XING4--YOUR LAST NAME--26
DA4I1ING2--YOUR FIRST NAJ.'1E---26
XING4---LAST NAME IS---26
MING2---FIRST NAJ.'1E IS--26
XIAN1SHENGl--MR---26
XIA02JIE3--I1ISS--27
TAI4TAIO---MRS--27
W03DEO--MY--27
NI3DEO---YOUR(SINGULAR)---27
TAlDEO---HIS, HER--27
SHI4-·-AM, IS, ARE, ,WAS AND WERE---27
MING2ZIO-NAliE--27
QING3---PLEASE---28
JIN4--COME IN--28
BIE2---DO NOT--28
KE4QI4--HOSPITABLE, FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE---28
ZU04--SIT DOWN--28
HEl--DRINK---28
CHA2--TEA---28
HAI2SHI4--0R---28
KAlFEIl--COFFEE--28
LEO--EMPHASATIC--28
TAI4--TOO---28.
XUE3JIAl--CIGAR--29
YANl--CIGARETTE---29
CHOUl--SMOKE--29
JIU3---WINE--29
PI2JIU3---BEER--29
NIU2NAI3---I1ILK--29
SHUI3---WATER--29
GU03ZHIl---JUICE--29
I
I
1
132
WEI2---HELLO--31
ZAI4--Al1 AT, IS AT, ARE AT, WAS AT, WERE AT---31
YIIXIA4---A MOMENT, A WHILE---31
SHEI2--WHO, WHOM---31
HA03JIU3BU4JIAN4--31
YOU3---HAVE, HAD--31
SHEN3UEO--WHAT--31
SHI4--THING,
TO, LIKE TO---31
QING3--INVITE--31
DIAN4YING3--MOVIE---31
HA03--0K-31
DIAN4SHI4--TELEVISION, TELEVISION SET---32
DIAN4HUA4--TELEPHONE--32
DA3--CALL--32
BA04ZHI3--NEWSPAPER-32
ZA2ZHI4---MAGAZINE--32
HUI2--GO BACK-32
XUE2XIA04--SCHOOL--32
TU2SHUIGUANG3--LIBRARY---32
JIA04SHI4-CLASSROOM-32
JIAI--HOME, FAMILY--32
BAN4GONG1SHI4--0FFICE--32
FU3SHANG4--HOMETOWN--33
NA2LI3--WHERE--33
ZHONGIGUOI--CHINA---33
SHANG4HAI3--SHANGHAI---33
DEO---POSSESSIVE
MEI3GU02--U.S.A.--33
JIA1--·CALIFORNIA--33
ZHOU1--STATE--33
JIU4JIN1SHAN1--SANFRANCISCo---33
XI3HUANI--LIKE--33
CHIl--EAT---34
CAI4---FOOD--34
XIICANI--WESTERN MEAL--34
FA4GU02--FRANCE-34
RI4BEN3--JAPAN---34
E2GU02--RUSSIA--34
DE2GU02---GEffiiANY--34
YINGIGU02--ENGLAND---34
XIIBANIYA2--SPAIN---34
REN2--!1AN, MEN---35
GEIGEO--ELDER BROTHER---35
JIE3JIEO---ELDER SISTER---35
TAI4TAIO---WIFE--35

GEO--A NOUN CLASSIFIER---35
i
i

I
XIA03HAIZ---CHILD---35
FUZQI4---FORTUNE---35
NAZLI3---NOT AT ALL---35
DI4DIO---YOUNGER BROTHER ---36
l1EI4HEIO---YOUNGER SISTER---36
ERZZIO---SON---36
ZU3FU4---GRANDFATHER---36
ZU2HU3---GRANilll0THER---36
ZHE4---THIS---36
NM---THAT---36
DONGIXII---THING---36
W03MEN2DEO---OUR---36
NI3MENZDEO---YOUR(PLURAL)---36
TAIHENZDEO---THEIR---36
HUI4---CAN. COULD---39
JIANG3---SPEAK---39
ZHONGIWENZ---CHINESE---39
TAI4---TOO---39
ZHENG4ZAI4---JUST NOW---39
XUEZ---LEARN---39
YINGIWENZ---ENGLISH---39
XIE3---WRITE---39


FA4WENZ---FRENCH---40
RI4WENZ---JAPANESE---40
XIIBANIYAZWENZ---SPANISH---40
DUZ---READ---40
SHUOl---SPEAK---40
NENGZ---·CAN.
LANGUAGE---40
ZI4---CHARACTER. WORD---40
GUOZYU3---MANDARIN---40
GUANG3DONGI---CANTON---40
BEI3PINGZ---PEKING---40
BEI3JINGI---PEKING---40

CHANGZ---OFTEN---41

YONG4---USE---41
KUAI4ZIO---CHOPSTICKS---41
SHAOl---COOK---41
YIIDIAN3DIANO---A LITTLE BIT---41
TIAOZGENGl---SPOON---4Z
BEI1ZIO---GLASS---4Z
PANZZIO---PLATE---4Z
DIEZZIO---SAUCER---4Z
133
134


ROU4---HEAT(ANY KIND OF MEAT)---42
QINGICAI4---VEGETABLE---42
SHUI2GU03---FRUIT---42
DAN4--EGG---42
MEI2---NEGATION---42
YA04---WANT---43


CAI4DANI---MENU---43
CHUNIJUAN3---EGG ROLL---43
JIA03ZIO---DUMPLING---43
SUANlLA4TANGl---SOUR AND HOT SOUP---43
TANGl---SOUP---43
QINGIZHENGIYU2---STEA}lED FISH---43
BEII---A GLASS OF---43
WAN3---A BOWL OF---43
FAN4---RICE---43
TANG2CU4PAI2GU3---SWEAT AND SOUR RIB---44
BEI3PING2KA03YAI---PEKING CRISP DUCK---44
HA02YOU2NIU2ROU4---BEEF WITH OYSTER SAUCE---44
CHICKEN CUBE IN THE SAUCE---44
FANIQIE:nlING2XIA2---PRAWNS IN TOMATQ-44
MIAN4---NOODLE---44
NIU2ROU4---BEEF---44
ZHUIROU4---PORK---44
JIIROU4---CHICKEN MEAT---44
KUAI4---PIECE---44
CRA03---FRIED. FRY---44
NIU2PAI2---STEAK---44
BI3---PEN--46
JI3---HOW MANY---'-46
YIl--ONE"':'-46
ER4---TWo--46
SANI---THREE---46
SI4---FOUR---46
WU3---FIVE---46
LIU4---SIX---46
JIU3---NINE---46
SHI2---TEN--46
ZHII---NOUN CLASSIFIER---46
BAI3---HuNDRED---47
DI4---NUMBER---47
ER4SHI2---TWENTY---47
SANlSHI2---THIRTY---47
I
J
135
LING2---ZERQ---47
SUI4---YEAR OLD---47
QIU2---BALL---47
DAOIZIO---KNIFE---47
CHAIZtQ---FORK---47
CAN1JINI---NAPKIN---47
HIAN4BOAI---BREAD---47
JINITIANI---TODAY---48
XINGIQI2---WEEK---48
DUI4BU4QI3---S0RRY---48
TINGI---HEAR---48
QINGICHU3---CLEARLY---48
YUE4---MONTH---48
HA04---DAY---48
XIAN4ZAI4---NOW---48
DIAN3---0'CLOCK---48
FENI---MINUTE---48
SHENGIRI4---BIRTHDAY---49
ZU02TIANI---YESTERDAY---49
MING2TIANI---TOMORROW---49
NIAN2---YEAR---49
XININIAN2---NEW YEAR---49
SHENG4DAN4JIE2---CHRISTMAS---49
JIE2---FESTIVAL---49
ZHONGIQIUIJIEI---AUTillIN FESTIVAL---49
DUANIWU3JIE2---DRAGON FESTIVAL---49
CHUNIJIE2---CHINESE NEWYEAR---49
KUAI4LE4---HAPPY---49
GU02QING4RI4---NATIONAL BIRTHDAY---49
BAI3HU04GONG1SII---DEPARTMENT STORE---50
JIAN4---NOUN CLASSIFIER---50
YIIFU2---CLOTHES---50
HEN3---VERY---50
PIA04LIANG4---BEAUTIFUL---50
KUAI4---DOLLAR--50
MA02---DIME---50
FENI---CENT--50
. PIAN2YI2---.CHEAP-50
KU4ZIO---PANT--51
QIAN2---MONEY---51
!iA04ZIO---HAT---51
XIE2ZIO---SHOES---51
QUN2ZIQ---SKIRT---51
DU01SHA03---HOW lfUCH---51
WA4Z14---S0CKS---51
GUI4---EXPENSIVE--Sl
1
CHEN4SHAN1---SHIRT---Sl
JIA2KE4---JACKET---Sl


DAI4---WEAR---Sl


I
I
I
I
f
i
,
lJ/
137
APPENDIX E
PATTERN LIST
S + TV + 0--10
S + BU4 + TV + 0---10
S + SV--1S
S + BU4 + SV--IS
xxx HA03 MAO?---2S
-----1
XIE4XIEO XXX-2S
xxx XING4 xxx MING2 XXX-27
xxx XXX, xxx (XXX) HA03 MAO?---27
------- ------------1
XlL'l: HING2ZIO SHI4 XXX-27
HEI XXX-29
CHOUI XXX--29
QING3 XXX--29
xxx HAI2SHI4 XXX?-29
xxx KAN4 XXX--32
xxx QU4 XXX-32
xxx HUI2 xxx QU4--32
xxx XIANG3 XXX--32
xxx XI3HUANI XXX-34
XXX XI3HUANI xxx XXX--34
xxx ZAI4 NA2LI3?-34
xxx SHI4 SHEI2?---36
xxx SHI4 SHEN3MEO?---36
xxx SHI4 SHEN3l1EO XXX?--36
xxx SHI4 XXX--36
USE VERB OR AUXILIARY VERB TO ANSWER THE QUESTION---40
QUESTION SENTENCE TRANSFOID1ATION---42
(1) SUBJECT + VERB + BU4(NOT) + VERB + (OBJECT) (WITHOUT MAO) IF
ORIGINAL QUESTION SENTENCE IS: SUBJECT + VERB + (OBJECT) + MAO ?
*** IF VERB IS IYOU3/. IBU41 IS CHANGED TO nIEI2/.***
(2) SUBJECT + ADVERB + BU4(NOT) + ADVERB + VERB + (OBJECT) (WITHOUT
}LAO). IF ORIGINAL QUESTION SENTENCE IS:
l38
SUBJECT + ADVERB + VERB + (OBJECT) + !lAO?
NOUN CLASSIFIER---44
(1) XXX BEll XXX
(2) XXX WAN3 XXX
(3) XXX PAN2 XXX
(4) XXX DIE2 XXX
(5) XXX TIA02GENG1 XXX
(6) XXX KUAI4 XXX
COUNTING PRACTICE---47
MONTHS.WEEKDAYS.AND TllIE---49
XXX KUAI4LE4-49
XXX CHUAN1 XXX-51
XXX DAI4 MA04ZIQ---51
XXX YA04 DU01SHA03 QIAN2?---51 .
XXX XXX QIAN2---51
COUNTING THE MONEY 51
,
I
I
I
i
i
139
APPENDIX F
INSTRUCTION ON THE USE OF THE liANDARIN SOUND DICTIONARY
1. DIAL ANY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING NUllBERS: 321-6262
321-6263
321-6264
321-6265
2. AFTER HEARING "PLEASE TYPE STUDENT NUMBER OR PASS WORDS", PLEASE
TYPE 030131*. (APART FROU THE PASSWORD, STEPS 1-2 ARE THE SAUE AS
THE USUAL WAY YOU GET INTO A LESSON EACH TD1E)
3. YOU WILL HEAR "M&"DARIN DICTIONARY".
4. TYPE THE CODE FOR THE SOUND YOU WANT TO HEAR. (IF YOU HAVE UISTYPED
THE CODE. YOU WILL HEAR A BELL SOUND, THEN TYPE THE CODE AGAIN.)
5. IF DESIRED, TYPE *I! TO REHEAR THE SOUND.
6. TYPE {j FOR THE NEXT SOUND AND YOU WILL HEAR A BELL SOUND. THEN TYPE
A CODE FOR A NEW SOUND YOU WANT.
7. REPEAT STEPS 4-6 AS OFTEN AS YOU WISH.
8. HANG UP THE PHONE WHEN YOU HAVE FINISHED.
*** NOTE: '0' IS STILL AN ERASE KEY.
CODES:
A = 21
AI = 27
AN = 26
ANG = 264
AO = 25
B = 22
C = 23
CH = 24
D = 31
E = 32
EI = 34
EN = 36
ENG = 364
ER = 37
F = 33
~ I i I J _ l i i i I i i l i i l l i l ! l l l l ""' ---.",
............... 140
G = 41
H = 42
I = 43
J = 51
K = 52
L = 53
M = 61
N = 62
a = 63
au = 68
P = 71
Q = 91
R = 72
S = 73
SH= 74
T = 81
V = 82
U = 83
X = 92
Z = 93
ZH = 94
141
APPENDIX G
QUESTIONNAIRE I
INSTITUTE FOR MATHniATICAL STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
ANY I N F O ~ ~ T I O N ON THIS QUESTIONAIRE WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. ONLY
MEMBERS OF THIS RESEARCH PROJECT WILL HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR ANSWERS.
INFORMATION IN THIS QUESTIONAIRE WILL BE MOST VALUABLE TO OUR RESEARCH
PROJECT. AND WE APPRECIATE VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Name: ~ ~ _
Birth date: __
Sex:
Major: ~
Undergraduate/Graduate (Circle one)
Race: Black. Caucasian, Chicano, Chinese, Others (Circle one)
IF others. please specify: ~ ___
Native language: __
Other spoken languages besides native language (include dialects): _
Do any of the members of your family speak l!andarin? If so. please
specify _
Have you ever had the opportunity to hear Mandarin spoken? _
Do you have any Mandarin speaking friends? If so. how many? _
I am studying Mandarin because:(Circle one)
a. I need the credits.
b. I think it will help me to understand better the Chinese people
and their way of life.
14L
142
c. A knowledge of two languages will make me a better educated
person.
d. It will allow me to meet and converse with more and varied
people.
e. Other reasons. (Please specify)
THE FOLLOWING 15 STATEUENTS ARE OPINIONS. IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT
MANY PEOPLE AGREE WITH EACH STATEHENT AND MANY DISAGREE. THERE ARE NO
RIGHT OR WRONG ANSI-lERS. YOU ARE ASKED TO liARK EACH STATEUENT IN THE
LEFT UARGIN ACCORDING TO YOUR AGREmlENT OR DISAGREEUENT AS FOLLOWS:
+1: SLIGHT AGREEMENT
+2: MODERATE AGREEHENT
+3: STRONG AGREEUENT
-1: SLIGHT DISAGREEHENT
-2: MODERATE DISAGREEUENT
-3: STRONG DISAGREmlENT
1. American may not be perfect, but the American way of life can
lead to a perfect society.
2. Foreigners are all right in their place, but they carry it too
far when they get too familiar with us.
3. Chinese are interesting people.
4. The Chinese way of life seems crude when compared to ours.
5. Americans are more sincere and honest than Chinese.
6. The Chinese people would benefit greatly if they adopt many
aspects of the American culture.

I
I
7. Chinese-Americans contribute to the richness of our society.
8. Chinese-Americans have every reason to be proud of thrir race
and their traditions.
9. Americans should make a greater effort to meet Chinese-
American people.
10. The Chinese has a colorful culture.
11. Computer-assisted instruction is like a tutoring instruction.
12. Computer-assisted instruction is an individualized instruction
which can a d j u s ~ to the student's personal learning speed.
13. I have confidence in the computer's teaching ability.
14.1 have confidence in the computer's ability in teaching a
foreign language.
15. I have confidence in the computer's ability in teaching
conversational Mandarin.
THERE ARE 5 STATEHENTS BELOW. AFTER EACH STATEHENT THERE ARE 4
POSSIBLE CHOICES. PLEASE CIRCLE THE CHOICE WHICH YOU THINK IS HOST
APPROPRIATE.
1. This Mandarin course is one of my preferred courses.
a. disagreement.
b. no opinion.
c. agreement.
d. none of the above.(explain)
a. not bother to learn Mandarin at all.
b. try to have lessons in Mandarin somewhere else.
2. If Mandarin were not taught in this school, I would probably
c. pick up Mandarin in everyday situations.( ask my Chinese friends
to teach me Mandarin, go to Mandarin movies, etc.)
144
i.P 2 Q ~ ~ .

i
-fi
I
~
i
d. none of the above (explain)
3. Considering how I will study for this Mandarin course. I can
honestly say that I will:
a. do very little work and hope to pass by sheer luck or
intelligence.
b. do just enough work to keep up with the course.
c. really try to learn Handarin.
d. none of the above. (explain)
4. My feelings about this Mandarin course are: It is:
a. very exciting.
b. slightly exciting.
c. so so.
d. none of above.(explain)
5. After I finish this course, I will probably:
a. continue to improve my Mandarin.(eg •• daily practice, night
school, etc.)
b. t ~ y to use Mandarin as much as possible.
c. make no attempt to remember any of the Mandarin.
d. none of the above.(explain)
INSTITUTE FOR MATHE:lATICAL STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
MaT
145
14
5
APPENDIX H'
QUESTIONNAIRE II
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
ANY INFOmlATION ON THIS QUESTIONNAIRE WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. ONLY
OF THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR ANSWERS.
INFORMATION FROM THIS QUESTIONNAIRE WILL BE HOST VALUABLE TO OUR
RESEARCH PROJECT AND WE APPRECIATE VERY UUCH YOUR COOPERATION.
Name: _
Did you use telephone receiver pick-up coil? yes_____ no
1. Do you feel that the material presented was worth learning? .
(1). Definitely (2). Yes 0). Haybe (4). No
2. Were handouts clear and well-organized?
(1). Outstanding (2). Good (3). Fair (4). Poor
3. Were the parts of lessons over the phone well-organized?
(1). Outstanding (2). Good 0). Fair (4). Poor
4. Were exercises valuable in their own right?
(1). Outstanding (2). Good (3). Fair (4). Poor
5. Was it worth to spend a long time (lesson 1 to lesson 23) on
Mandarin phonology?
(1). Definitely (2). Yes (3). Fair (4). No
146
6. Was the convenience of learning at home or in the office worth
while to you?
(1). Outstanding (2). Good (3) • Fair (4) • Poor
7. Was the convenience of being able to use the program any time worth
while to you?
(1) • Definitely (2). Yes (3). 11aybe (4). No
8. Was it heplful talk to Peter after a short period of learning?
(1) • Definitely (2). Yes (3). Maybe (4). No
9. Do you feel about this neW way of learning?
(1) • Definitely (2). Yes (3). Maybe (4). No
10. What is your over all evaluation about this course?
(1). Outstanding . (2). Good (3). Fair (4). Poor
THE FOU.OWING 5 STATEr:1ENTS ARE OPINIONS. IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT
MANY PEOPLE AGREE WITH EACH STATEMENT AND DISAGREE. THERE ARE NO
RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWERS. YOU ARE ASKED TO MARK EACH STATEllENT IN THE
LEFT MARGIN ACCORDING TO YOUR AGREEtfENT OR DISAGREEMENT AS FOLLOWS:
+1: SLIGHT AGREEr:1ENT
+2: MODERATE AGREEMENT
+3: STRONG AGREEMENT
-1: SLIGHT DISAGREEr:lENT
-2: MODERATE DISAGREEr:lENT
-3: STRONG DISAGREEr:lENT
1. Computer-assisted instruction is like a tutoring instruction.
2. Computer-assisted instruction is an individualized instruction
which can adjust to the student's personal learning speed.
3. I have confidence in the computer's teaching ability.
147
4. I have confidence that I did learn as much from this computer-
assisted instruction as a class teacher.
5. I have confidence in the computer's ability in teaching
conversational 11andarin.
-----------------------
THERE ARE 5 STATEMENTS BELOW. AFTER EACH STATEMENT THERE ARE 4
POSSIBLE CHOICES. PLEASE CIRCLE THE CHOICE WHICH YOU THINK IS MOST
APPROPRIATE.
1. This Mandarin course is one of my preferred courses.
a. strong· disagreement.
b. disagreement.
c. agreement.
d.·strong agreement.
2. I enjoyed this course.
a. Strong disagreement.
b. disagreemellt
c. agreement.
d. strong agreement.
3. If Mandarin were not offered in this university, I would probably
a. not bother to learn Mandarin at all.
b. pick up Mandarin in everyday situations.( ask my Chinese friends
to teach me ijandarin, go to Mandarin movies, etc.)
c. try to have lessons in Mandarin some where else.
d. have a tutor to teach me the Mandarin.
148
4. In study for this course, I:
a. did very little work and hope to pass by sheer luck or
intelligence.
b. did just enough work to keep up with the course.
c. worked moderately hard.
d. worked very hard.
5. After taking this course, My interest in learning Mandarin is:
a. very little.
b. little.
c. moderate.
d. great.
-------------------
Suggestions:
APPENDIX I
EVALUATION SHEET ON STUDENT'S ABILITIES OF SOUND PRODUCTION
CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE LITTLE NO
RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION HESITATION HESITATION HESITA-
HESITAIION nON
'6 5 4 3
JUDGE'S NAME:
2 1

RESPONSE
SPEED
STUDENT NUlfBER:
1. PHONOLOGICAL ELEMENTS:
ACCUR..<\CY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6
PRONUNCIATION -------------_--_- _
NOT UNDER- HARD TO UNDER- FAIR GOOD PERFECT
STANDABLE STANDABLE

CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE 'LITTLE NO
RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION ,HESITATION HESITATION HESITA-
HESITAIION
2. TONES:
RESPONSE
SPEED
1 2 3 4 5 6
ACCURACY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6
PRONUNCIATION ---------------------------------------------------
NOT UNDER- HARD TO UNDER- FAIR GOOD PERFECT
STANDABLE UNDERSTAND STANDABLE
3. VOCABULARY:
---------------------------------------------------
CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE LITTLE NO
RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION HESITATION HESITATION HESITA-
HESITATION TION
RESPONSE
SPEED
1 2 3 4 5 6
iii't ZC
150
ACCURACY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6
PRONUNCIATION -------------------------------------------------
NOT UNDER- HARD TO UNDER- FAIR ·GOOD PERFECT
STANDABLE UNDERSTAND STANDABLE
NONE 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % ALL
CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT
6 5 3 2 1 CORRECTNESS
IN MEANING
4. TRANSLATION:
---------------------------------------------------
CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE LITTLE NO
RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION HESITATION HESITATION HESITA-
HESITATION nON
RESPONSE
SPEED
1 2 3 4 5 6
ACCURACY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6
PRONUNCIATION --------------------------------------------------
NOT UNDER- HARD TO UNDER- FAIR GOOD PERFECT
STANDABLE UNDERSTAND STANDABLE
- - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - ~
CORRECTNESS
IN MEANING
1 2 3 4 5 6
NONE 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % ALL
CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT
5. RESPONSE:
---------------------------------------------------
CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE LITTLE NO
RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION HESITATION HESITATION HESITA-
HESITATION nON
RESPONSE
SPEED
1 2 3 4 5 6
ACCURACY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6
PRONUNCIATION ---------------------------------------------------
NOT UNDER- HARD TO UNDER- FAIR GOOD PERFECT
STANDABLE UNDERSTAND STANDABLE
NONE 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % ALL
CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT CORRECT
CORRECTNESS
IN MEANING
1 2 3 4 5 6

4

ACKNOWLEDGEtlENTS

I deeply thank Professor Patrick Suppes for his valuable ideas, suggestions, assistance and support. As the chairman of the reading

committee, he lent principal guidance throughout. Several persons deserve special mention. The members of my

committee: Professor Rosedith Sitgreaves and Professor Robert Politzer; for his assistance in lIandarin Phonology: Professor Kung-yi Kao; for his help in computer audio system: William Sanders; for their superb computer programming knowledge: Scott Daniels, Ron Roberts and Robert Smith; for his hardware preparation: George Black; for their cooperation: Wun-I Chang and Josie Chen; for editing: Dianne Karnerva. Laurine Zepper and Carol Rossi; for the most detailed and patient assistance I received: my wife, Suzanna; for the greatest encouragement
"

all the way: my dear parents. Special thanks I also give to my students for their patience and cooperation to finish the whole curriculum without any material reward whatever.

TARLE OF COnE'ITS

LIST OF TABLES. LIST OF FIGURES Chapter
1. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY.

vi .viii

. .

. .

.

1

2. GOALS OF THE CURRICULU11
3. THE CURRICULUM.

4
6

....

A. B. C. D. E.

Selection of Teaching Haterial
Editin~

F. G.
H. I.

Description of the Lessons Description of Lesson Frames Arrangement of Frames Paradigm Requirements for Students Computer Program and Hardware Computer Audio system and Recording
R~IEDIES.

4. POSSIBLE-SIDE EFFECTS AND THEIR 5. EVALUATION• • •

24

29

A. Experimental Design
B. C. D. E. F. G. Variables Instrumentation Administration of Experiment Summative Evaluation Data Analysis Formative Evaluation
60

6. LEARNING MODELS
A. Models

B. Estimation of Parameters C. Evaluation of the }lodels D. Fitting Models Student 317 Student 325 Student 327 Student 366 Student 371 Student 372

iv

B. F.' •• Handout Sheet of Introduction to the Curriculum 114 117 C•. Co~rCLUSION. • • • • • • • • • • . Contents of the Text •• '.- 7. Instruction on the Use of the Mandarin Sound Dictionary • Questionnaire I Questionnaire II 120 130 137 139 141 • 145 I. • • • • 149 . H. G.Evaluation Sheet on Student's Ablilities for Sound Production • • • . . 109 112 BIBLIOGRAPHY • • • • APPENDICES A. E. Lessons 35 and 36 D. Sample Lessons. Vocabulary List Pattern List • '.

and C Summed over . Data on Evaluaion by Judges. 5. 6. Comparison of Observed and Expected U for Student 327 Ak Comparison of Observed and Expected V(U ) for Student 327 Ak Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for Student 366 • 88 92 ···· ·············· Comparison of Observed and Expected U for Student 366 Ak of Observed and Expected V(U ) for Student 366 Comparison Ak Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for Student 371 . 11.. Comparison of Observed and F.xpected U for Student 317 Ak Comparison of Observed and E.LIST OF TABLES Table 1- Page Data on the Dependent Variables. 15. 8.2 2. 10. Comparison of Observed and Expected U for Student 325 Ak Comparison of Observed and Expected V(U ) for Student 325 Ak Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for Student 327 ····· ·············· 16. 74 75 80 81 82 86 87 .··············. 17. 4. 13.<:pected V(U ) for Student 317 Ak Comparison of Observed and Expectecl Probabilities for Student 325 . . 9.2 73 7 Scores of R. 3. 19. 20. 18. ····· ·············· 12.. 14. 7. Scores of Rand A summed over y and y y 43 45 49 51 8 5. A. and y 10 9 11 Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for Student 317 • ····· . Data on the Independent Variables. Data on Course Evaluation by Students. · · • 93 94 '18 ····· ······· ···· Comparisori of Observed and Expected U for Student 371 Ak 99 vi . y . · 1.

.... .Table -- Pa~~ 21. Ak for Student 372 106 . U 104 105 Comparison of Observed and Exnected for Student 372 ) Ak 24... . 100 .. Comparison of Observed and Exoected 'l(U ) for Student 371 Ak Comparison of Observed and Expected Probabilities for Student 372 .... . 23. 22.... Comparison of Observed and Expected 'l(U ...

• • • • • • • • • • • • •• 37 viii . Announcement for the Course.r rz LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.

and political and cultural orientation. attitude towards the Chinese culture. These three factors have been shown to be important in determining how successful students will be in learning Ifandarin [9).CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of the study was to construct and evaluate (with normreferenced criterion) a CAl (computer-assisted instruction) spoken aandarin curriculu:n and to design and evaluate four stochastic learning models to help uS understand the learning processes of the students in this curriculum. it is too expensive to be feasible. Each model is evaluated accordin~ to its fit to the results ·of the multiple-choice tests. varying rates and at different levels of accuracy and Students work at understandin~. The reasons for constructing this curriculum are to provide individualization. ordinary classroom instruction in Mandarin does not take care of these individual differences. instruction (CAl) is a technique that can be used in schools to meet the problems of individual differences at a much deeper level and in a 1 . flexibility in time and place of learning. immediate attention to individual response. Students entering a ~mndarin class may differ considerablely in language aptitude. Although tutorial instruction is a possible Computer-assisted solution. and motivation to learn Handarin. Individualization It is a well-known fact that there exist definite and significant individual differences among students in a class.

CAl can simultaneously respond to several hundred students and yet give each student the impression that he is receiving individualized instruction [171. but with the aid of a high-speed computer. which is another convenience. Usually in a CAl class the number of students is larger than the number of computer terminals available. such immediate responses are an integral part of good language instruction. The average classroom teacher has too large a class to be able to do this. the students can log in to the lessons and work any· time they wish. are used as a teaching medium so that students can conveniently learn at home. Convenience of Flexible Pla~and Time of Learning Push-button telephones. Individual Respons~ In learning a language. as long as the computer is working. [181. The use of a push-button Also. in the office. students have no need to come to school specifically to have access to a computer terminal. students form correct langua~e habits when their answers are immediately checked and wrong answers corrected. so students may have to wait for a computer terminal.more scientific way than has yet been possible [17]. Immediate Attention to. Political and Cultural Orientation People have recently begun to pay more attention to Chinese affairs. The long historical traditions and rich cultural past of that . or any place where a push-button telephone is available. rather than computer terminals. telephone eliminates this problem. [18].

there is no commercial computer available that can input and output Chinese Characters.is new and it is hard to find regular class instruction with similar content. Such a comparision is very difficult to make. There was no intention. As a result. The present research was developed in order to assist non-Mandarinspeaking persons to learn the Chinese language. the norm-referenced criterion evaluation was used. as the content of the curriculum used in this study. (Actually.) The -curriculum we used evolved from consideration of the strengths of CAl. . this curriculum concentrates only·on teaching spoken llandarin. however. of attempting to make any experimental comparisons of the CAl curriculum with regular class instruction in this study. As it is hard to input and output the Chinese characters in the computer system available. and it is hoped that the results of the study indicate what sort of outcomes can be achieved in a carefully designed CAl learning situation.nation are best understood through the medium of the Chinese language.

the goals for the curriculum were as were the abilities to differentiate among phonological elements and identify the appropriate romanized symbol for each element. to manipulate phonological elements (i. Changing attitudes and interest The third important set of goals of the curriculum concerned 4 .. to differentiate and discriminate among . For the reasons discussed in Chapter 1. to grasp the explicit meaning of utterances. follows. to reproduce vocabulary items.goal of the curriculum was to teach spoken llandarin "ith Chinese grammar introduced only as needed. Recognition The recognition skills identified as goals of the curricultL~ More explicitly. to differentiate and discriminate among tones. to spell). the writing of Chinese characters was not included in the curriculum. vocabulary items. to produce appropriate tones.CHAPTER 2 GOALS OF THE CURRICULffil The main . to reproduce sentences.e. Production The production skills identified as goals consisted of the oral abilities to reproduce phonological elements. to respond to a given tffindarin utterance in a conversational situation. to development the ability to respond to given Handarin utterances.

. .5 encoura~ing a positive attitudes toward a CAl curriculum in rtandarin an interest in learnin~ teaching.landarin. stimulatin~ .

~~ndarin Any text that emphazised teaching Chinese grammar rather than Second. it was to be oriented toward conversation. the material chosen had to be practical. ideally they can pronounce any word accurately by themseves without help from a teacher. not need to spend a great deal of time learning Mandarin. Selection of Teaching Material: Four criteria were applied in the selection of teaching material. Language is for use. lessons were to be" of limited length. once students learn all the phonological l~ndarin sounds and rules. students acquire good pronunciation. not grammar. in order to increase conversation was not considered for use. 6 ~4UjaZ3JL a± . Also. it was less likely that they would become bored and discouraged with the course.. Through the emphasis on teaching sounds. Finally.CHAPTER 3 THE CURRICULilll A. One of the ideas in this course was that students would spend Because students did only about 30 minutes over the phone each day. so the material chosen had to be practical and close to real-life situations. Students are interested in learning language only if they can use what they have learned. and maintain the students' interest in learning. the teaching material was to emphasize the phonological teaching of sounds. First. Third. the It must be possible to break the materials chosen into units which occupy 30 minutes of the students' time.

met The authors did not intend for their texts to be broken into 30-minute units. the I included the following topics for their practicality: names. making phone calls. A total of 12 hours of her conversation with a few adults Although it consisted of a child's lexicon. Chinese fqOd. I had valuable help from Dr. greetings. In accordance with these four criteria. hometown.' Her native tongue is Mandarin. Some of the words selected to be taught c~me from the frequency counts of words in the Lingling's corpus [21]. material myself. language. but rather they divided their texts into 50-minute (or longer) units. Chinese restaurants. selecting the materials. Therefore. cours~. There' None. a two-year old girl. was born and brought up in Taipei. family. see Appendix A. tingling. but all of them were based on written material. Kung-yi Kao of Stanford University in compiling the phonological material. which was not . and shopping.7 No Mandarin texts were available that met the four criteria listed above and that therefore could have been used in this were a few texts that fit the first three criteria. In For r always kept in mind the 30-minute limitation and selected brief material for each topic. of words. details about what was included in the text. In the conversational component. however. There were several other frequency counts were recorded in Taipei. it was a valuable reference. dates. I had to select and edit. counting. visiting. the fourth criterion. I selected the materials that included a phonological component and a conversational component.

8 suitable as a reference for the selection of words for teaching .-conversational material.

phonological elements. and two patterns for every two lessons. names. it was impossible to include in one lesson all the important material on a particular topic. the judgment of frequency of use was my _T_im_. Because each student was limited to a 30-minute segment on the telephone. Background information . visiting. less frequently used material. Here. Every ~ lessons ~~~. 1 allotted about 10 vocabulary items for each lesson. The order of presentation was as follows: spelling. Carol Rossi and Suzanna Wong assisted me The order of presentation of materials was established according to the complexity of pronunciation. vocabulary. Because of time limitations. some expressions that are natural to Chinese may not be understood by Americans. and making phone calls were put·before lessons on counting and shopping. Frequency of use. ~l~i~m~i~t~a~t==i~o~n.9 B. Editing The material selected to he taught was edited carefully according to the rules presented below. Therefore. two lessons were used as a single between American EngliSh and Chinese. then. The more frequently used material preceded the For example. in editing the English text. and sentences. on the topic. tones. lessons on greetings.e_. Background information. Because of the cultural differences A second lesson was necessary to complete the work For one topic. the lesson content was tightly structured. 10 sentences for each lesson. Complexity ?f pronunciatio~. unit.

Exercise. hei~ students understand Figures were used to assist students in understanding the written material. Review. .10 for some of these expressions "as provided to them. Illustrations. Numerous review lessons were provided to maximize retention of the material. The students were given many exercises to allow them sufficient practice in the material being taught.

11

C. Description of the

le~

a. Number of lessons: 55 b. Size of vocabulary: 274 (see Al'pend ix n) c. Total number of Patterns: 40 (see Appendix F.) d. Total number of figures: 53 e. Total number of exercises: 131 ( 2.38 exercises per lesson ) f. Total number of review lessons: 13 g. Facility: For economy and for the convenience of the students. push-button telephones rather than computer terminals were utilized as the teaching medium. The course was. however. In this way. the

completely controlled by the computer.

students could learn at home. rather than having to come to school to use a computer terminal. The students listened on

Fhe telephone and answered questions by pushing buttons on the dial. i. Contents: Lessons 1 and 2 were reading lessons designed to provide basic phonological knowledge necessary for the accurate pronunciation
of.~~ndarin.

Lessons 2 through 23 introduced

phonological elements and tones of Uandarin. while Lessons 24 through 55 were conversational. in Appendix A. The lesson topics are listed

Appendix C contains sample written materials

from Lessons 35 and 36. k. Average number of vocabulary per lesson after lesson 23: (standard deviation = 2.37) j. Average number of patterns every two lessons after lesson 23: 3.42 (standard deviation = 1.31) 9.67

12

1. Average number of sentences in the text after lesson 23: 6.67

(standard deviation = 1.56) m. Average number of days to finish the course : 86.83 ,days (standard deviation = 34.07 days) n. Average time per lesson spend on lessons 3 to 23 : 31.67 mimutes (standard deviation = 4.92 minutes) o. Average time per lesson spend on lessons 24 to 55 : 33.92 minutes (standard deviation

= 15.52 = 9.57

minutes)

p. Average time per lesson spend on the whole course : 33.00 minutes

(standard deviation

minutes)

q. Average time in between lessons (time not spend on lessons) :

2262.60 minutes (standard deviation = 1064.86 minutes)

'~'-'"

13

D. Description of

Les~

Frames It was a handout,

a. Reading frame.

Every lesson had this frame.

explaining the material to be taught and the steps the student must take to complete the lesson over the telephone. This frame

served not only as an introduction to the lesson. but also as a text that could be used to review lessons. b. Reading exercise frame. were reading lessons. This was only for lessons 1 and 2 which This frame is used to determine the

students' level of comprehension of the reading material. c. Listening frame.

On this frame. the students listened to the
Through listening, students found

sound without imitating it.

the characteristics of each new sound and compared it with the English sound. This finding and comparing process helped them Because of differing

in 'actually pronouncing the sound.

,

abilities. it was not necessary that every student have this practice in finding and comparing sounds. d. Imitating frame. The students listened to the model sound and

then imitated the sound. e. Discriminating frame. This excercise required 'students to see After

whether a pair of sounds presented were the same or not.

the students could detect the similarities and differences among related sounds, it was easier for them to pronounce the sounds accurately. f. Identifying frame I. elements. This exercise was used only on phonological

The exercise determined whether students could

identify the romanized symbol for each phonological element.

Identifying frame II. Students had to identify the tone without hearing it contrasted with another tone. Identifying frame 11. This exercise again was used only in the It presented a tone and asked the students This exercise was different from previous ones in that it presented only one tone instead of a pair. and then asked students to decide which of the four was the correct spelling of the consonant and the final. This exercise was used only in the It presented a pair of tones with the same sound and asked students to identify each tone. The students had to know these letters in order to read the handout. this was more difficult than identifying a pair of tones with identical sounds. This exercise presented a consonant and a final. spelling ability. practice with tones. g. Because the computer system could not input and output Chinese characters.14 Without this knowledge. practice with tones. i. .1. for' every pair. it was important to see how well they could combine two elements to form a syllable. students could compare the two tones and thereby to develop discrimination skills. h. I used romanized letters to represent them. the students could not read the handout. to identify the tone. then presented another four sounds. respectively. By presenting a pair of tones. Identifying frame IV. This waS to check the students' After they had learned the phonological elements. Some of the exercises required students to identify a pair of tones with different sounds.

the corresponding In the previous frame.. This exercise tested students' It presented an English utterance and This frame always followed the four Mandarin utterances.15 j."!. m.. Translation frame I. the students heard after hearing the English translation. Translation frame III. comprehenion ability. ResR. were requested to pronounce the corresponding }ffindarin. 1. Substituting drill t~~.. ~landarin This frame helped build the students' confidence in translating from English to Ilandarin as they found that their pronunciation paralleled the model sounds. n. This grasping of the meaning was an important initial step to communication. This frame helped the students associate correspondin~ ~ffindarin with its English translation and also to pronounce the !landarin properly.~ exercise fram.: This exercise was designed not only to . and then asked the students to correctly identify the translation of the English.as introduced. while in the previous frame they were not. correspondin~ aandarin--hear llandarin The purpose was the same as that of The difference was that in this frame the En~lish students. sequence was: Hear English translation--hear aandarin--repeat :Iandarin--hear llandarinrepeat ~landarin. Translation ~~ II •.students throu~h could familarize themselves with the pattern k. Each time a new pattern . 'the . The sequence of learnin~ was: Hear the English translation--speak --repeat Mandarin.. after hearing the translation. translation frame I. This frame was used for pattern practice. The learnin~ this drill. previous one.

It presented. identify which of the four was the most appropriate to follow the leadin~ utterance. they had to make the correct most appropriate response to the leadin~ by choosin~ the utterance.16 see how well the students ~rasped meanin~. but also to see whether they could make the appropriate response when they heard a Handarin utterance. utterances. If they failed to do so they After they understood the jud~ment might possibly miss the right answer. .a lIandarin utterance and then The students were requested to four more !Iandarin utterances. they failed. Students first had to fully grasp the meanin~ of the five utterances presented. If they failed to make the correct judgment.to determine the right answer as well.

repeated the identifying exercise at frame f.-> g: lesson 4. This lesson was an extension of Lesson 3 to teach students to USe the phonological element. a was the reading frame and b was a reading exercise frame designed to test how well students understood frame a. This Frame g was a test on arrangement was the same as in Lesson 4 except for practice and exercise on tones. The students started to imitate the sounds at frame d. 16. 6. and then provided practice on spelling at frame d. The arrangements of frames were as follow: Lessons 1 and 2 were reading lessons. a -> d -> f -> d -> d -> h -> g: lessons 7. Tones had not been taught prior to Lesson 4. 17. and finally an identifying exercise at frame f checked whether the students were able to identify the romanized symbol for each element. taught the pronunciation of phonological elements. did a discriminating exercise at frame e. Frame d reviewed the sounds learned in Lesson 3. 14.s learned in-Lesson 3 for spelling. 13. a -> d -> f -> d. . 11. Arrangement of Frames The different purposes of the lessons required different arrangements of the frames. These lessons Frame a gaves the necessary information about points and modes of articulation and -possible-difficulties in pronouncing these elements. 12. a -> b: lessons 1. 2. spelling. a -> c -> e -> C -> d -> f: lessons 3.17 E. The students heard the sounds at frame c. and heard the sounds once again to make sure they had grasped the features of the sounds and the pronunciation of each element.

28. frame n was a . 39. 43. 33. lUI. pronunciation of syllables with The arrangement was for the finals beginnin~ III. 41. a -> c -> d -> h -> i: Lesson 8. This was a lesson on tones. 50. in which English sentences were associated with their Mandarin translations. 23. Frame m was an exercise on translation from English to llandarin. Frames k and I were then repeated. frames hand g were exercises on tones and spelling. and did the exercise on tones at frame h. a ->d -> d -> h -> g: Lessons 20. a -> k -> 1 -> m -> k -> 1 -> n: Lessons 24. a -> c -> e -> d -> h: Lesson 5. c. This arran~ement was for learnin~ the neutral tone and was about the same as the one'in Lesson 5. IS. Frame d was 'for imitating the model sounds. This arrangement was for Frame d was to imitate the model Frame k was a translation frame to help students associate Frame m was an an English sentence with its Handarin translation. 31. 46. performed the discriminating exercise at frame e. This arrangement wa~ for lessons on conversations. 35. and IV/.mys to The students listened to the different tones at frame be~an prononuce them. Finally. exercise on translation from English to llandarin. sentences. The students listened to tones in Imndarin and the . a -> d -> k -> m: Lessons 10. to imitate tones at frame d. Frames k and 1 were translation frames to help students associate English vocabularies w:i-th their corresponding llandarin vocabularies. learning sentence patterns. Fra~e fra~e d and did the exercise on tones at a described the importance of tones in llandarin and the ways to prononuce them. 26.18 Students imitated the tones at frame h. 21. 48. respectively.

37. 44. Finally. 49. 27. . and 55 were review lessons. 30. This Lessons 25.i -> m: 42. lesson at frame 1. Lessons 9. 45. 23. 52.19 response exercise to see how well students could respond to sentences. 19. 53. f~ Each lesson consisted of several exercises chosen from g. 34. frames e. was a sentence translation exercise from En~lish to llandarin. 40·. was an extension of the precedin~ ~Iandarin arran~ement one for lessons on conversations. 32. learnin~ Frame j was for pattern practice. 18. 51. 22. 29. i. h. 1 and m were the same as in the vacabulary. and n. arragement for The students reviewed the previous precedin~ Frame k. 36. 54. a -> 1 -> k -> 1 -> m -> . 38. frame m the students did substitution drills in this frame. m. 47.

students were required to ans\'er at least 80% of the problems in each exercise correctly in order to .20 F.. The 80% criterion did not lower the students' achievements. because the course had 13 review lessons and much of the material was repeated several times to give students the opportunity to learn what they might have missed in previous exercises. There was nO branch supplied for students not reaching the 80% correct criterion.. Those who failed to answer 80% of the problems correctly repeated the exercise until they reached the 80% correct criterion. . Patrick Suppes. they simply repeated the exercise which they failed. because the criteria of 100% or 90% correct are very high and tend to discourage learning. :~I! ... All the students went over the same frames throughout the For all the exercise frames.._ .._ .•llI!all!\l_I!I)Ql!Itl!l. Patrick Suppes.. -'- ~ . course. Paradigm The parad~gm for this course was that of 'simple intrinsic' programming._ .. Toe 80% correct criterion was suggested by Dr. The 80% correct criterion was suggested by Dr.. pass the exercise... they simply repeated the exercise which they failed... There was no branch supplied for students not reaching the 80% correct criterion. Those who failed to answer 80% of the problems correctly repeated the exercise until they reached the 80% correct criterion.

c. ~ have access to the push-button telephone. . They had to be able to imitate the sounds and to compare model sounds with their own sounds to try to correct their own pronunciations. students without good auditory ability would not be able to succeed in this course. This may be the most important requirement in learning a foreign language. students in this course had to record and compare the model sounds and their own sounds for self-corrections. Unlike the usual language-learning class where the teacher can hear the students' pronunciations and immediately correct their errors. As mentioned earlier. even though I held meetings with the students periodically to hear and correct (if necessary) their pronunciations. !£ have access to ~ tape recorder and ~ telephone receiver yickup. graduated from high school.21 G. Thus. especially for this course. Requirements of students It was required that the students taking this course had a. As the beginning of each lesson was a reading frame (frame a) in which the students had to read and understand written handouts in order to work on the lesson. the students needed a high school education. d. The push-button telephone was the teaching medium and hence one had to be accessible to the student in order to take the course. therefore they need these two pieces of equipment. the students in this. ~ have reasonable auditory ability. The course was basically a self-instructed course. b. course had no classroon teacher and had to rely on their auditory ability to hear each sound clearly.

the history program. The response program kept records of the students' responses to the questions of each lesson. and the response program. for example. a student who had just finiShed Lesson 13 will automatically started at Lesson 14 the next time he or she logged in on the telephone. _. ~2U:d!!Ui&z. The main program was the largest of the three and contained the curriculum itself. with this program. The history program kept records of the students' history of learning. The pDP-10 computer of the Institute for 11athematical Studies in the Social Sciences (IMSSS) at Stanford University was used and the programs were written in SAIL programming language. Scott Daniels.22 H. Computer Programming ani Hardware The Mandarin CAl computer programs were divided into three parts.15 LXSLZ.g 1£". Ron Roberts. and Rohert Smith helped design these programs. the main program.2 & .

The llandarin sounds in Lessons 3 to 23 were recorded by Professor Kung-yi Kao and me and the rest of the lessons by me alone. Computer Audio System and Recording The computer audio system that was used was the Delta Modulation Audio System of IMSSS and had a reasonably good sound quality.I. . The recordings in English for the whole course were made by Suzanna Wong Wu.

.. this effect.. Aeeording to Lambert.. and sentences. blaekboard explanations or pietures. . After a short learning period. students were less likely to feel bored because they nad chances to use what they had learned.. the repeated aetivity--whien is without diseussion witn elassmates and teaehers.~!1!~ !!!_!l!IZiIl'Z!I!.lIIlitl!!. With these aetivities. I had a eonference arranged for each student for a certain amount of time after finisned a eertain number of lessons. tones. 23. for example.. 38. without slides... Students' Boredom Tnis is a eommom eritieism about programmed instruetion. I cnecked their pronuneiation on phonologieal elements. 30.""'_ _.. vocabulary. 45 and 55.CHAPTER 4 POSSIBLE SIDE EFFECTS AND THEIR RB:1EDIES . the motivation of tne students is one of tne important faetors influeneing their sue cess in learning a foreign language and is independent of general 24 ... A... Sinee a CAl course is one kind of To remedy programmed instruetion. Eaeh time the students met with me..j. tnrough practieal use of the language do students develop a genuine interest in learning a language...I!IIlIlI!!IIlII!I . Tnere are several possible side effeets to programmed instruetion. _ .. I met witn the students when they had eompleted the work through Lessons 10. These effeets and some attempted remedies are discussed in tnis enapter. I arranged some activities to maintain student's interest in learning. without experiments or field trips--beeomes monotonous and students feel bored. Tnis point is very important Only in foreign-language learning beeause language is to be used.. and I conversed with tnem in Mandarin. it is subject to this effeet too.....

and spelling. the English IBI is heard as voiced to the American ear. as follows. but the modes of articulation for Mandarin for IBI is stop. To the American. Also. Inaccuracy of Pronunciation In this CAl course. Ipl. correction is an important procedure in helping students pronounce accurately. this is a serious side effect of the CAl course. aspiration or lack of aspiration has nothing to do with whether or not the stops he . tones. the speech recognition of the computer audio system was still in an early stage of development. unaspirate. aspirate. (a). B. Handouts. the teacher could not listen to the students' pronunciation and make immediate correction. Second. I provided students with simple and necessary phonological information about tbe phonological system of Mandarin and presented the notions of point and mode of articulation. For example. first. The computer was not yet capable of recognizing all Since immediate speech or of correcting students' pronunciation. whereas Ipl is heard as voiceless. I described the difficulties Americans may have when they pronounce phonological sounds. I included a complete description of. and 16-22. So maintaining the students' interest (or motivation) is a critical objective of the course. In Lessons 3-9. compensated for this effect in six ways. 11-14. how to produce the phonological sounds according to point and mode of articulation. . The handouts I gave to the students included written In the written materials for Lessons 1 and I materials and figures. stop. 2.25 intelligence and language aptitude (12).

In addition to discrimination . in English there is no /Z/ sound of A lot of American students have difficulty pronouncing Iz/. I provided rough English equivalents of Handarin sounds· that provide useful information for the students. 6. but at least they helped the students' pronunciation somewhat. (b).) I included 53 figures to help the students These aids could not understand these written materials. Part 2 of Lessons 3. Finally. 5. even though being able to discriminate sounds correctly did not necessarily mean correct pronunciation. Discrimination training. Listening before pronouncin&. I asked them to discriminate the sounds they were going to pronounce. it was easier for them to pronounce them accurately. he should give adequate aspiration. So I su~gested to the student that when he pronounces the Mandarin /p/. After I told them that /Z/ is a rough equivalent to /ds/ in /leads/. For example. 11. (c). Before having the students practice pronunciation.hears are a like or different. 8. He should try to hold a piece of paper in front of enou~h his mouth during articulation. After the students were able to discern similarities and differences among the related sounds. they were able to produce a proper pronounciation of /Z/. 13. (These materials were provided by Dr. the aspiration is probably adequate. Mandarin. guarantee that the students would have accurate pronunciation. Kung-yi Kao of Stanford University. and 16 were exercises in discrimination training. if the paper receives of a shock from the aspiration to move it sharply.

bility were a. Part i and part 3 of Lessons 3. 8. From just listening.d different abilities.nd correction procedure depended on the student's ability to identify the simila. I asked students to listen to sounds before pronouncing them. Recording a. Compa.re their sounds a. (e).£!!.d finished Lessons 1 through 23. Different Some· students were not a.ve been a.s the model sounds while they were on the phone (by the use of telephone receiver pickup coil).l sounds. finding and a comparing helped them lmen they actually pronounced these sounds. they should ha. For the students with this ability. Therefore. 11.nd the model sounds.ring the students' sounds a. not all the 16 were designed for this purpose.s well a. 6. After the cla. 13.ny llandarin sound without problem.ll the phonologica.ll th~ sounds while .ble to produce a. students have the ability to find and compare characteristics. I asked the students to pronounce all the sounds by themselves before going to the .nd spelling correctly a.ss. the phone.ble to improve their pronuncia. students ha. a. The students recorded all the sounds they produced a.ble to But the students with this a. After the students ha. (d). .rities or differences between their sounds a.tion with this procedure. This self-comparison a. tones. starting from Lesson 24. the students found the characteristics This of each new sound and compared them with the English sounds.27 training. and Of course.odel ~nds.nd to pronounce a. listening was helpful.nd the . identify the differences [3].nd the model sounds a.!!'. the students could compa.nd try to correct their pronunciation.

. the students their pronunciation by comparision. without the ability to identify the differences between their pronunciation and the model sound did not benefit from this comparision process. 45. At these meetings I checked their pronunciations. they could simply play the tape recorder.28 telephone. In addition to correcting their pronunciation. I worked with them until it Yas correct. the students to bring a tape recorder to our conference each time. (f). When they were on the telephone. If they needed more practice in pronunciation later. their confidence in their pronunciation was increased. I said that when the students had finished Lessons 10. they could check If their pronunciation by comparing it with the model sounds. 30. In the first section of this chapter. they were able to correct Of course. If their pronunciation was not accurate. but students with this ability did. 38. their pronunciation was correct. so that they could record all the sound both they and I produced. . If their pronunciation was good I told them so and complimented their ability in order to build confidence in their pronunciation. I I also asked told them where and why they were making mistakes. and 55 they met with me in my office. If not. 23. Correction of pronunciation during periodic meetings.

1972. pUblished by ShangWu. y. Dependent variables. a one-group posttest design was used. 'this CAr- curriculum concentrated on conversation and used a text r edited myself. s .. (1). . Peking. s) and production variables 6 I 1 (y . hence there was no control group available and it was impossible to make any experimental comparision with regular class instruction in this study. B. s ).. The recognition variables were as follows: Y 7 13 2 3 y: 1 phonological elements and association of phonological sounds with romanized characters (measured as in frame f) y: 2 y: 3 y: 4 y: 5 spelling (measured as in frame g) tones (measured as in frame h) vocabulary (measured as in frame m) sentences (measured as in frame m) 29 .- CHAPTER 5 EVALUATION A. Experimental design.-----. As it was quite safe to assume" that the students did not know any Mandarin before taking this course.. Beginning 11andarin as taught in the Asian Language Department at Stanford University is grammar oriented and the textbook is Elementary Chinese. The dependent variableS fell into two groups: recognition variables (y . Varia"bles.

y. y 10 • and y 11 789 s: s + s 312 Y 12 Y . 3 y. : interest attitude ·towards CAI. 2 y.30 y: 6 s : 1 responses (measured as in frame n) sum of y. The following items were used as the independent variables in the study: x: 1 interest attitude towards CAI number of times loged in x: 2 x: 3 . Independent variables. 13 (2). y. 1 y. 4 y • and 5 y. 6 The production variabes were the following: y: 7 y : 8 y : 9 phonological elements tones vocabulary : y 10 sentences reponses y : 11 s : 2 sum of y.

Student evaluation. no 12 . undergraduate = 2. x : 14 x 15 : x : 16 (3). The students were asked to answer the following 10 questions about the curriculum. other = 0) race (Chinese = 1. other = 0) 7 x: 8 x: native language (Chinese = 1. no = 0) x 13 average time spent on Lessons 3 through 23.31 x : age sex (M = 4 x : 5 x: 6 x: I. = 0) no = 0) : = I. z: 1 Do you feel that the material presented is worth learning? Are the handouts clear and well organized? z: 2 . average time spent on Lessons 24 through 53 average time spent on the (entire) course average time in between lessons (time not spent on lessons). graduate = 3) major (linguistics or language = 1. other = 0) : 10 x 11 x 9 x Mandarin-speaking family member (yes Mandarin-speaking friend (yes = 1. F = 0) educational background (high school = 1. : opportunity to hear Mandarin (yes = I.

32 z: 3 z: 4 z: 5 z: 6 z: 7 z: 8 z: 9 z 10 Are the parts of the lessons given over the phone well organized? Are the exercises valuable in their own right? Is it worthwhile to spend a long time on Mandarin phonology (Lessons 1 through 23)? Is the convenience of learning at home or in the office worthwhile to you? Is the convenience of being able to work on the program at any time worthwhile to you? Is it heplful to talk to Peter after a short period of learning? Do you feel comfortable with this new way of learning? : What is your overall evaluation of this courSe? .

The students had to answer at least 80% of the test items correctly to pass the test and to proceed to the next step of the lesson. exercises to the students. All of these tests were given The order of presentation of the items in each exercise was randomized so that the students could not pass the exercises by simply memorizing the correct answers as given. Since there are no standardized tests for testing Mandarin competence for any levels and the goals of this curriculum. These tests were not used to evaluate the students' performance but.33 c. The measuring instruments consisted of short ·multiple-choice tests.mastery of the lessons and questionnaires to obtain the attitudes and personal information of the students. rather. achievement tests. special tests were constructed for this experiment. . and composite questionnaire. Short multiple-choice tests. Instrumentation. The dependent variables will be measured in these tests to evaluate the student's overall achievement at the end of the sequence. The tests that were constructed were be achievement tests to measure. were presented as . Achievement tests. The results of these tests were used to construct the learning models described in Chapter 6. There were alto~ether 132 short multiple-choice tests (each consisting of about 10 items) for the SS lessons making an average of 2. over the telephone.38 tests per lesson.

tion is self-axplanatory. correctness of meaning shows y. y. x. y. Questionnaires. 1 x. y. 5 x. y. y. One (Questionnaire I) was given to the students before the start of their lessons to collect information on all the independent variables. 3 x. To evaluate variables y • All these 6 y. y. the more Accuracy of pronuncia- fluent was the student in llandarin. y. I calculated the reliability of the scores for the two judges. y scores for 7 8 9 how correctly the studerit translated an English vocabulary or Sentence into the Mandarin vocabulary (y (y ) 9 or sentence ).Lessons 54 and 55 were actually tests to measure variables y. All of the sounds produced were recorded and evaluated by two native Mandarin speakers for the quality of the pronunciations. The faster the response. and responses. Two composite questionnaires were designed. The evaluaton sheet is found in Appendix I. y • and y • 7 8 9 10 11 The students were asked to pronounce all the phonological elements. or how correctly the student responded with a 10 Mandarin utterance when he heard a Mandarin utterance (y ). sentences. 6 . y. Response speed means how fast the student 11 responded to an English vocabulary or sentence or to a Mandarin 'utterance. The average scores given by the two judges were the • and y 10 11 In the evaluation sheet. vocabularies. and 1 2 3 4 5 tests were given over the telephone. tones. 4 x.

x. x . and 3 456 789 See Appendixes G and H for the two questionnaires. 17 . was automatically 3 The computer also recorded the starting and x . number of times a student logged in over the telephone. 13 1 2 y 12 . z.z. z. z.35 x. z . z.z. z. z . so and x 13 14 15 16 could be calculated from these recorded times. x and x The other (Question11 12 7 8 10 9 naire II) was given to the students after they had finished the whole course to collect information on variables y. The computer recorded the z 10 Computer-recorded histories. x . so the information for variable available. x • x • x • x ending times for each lesson.

D. Other meetings... Menlo Park.. First meeting. questionnaire (Questionnaire I) was designed to obtain information on the student's background for evaluation of the curriculum. Administration of Experiment. Meetings were held in my office after the students Materials for the next had finished a certain number of lessons. Since some of the students had to work in the daytime. The I demonstration included how to log in to the computer system through the telephone and how to take each lesson. This the student was given a questionnaire to fill out. Two small advertisements of the course ~ were placed in Stanford Daily and Palo Times and copies of a small announcement (Figure 1) were distributed to the public libraries in Palo Alto. and Ifountain View and put on bulletin boards on the Stanford University campus and in supermarkets within Palo Alto area. After my demonstration. The response was good with 34 return calls for information. I met with them in the evenings and on weekends. went over the material item by item with the student and then demonstrated the use of the push-button telephone in my office. 13 of which resulted in appointments to meet with me.m'~&!III!II!IJ!l "" _ . An informal session of reviewing ~. few lessons were given to them. Recruitment of students. Each student at his or her first meeting received written materials and figures for the first 10 lessons together with' the two-page introduction to the curriculum shown in Appendix B.

# iJ # iJ # ####################################################################### .37 FIGURE 1 ANNOUNCE1ENTFOR THE COURSE ####################################################################### # # iJ # # FREE COURSE. IN CHL~ESE (}~~DARIN) CONVERSATION: # # # # # # THIS IS A COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION COURSE AT lllSSS OF # # # # STANFORD UNIVERSITY. # # # # 497-3084. 3-5 DAILY. YOU ~lUST BE ACCESSIBLE TO A PUSH# iI # # BUTTON TELEPHONE TO TAKE LESSONS AT HOME. CALL PETER WU.

.'

the students' pronunciation, with corrections of their errors (if any), followed. were recorded. All the llandarin sounds pronounced by'the students The students' performance and weaknesses were

apparent from hearig the tapes, which could be of value to both myself and others to revise the curriculum. Last Meeting. At the last meeting, I gave the students another

questionnaire (Questionnaire II) to fill in and administered various tests on the production of sounds. All the students' reponses were

recorded so that the judges could hear the tape and give a evaluation of the students' achievements of 11andarin sound ,produc tion.

39

E. Summative Evaluation. Of the 13 students who took the course seriously and worked on their lessons at the time of this writirtg, 6 had already finished the entire course, 3 were still taking the lessons 'but at their present pace might need' at least two more months before completion, 2 had moved out of the area and thus had dropped out, and the remaining 2 had stopped for unknown reasons. The six students who finished the whole course took an average of 86.83 days for completion. Considering the time required by the

experiment and the absence of any constraint or material reward (in terms of credits, mortey, etc.) to the students, six, ,in my opinion, was not too small a number of students, as the students could quit any time they
~dshed

and their interest in learning Ilandarin was the only thing

that kept them in the course. The following is a brief description of the students: Student 317: Male, age 31, completed graduate education, from the

Philippines; parents Speak non-Mandarin Chinese, student speaks very little South Fukienese (one 'of the Chinese dialects), native language is Tagolog, (a Philippine language); now an engineer. Student 325: Male, age 36, completed Master's degree in

psychology, Caucasian; native language is English, learned Spanish, French, Russian, and Portuguese; now a computer programmer. Student 327: Female, age 28, completed undergraduate degree in

biology, an American Chinese; native language is Cantonese, speaks fluent English; now a computer programmer. Student 366: Female, age 51, completed undergraduate degree in

40
physi~al

therapy,

Cau~asian;

native language is English; nOW a

housewife. Student 371:
Cau~asian; Fren~h,

Male, age 33,

~ompleted

Ph.D. in philosophy,

native language German, speaks fluent English, Spanish,
~fuyan,

and

also speaks

so~e

Japanese.

Student 327:

Female, age 33, undergraduate in history, an

Eurasian with Chinese blood; native language is English, cannot speak any kind of Chinese at all; now a computer operator. Data on the dependent variables, independent variables and the evaluations of the
~urriculum

for

ea~h

student are presented in Tables

1. 2. and 3. respectively.

Because of the small sample size (6), strong results from the statistical analysis of these data for the summative evaluation were not expected. The results of the evaluation in this study were only

tentative and were intended to give possibly Some indications of the strength of the curriculum. However, as in psychophysis experiments, The

I have a large number of observations from single subjects.

results from fitting the four learning models for each subject are reliable.
An important point to note is that all the dependent variables

were measured without the students' being aware of a test situation. This was done to ensure the students' cooperation in the learning process, as well as to avoid any possible Hawthorne effect (i.e., attention itself improves performance).

As a consequence, the scores

obtained for the dependent variables are likely to be an underestimate

of

the true scores of the tests.

58 ( 2.04) 12.47) 8.66) 13.5 51.67 7 8 12 10 12 58.67 7 9 13.5 13 62 11.5 56.5 15.00 10.33 ( 1.52) 10.83 ( 1.5 62 11 10 10 11 12 10 64.5 - (18) 11 s (78) 2 ------57.75 ( 7.08 ( 2.92 ( 0.17 ( 1.5 10 14 14 13.84) 11 ( 0.5 1 y (10) 10.17 ( 2.5 11 7 7 12 11 11 59.58) .07) 9.00 ( 1.89) 60.67 10.41 TABLE 1 DATA ON THE DEPENDENT VARIABLRS Student 317 325 327 366 371 372 Mean (sd)a a y (12) ~ 9.67 10 10 f3 13 10.37) 11.5 11 11 10.60) 13.52) 9.5 15 67.5 11.67 8 7 12 10 10 58.5 9 10 10.94) 9 8 11 2 Y (10) ·3 Y (12) 4 Y (12) 5 y 10 12 61.66) 7.5 47 (12) 6 s (68) 1 Y (12) 7 y (12) 8 Y (18) 9 Y (18) 10 y 15.5 14.5 10.67 6 10 12 10 11 59.67 ( 0.84 ( 0.50 ( 0.00 8 10 16.00 8 9.

33 ( 0.00 ( 1.04) 12.58 ( 2.00 8 10 16.5 145.92 ( 0.94) 58.5 51.5 138. .5 16 19 135.14) 16.5 62 121 17 22 6 s (68) 1 y (l2) --.5 10.17 ( 2.66) 13.33 ( 1.5 14.67 7 9 13.82) 23. ~he standard deviation.5 13 62 148 17 23 5 y (12) 11 59.5 15 12 10 11 121 17 12 11 148 17 11 138.5 11. 10.07) 9.5 16 25 9 Y (18) 10 Y (18) 11 s (78) 2 s (170) 3 Y (20) 12 Y (30) 13 a ----57.76) 22 The maximum sc ore for each variable is indicated in parentheses after that variable.92 (10.5 9 10 10.00 8 9.52) 9. in parentheses below the mean.52).37) 11.5 10 14 14 13.92 (10.75 ( 7.67 ( 0.84) 11 4 y (12) 10 12 61.14) 16.00 10.67 10.5 15.5 11 7 y (12) 8 y (l8) 15.60) 13.08 ( 2.5 15 67.5 56.00 ( 2.50 ( 0.5 47 130 17 12 10 64.58) 135.42 TABLE 1 (Continued) s (170) 3 Y (20) 3 y (12) 145.89) 59.5 16 12 10 12 130 17 11 132. ( 0.17 ( 1.67 10 10 13 13 10.5 15 27 60.5 16 12 10 10 58.5 132.

J.8 1 1 12 34.50 ( 3.50 ( 1.1 16 26 58 33 1 3 1 0 0 0 17 28 58 33 0 2 16.7 1 1 22.43 TABLE 2 DATA ON THE INDEPENDENT VARIABLES Student 317 325 327 366 371 372 Mean (sd) x 15 1 20 2 64 3 31 4 1 5 18 25 214 36 1 3 ~ 15 27 76 28 0 2 0 1 1 0 18 21 97 51 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 36.50 (60.:W&i£$MJ .67 ( 4.7 0 0 0 0 x x 9 x 0 10 0 11 x x 1 1 30.5 31.12) x x x x x 6 3 . x 0 7 0 8 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 30.2 13 a 35.27) 94.38) 24.37) 35.92) x "'~J!4JJ.33 ( 8.

3 25.00 ( 9.1 31.4 1989.3 927.1 14 28.92 (15.9 28.0 26.60 (1064.57) 2262.2 51.44 TABLE 2 (Continued) x 25.4 33.3 16 65.8 33.5 32.4 24.1 3989.1 29.0 1489.86) x x ~LL&LaU_&M & .7 15 2495.5 2685.52) 33.

67 (0.41) z z z 4 z z 6 z 7 3 3 8 3 9 3 10 z z z 3 3 4 4 3 3 ·~!IJ.52) 3.17 (0..17 (0.llM _.45 TABLE 3 DATA ON COURSE EVALUATION BY STUDENTS Student 317 325 327 366 371 372 Mean (sd) z 1 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 5 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 2 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 4 3.98) 3.83 (0.41) 3...52) 3.17 (0.00) 3.00 (0.41) 2.lll!M!I!!!..41) 3.33 (0.33 (0.17 (0.52) 3.67 (0.. 1_ ~ .52) 3.

83 out of 10. the mean was 8. One should also bear in mind that the recognition of sounds over the phone was more difficult than in ordinary conversation (because of the fidelity and intensity of the sounds over the phone) and that the students were taking these tests without knowing that they are being tested. Y • Y • y • and y ) was a score 5 6 1 1 2 3 4 for overall recognition ability. I think the students also performed well on On Y (vocabulary).5 out 3 high.33 out of 10.3 of the items.16 phonological elements. comparison of the tones within each pair might help the students to identify the tones.17 out of 68. the mean was 7. On y "different" sounds. All the mean scores were very closes to their y 1 m~ximum scores. The . which is quite (sentence translation) and ~f 4 On' Y 5 were 10. Botti exercises were y successful. it was 60. but for "different" sounds within each pair. (sum of y. On y 2 The student missed only 1. spelling. (spelling). and response). It is my opinion that the students did very well.84 out of 12. vocabulary.46 The mean scores for the variables of recognition are shown in Table 1. tones. the contents of which are randomly chosen. y • Therefore.6 and 1. Y . the mean was 11. the advantage of comprison was lost and identification of the tones became more difficult. (response) the means 6 12 and 11 out of 12 respectively. sentence translation. In this test.6 out of 12. The mean scores for (phonological elements) was 10. (tones). The students The mean of s did very well on each part of the test (phonological elements. the students missed only 1. 3 the students were required to identify the tones for pairs of If the sounds were the same for each pair. as this test is very difficult even for a native Mandarin speaker.

for (vocabulary). for y 9 8 (sentence translation). 1. and correctness in meaning.085. . sentence translation. except for 8 . and response (maximum score = 18). vocabulary (maximum score = 18).957. evaluations of vocabulary. 000. accuracy of pronunciation. for (total). and for Y (tones). 1 2. and "correctness in meaning" are explained on page 34.986. since the 'score' as evaluated by a judge is an ordinal measurement. . and response were according to response speed. The reliability or consistency of the two judges was measured by rank correlation. that the curriculum was doing a good job in teaching the recognition of sounds. . degree from an American university.07. is quite small. sentence translation (maximum score = 18).814. lleanings of "response speed". The evaluation sheet (see Appendix I) has five parts: phonological elements (maximum score = 12). "accuracy of pronunciation". Each student's sound-production ability was evaluated by judges Wun-I Chang and Josie Chen. indicating that the Therefore. They speak excellent Mandarin and were well qualified to be judges for this study. They are both native Mandarin speakers and Each has a Masters both grew up and graduated from college in Taiwan. The rank correlation (Table 4) for Y y 7· (phono- logical elements) was . Evaluations of the phonological elements and tones were according to response speed and accuracy of pronunciation. I will say students did uniformly well on these variables.986.47 standard deviation for s. for (response). y . tones (maximum score = 12). 6 points each. . Y 10 Y 11 All the rank which might have been 12 correlations were very high. 6 points each.

13. but the accuracy of pronunciation is not that excellent. The sound-production scores (Table 1) "ere not as good as those for sound recognition. C 03.08 out of 18 for Y 12.17 out 18 for y . That is to say. and then A. foreigner Who speaks En~lish It is extremely hard to find a without a foreign accent and an American ft~erican who speaks Mandarin without an accent.92 out of 12 for 7 of y R (response speed) and and y. the hi~h Chang and two by Josie Chen). I think Jakobovits is realistic. maximum scores: The mean scores were quite a bit lower than the y . the students did The mean score of the two judges A (13. point. He think that high phonetic accuracy is not required for effective communication and is inordinately difficult to attain in any event. best in . y.58 8 out of 18 for y • 13. language is for communication. measure~ents of consistency of the judges were very except for tones.48 mu~h hi~her if it had not been for the ties (four students by Wun-I Generally speaking. Therefore. 8 y • A (accuracy of pronunciation) summed over R. I think this is an interesting According to Jakobovits [11).75 out of 78 for Y If we look closer. the students were 12 actually not doing that poorly in this area. Table 5 shows that the Y 11 they can produce the phonological elements and tones without much hesitation. the two judges). C (correctness 7 of meaning) summed over students were better in and 9 10 R than A' . Table 5 ~ives the scores 9 out of 12 for 9. From Table 6.1) is the best. it may be . the students could communicate better than they can pronounce aandarin. however. C.7) is still higher than that for (12). for R then R. to the native :Iandarin speakers (in this case. 9 10 11 and 57. A Table 6 gives the scores of Y and .

4) 9(4.5) 2 6 3.4) 7(4.4.5) 17(6.4) 11 (6.5.5) 1 6 2 4 4 4 11(6.4.4.3) 9(5.5) 14(5.5) 11(5.3.5) bA 11(~.6) 11(3.2) 9(5.5) 11(5.4) 8(4.4.4) 11 (6.4) 8(4.4) 11(6.5 6 2 4.5 4.4) ------------------------------------------------------(vocabulary): rank correlation = .6) 9(3.957 7 317 325 327· 366 371 372 y (tones): 2 4.5) 1. 371 372 y 3 3 6 3 3 3 11(6.5 3 RA 10(6.3) 6(4.5.4) ------------~----------------~~-------------------~----- rank correlation = .5 6 1.3) 14(5.3.5) 9(3.3) 9(5.4) .5.085 8 317 325 327 366.2) t3(5.4) 8(4.5) 14(5.TABLE 4 DATA ON EVALUATION BY JUDGES Student a Judge A Rink Score Judge B Rank Score y (phonological elements): rank correlation = .5 2 9(5.5 4.6) 15(5.4.4.2) 10(5.4) 11(6.5) 16(6.814 9 317 325 327 366 371 372 2 6 5 4 1 3 RAe 16(5.5) 7(4.5) 9(5.5 1 5 15(6.5 3.3) 10(4.4.

tz .5) 15(5.5) 12(4.5 2.3.6) 9(3.000 69 52 54 65 65 63 11 317 325 327 366 371 372 y (total): 3 5 1 5 5 2.5.5 5 15(5. 3) 13(4.5.4) 13(4.5 4 2.3.4.4.5.4) 14(4.4.3) 10(3.5) 13(4.3.5 2.3.4.4.5) 14(5.5) 12(4.5) 15(5.4} rank correlation = 1.3) 13(4. C = correctness in rneanin~.5) 12(4.4.4) 12(4.3) ---------~--------------------------------------------.5 2.5) ------------------------------------------------------rank correlation = .5.6) 9(3.4. . A = accuracy of pronunciation.4. b R = response speed.5} 13(5.4.5.5} 9(3.986 15(5. 317 325 327 366 371 372 a 1 6 1 6 5 5 2.3.3} 9(3.50 TABLE 4 (Continued) y 10 317 325 327 366 371 372 y (sentence translation): 1 6 5 2.4. Judge B was Miss Josie Chen.986 1 6 5 3 2 4 15(5.4) 16(5.5) 14(5.4.3.6) 11 (4.5 2.4.4. Wun-l Chang.5 4 (response): 1 5 5 2 rank correlation = .5 4 66 42 49 59 59 50 Judge A was Mr.

. . 8) 6) . 6. . . A 7.7) R Mean of the two judges: (10.0) ( 9. . 10) 8) 8) 10) 8) 10) . .0.51 TABLE 5 SCORES OF R AND A SilllllED OVER AND Y Y 7 8 Judge A R 317 325 327 366 371 372 (12 (10 ( 8 (12 (10 (12 Judge B R (12 ( 8 ( 8 (10 ( 8 (10 A A .3. . 9.8) . . . 4) 9) 5) 8) Uean (10.7.

14. C ltean of two judges: 13. 12 9 10 12 11 11 .8 .3) A· 12. 9) 12) 15) 16) 11) (13. . AND 10 Y 11 Judge B C R A R 06 ( 9 01 03 (16 (10 A C 317 325 327 366 371 372 Mean (15 (11 . 15 12 11 (13 (14 (15 (14 14 14 13 . . .1 ~ Y .7. . 13.2 . 10. . 9 Judge A . .13. 17) . .5. .0. . . . . A. . .7) .52 TABLE 6 SCORES OF R. . 17) 9) 14) 15) 16) 14) . (12.2) R 03. AND C SU!:IMED OVER Y .1. . . .

13 The Let us look next at the students' evaluation of this course.33 (out of 20). however. evaluation data are presented Table 3. and from the point of view that language is for'communication. that the sample was biased because information on y and y on the students who did not finish the 12 course is not available. It must be remembered. From the mean scores on y . the mean was z 3 2 3. This means that the students had a relatively high interest in learning after finishing this course. on (Were the exercises valuable in their own . The mean score on variable of y (interest in 1earnin~ Mandarin 12 after finishing the course) was 16.53 too much to ask for a perfect pronunciation in forei~n-1anguage teaching. (attitude toward CAl curriculum in 13 teaching Iffindarin after finishing the course) was 23 (out of 30) which indicates that the students had a relatively positive attitude toward the CAl curriculum in teaching Mandarin conversation after taking this course. discourage the students' interest in learning Mandarin or produce negative attitudes toward the CAl llandarin conversational curriculum. the mean was 3. For z 1 (Do you feel that the material presented was worth learning?). for z (Were the handouts clear and well organized?).17.33 (out of 4). for (Were the parts of lesson over the phone well organized?). the teaching of this course on sound production is reasonably good even though there may be a need for more concentration on the subject matter of pronunciation. z 4 the mean was 3. we may conclude that the· 13 At least the course did not and y Also the mean score on y 12 course was relatively successful.

indicating that students needed more chances to talk to a native This will be facilitated Also. z 8 the mean was 3. one student scored 3 (Yes). we can See that there were no unfavorable scores on any of the items. Until that time. for (Do you feel comfortable about this way of 9 learning?). the mean was 3.17. for z 7 (Was the convenience of being able to use the program any time worthwhile to you?). or any place with a pushbutton telephone any time that the computer was working which was considered a merit of this course. the means for closes to the maximum scores.·the mean was 3. Most of the items had a mean of 3 or and z were higher and 6 7 The students seemed to enjoy very much z However. in the office. by computer recognition of human speech.67. the mean of z Mandarin speaker to practice pronunciation.33. but when a major breakthrough occurs the enormous potential of a CAl curriculum in teaching foreign-language Conversation will be fully realized. (Was the 6 convenience of learning at home or in the office worthwhile to you?) . the mean was 3.17. From the mean scores. . the mean was 3. Slightly above. was very 8 high. On z. occasional contact between students and a native Mandarin speaker is necessary in order to have effective teaching in a CAl Mandarin conversational course. being able to learn at home. for z (Was it worth spending a long time for z 5 on Mandarin phonology?). and for z (What is your over all 10 evaluation about this course?). 5 three students scored 2 (Fair). the mean was 3. At present such recognition is beyond our technical capacity.• right?).83. for z (Was it helpful to talk to Peter after a short period of learning?). the mean was 2.17.67.

All the students appeared to feel comfortable about this new way of learning. students' evaluation of this course was positive and encouraging. as indicated by the .17 on z • This 9 implies that this way of learning (reading the handout first and then spending 25 minutes on the telephone) was acceptable to the adult student. the time devoted to learning phonology eould have been shortened. the students could pronounce any vocabulary item correctly. and all the students judged the The 10 There were no scores of 2 (Fair) or 1 (Poor). because all the students scoring 2 had higher scores on oral production than the ones scoring 4. The students scoring 4 seemed to realize the importance of the learning of Mandarin phonology to the learning of Mandarin conversation.r .mean score of 3. just by looking at the romanized representation of the Chinese characters. But the lessons on the phonology might have been a bit lengthy and students might have felt bored. they could begin to feel bored. . z was 3. 55 and two students scored 4 (Definitely). For the students with better language aptitude. . even without the hearing the model sounds before. After learning all the phonological sounds and rules of llandarin.17. If they spent too much time on the phonology they had already learned. The mean for course "Good".

8 12 Older persons had longer inteval b.7906* and 8 and z is .8879**. for sentence translation r = . Correlations between recognition and production were as follows: for phonological elements r = . The correlation of the production of phonological elements and tones (y ) 7 (y) are resonably high (r = .1943. that is. with df = 4. for tones r = -. significant at the 5% level.F. The high 10 11 correlation indicates that the production of sentence and response may take same skill.ulary r = .7937*). and for response r = -. for vocab.etween the lessons. . ) 12 might be related to the fact that they could work on the lessons at any time (z) 7 The fact that some persons felt the course was interesting (y and might be due to talking to me after a short period of (z ). Data Analysis The following data analysis was to investigate possible relationships between the variables.2197. sentence (y) 9 and ) is . the production of a sentence. learning bet"een y The correlation between y and 12 z 7 is .8693** ) and response (y ). which is also high and indicates that the 10 productions of vacabulary and sentence require a similar skill.1598. for production of sentence (y Also the correlation is .7293 r = . with df = 4. These product-moment correlations indicate that recognition and production of sounds may involve different skills. translation of English into l1andarin. This indicates that 8 the production of phonological elements and tones may use a similar The correlation of the productions of vocabulary (y skill.8113 The -----------------* ** significant at the 10% level.7906*. r = .8204.5754.

a word of caution: the sample size was small and the above observations are only tentative and meant to serve as possible guidelines for future studies. . learnin~ had The correlation between z and 9 10 Again.7695*. The older person may 4 16 like to take course at a more comfortable pace while the younger person may prefer to finish the course quickly. I The person who felt comfortable with this new way of a better evaluation on the course.0000**. z is 1.T i ! 57 correlation between of x and x is .

More student control over the lessons. ---- Some of the students felt that they did not have enough control over the lessons because they could hear only the sounds given by the lessons and could not get the sounds that they wanted to hear a second time. The Mandarin sound dictionary (Appendix F) was created for this purpose. emphasis was placed on the pronunciation of tones and the students were requested to pronounce the four tones not only forward but also backwards (usually the students were required to pronounce the four tones only forward). non-Cantonese students appeared to have difficulty with the pronunciation of tones of non-monosyllables. In providing a formative evaluation of this curriculum three points should be noted: the strengthening of students on the production of tones. Corrections were made immediately after the students had informed me of the errors so that the lessons presented the other students would be free of errors. During the first few meetings 'nth the students. but further study is needed to substantiate the statement.G. Strengthening of students ~ . Correction of errors in ~ curriculum. SOme errors were detected by the first students attempting the lessons. and more student control of the lessons. Formative evaluation. the correction of errors in the curriculum. Even though the handouts and lessons over the telephone had been checked two or more times. and so at later meetings. I. students could . It appeared that students made some improvement in the production of tones after special attention was given to it.~ production of tones.

59 hear any ~fundarin phonological sound as many times as they wish. Plans for a Mandarin vocabulary dictionary were abandoned as there are only 12 keys on the phone dial and codings for each vocabulary would have been very complicated. .

Models Four different learning models were constructed separately from the results of all the multiple choice tests in the course and were evaluated according to their fits to these results....l. Exactly one stimulus is sampled on each subtrial.. we were able to tell how a student learns.i. . denoted O. which are denoted by 1. .for each individual student and from the goodness of fit of each model to the data..CHAPTER 6 LEARNING MODELS A. . Every student starts from state O. there are m i trials.. . i i. Trial Axioms Tl.j. . . For each state . _ . !!l!!!II_ _. The identification and trial axioms are the same for all four models and are presented first.. The models were applied to the data.•.. which are denoted T2.k. 12.• .. Each trial contains i r i subtrials. In the following are presented the axioms for the four models. T3. 60 ~!!I.r ..n..m.. Identification Axioms II. ••. by There is a finite number of states in a given order. . by l. .

.. The probability of going from state the end of a trial is C. where 1 j = 1.2.e •• p ~k = P.m • = 1.3 ••••• n. he will go to If a student has mastered state + I). Probability of success for each subtrial is independent of the order of the subtrials and the number of trials and states. Criterion of mastery of a given state for all students. . There are r i stimuli for each trial and they are randomly assigned to the subtrials.2.•• .. i. . the student has not mastered state not mastered state another trial. (or decision rule on Whether a student will stay in the same state or be promoted to the next state): a given trial of state i A student who scores at least 80%(r ) in i 1s considered as having mastered state i. state (i i. .n. i where i = 1. i.r 1 i k .61 T4. Mastery Criterion Axioms Cl.2.. = t. (i . otherwise. n is total Here state corresponds to frame for each lesson. and .2» . If a student has he will stay at state i and will be given i. . SIMPLE MODEL(Model 1) Response Axiom Rl.1) to state i at C2.

e •• ijk j k. the jth i and being responded to correctly. that the student does the exercise the first time. Same as Axiom C1 of Model 1. Subtrials correspond to the order of items presented in the exercise. Trial corresponds to the Trial 1 -means number of times the students do the same exercise.62 number of frames in the curriculum. by reinforcement his probability (j of respondin~ to the same subtrial correctly on the This increased probability is p j+l + 1)th trial is increased. . = a(p) j + (1 . . All stimuli in the of j jth trial of any state have the same p = P probability' p for all R2.2. which may be because either the curriculum is too difficult. trial 2 means that the student does the same exercise the second time~ etc. SINGLE OPERATOR LINEAR MODEL (Model 2) Response Axioms R1.1).Model 1 simply says that a student does not make progress as the subtrials or trials proceed. where j = 1. It means that the student is not able to learn. i. i Mastery Criterion Axioms C1. stimulus correctly on p j+l A student who fails to respond to a trial. It also may be that student has a low language aptitude.a).3 ••••• {m .

Model 3 says that a student learns as sub trials proceed and that he will not learn as trials proceed. As stated before the stimuli for each sub trial are not necessarily connected.1). All stimuli in the p k p (Model 3) kth sub trial of any trial in any state have the same probability of being responded to correctly. therefore it does not look likely that the model will fit the data very well. (k = ijk P for all k i and R2. i. If it turns out that the model fits the data. i Same as in Uodel 1. Since the stimuli present for each subtrial ate not necessarily related.e •• = b(p k+l k ) + (1 . then my statement about the connections among stimuli for each subtrial is wrong. i. The probability of success in the kth + l)th subtrial of any trial is .2 ••••• (r . .b).e •• j.greater than in the p subtrial of the same trial. where Mastery Criterion Axioms k = 1. I think this model will probably describe student learning most appropriately.Model 2 says that student will learn as trials proceed but will not learn as subtrials proceed. SERIAL EFFECT MODEL Response Axioms Rl.

k trial is increased. ••• . Same as Cl for Modell. kth p A student who fails to respond to a stimulus correctly on the subtrial of the jth trial.2.2.e .r • i Mastery Criterion Axioms Cl. ••• . jk where j = 1. The model This says that a student will learn as trials and subtrials proceed. by reinforcement his probability (j + l)th of responding correctly to the same subtrial in the j+l.e. where j = l.2.(r R3.• The probability of success in the kth (k + l)th subtrial of the trial is greater than in the subtrial of the same trial.3. ••• . P = j. all 1. jth i. The probability of success on the kth sub trial of the jth for trial is the same no matter what the state is. This model is a combination of Hodel 2 and Model 3..k+l b(p ) + (1 .k = a(p ) jk + (1 . .3. p ijk =P jk R2. ••• .m i and 1). i. i k = 1.b).64 SINGLE OPERATOR LINEAR AND SERIAL EFFECT MODEL (Model 4) Response Axioms Rl. This increased probability is p j+l.a).2.(m i -1) k = 1.

Also. if either Model 2 or Model 3 fails to fit the data well this model will not fit the data well either because this model is a combination of the two. the size of the parameters a and b. we can see whether the student learns as the trials or as the sub trials proceed. .65 model implies both that the stimuli for each sub trial are connected and that the degree of difficulty of the material in the curriculum is adequate for the student. By fitting the models to the data. we see each model has its own interest. From the above discussion. from we can see how fast the student learns as the trials or subtrials proceed. In addition.

. . 3 and 4 are extremely complicated.m 1. b.l. a. .q = p.2. i where i j 0. 2. = 0) = 1 .2. Maximum-likelihood estimators will not be used since the maximum likelihood functions for Models 1..r k Also let p{x ijk P(x = ijk 1) = q. i (index fo r subtrial). (index for state).· . Hodel 1: 2 q) • Let L = 222: (x ijk ijk L with respect to q. Let x ijk- . {l o = = if a student's answer is incorrect. (index for trial).2 ••••• n = 1... b P. a The parameters to be estimated for each P. model are: Model 1: }rodel 2: Model 3: Model 4: p p. we have: After taking the derivative of . B. if a student's answer is correct.T . Estimation of parameters. . 66 The least-squares method will be used to estimate all of the parameters in the four models..

Sometimes.. it is impossible to find the exact root of a for equation a. ij (1 . Hodel 3: Let L = 2~~ (x ijk ijk k-l . we have: k-1 q=[2Z2x b ijk ijk 2 (1 .bq -ZZ:2.b ) 1/ ri2. we have: After taking derivatives of q = [211x ijk ijk a j-l (1 - 2 2m a )] /[L~(1 .aq ~2. x ij=2k ijk (j-l)a .2. .~ (j .b (3) k-2 2(k-2) . I use Newton"s method of root approximation to estimate substitute the value of a in equation 1 and solve for q. x ijk=2 (k - 1)b 2:i2-. I then 1.b 2 q).a )] ik 2(j~2) (1) j-2 1:2:. ijk L with respect to q and a. for q of equation 3 in b q of equation 4 and solve for back into equation 3 and solve I then substitute the value of q. (4) ijk Substitute b.1) • ijk ijk Let L = 2}} ijk J-~ (x - a 2 q).67 (HI x ijk Model 2: q = ) / (L2l.i)a ij=2k = 0 (2) Substitue q of equation 1 in q of equation 2 and solve for a. After taking derivitives of L with respect to a 2r and ) 1. ijk=2 (k - l)b = o. q.

substitution of 0 and 1 for x But after sL~pler. an approximation method After a and b estimation will be used (sometimes.2. suhstitute the values of q. . by trial and error method). 5. the values of a and b are found. x ijk=2 ijk Substitute solve for 'a and 2(j-1) 2(k-Z) b = o. we have: q=[(~"l:~x a ijk ijk L with respect to a. back into equation 5 and solve for Equations. ': 68 Hodel 4: Let L = 2:n ijk j-l (x a qb k-l 2 )• ijk Again.:r L1.b ) ] .qbZ2~ (k .l)b . simultaneously. 3. i (5) . ij=2k (6) j-l k-2 (k . after taking derivatives of q. band j-l k-l 2 b )(1 .a )(1 . . the equations look much ijk All the above calculations are done with the computer.T .l)a ijk=2 a ~~2. ij=2k k-l x b ijk 2 (j-2) 2 (k-1) j-2 ( j . 6 and 7 look formidable. . (7) q b of equation 5 into equation 6 and equation 7.1)a -qa2~~(j-i)a b =0. Then Again.a ) (l 2m 2r 2 b)l/[~(l . 4.

2. jk jk j=1 where T jk = the total number of errors on sub trial k in trial j over all states.4 and 5 and A = 1. x i ) ijk =C E(x ) jk ijk E(T IC ) jk jk = E(x ijk ) . statistics are: U Ak The two = L A (T I c ). ) = the variance of Ak Ak Since the data for the first five sub trials and the first two trials are more complete. Evaluation of the Models 69 Two statistics calculated from the actual data will be compared with their theoretical counterparts of the four models. Let me explain more about tham: T = jk 2. U in = the sum of the proportion of total errors for the Ak first V(U A trials for some fixed U k (or subtrial).3.T c.x i ijk E(T ) jk = E(2.2. I only calculate U Ak and V(U ) for k = Ak 1. k C = total number of appearances of sub trial jk trial j over all all states.

70 A E(U ) Ak Modell: Model 2: Model 3: Model 4: = Z.a qb ) =2.qb ) Ak Model 4: V(U j-l k-l A j-1 k.a j=l Ak . j=1 x ) = L Vex ) (Here.) Model 1: V(U ) = Aq(l .all A A V(U ) = V( 2..q) j-l A j-l q) q(l .a j=1 k-l k-l (l Ak Model 2: V(U Ak ) Model 3: V(U ) = Aqb .all 1 .a )/(1 .E(x ) j=l ijk E(U ) = Aq Ak A-I A E(U Ak ) = q + aq + + a q = q[(l ..a )/(1 .l ) qb (1 . independence I I Ak ijk j=l ijk I t over the trials is assumed.a =2. ~ I I ! k-l E(U ) = Aqb Ak A-1 k-1 k-l k-l + a qb E(U ) = qb + aqb + Ak k-l A = qb [(1 .

The Fit of the Models 11 71 The models were fitted for each student.9303846 .9500000 ---------------------~-----_ .9296552.9500000 Observed . and the estimated values of the parameters show how effectively the student learned.T.9298487 .7107843 j Expected •9296552 .9024364. 1 2 Model 3: Serial Effect Model p = . Student 317: Model 1: Simple liodel p jk = . b = . The estimations of the parameters and the expected values from the resulting fitted models were compared with the observed values for each student. D. a = .9301075 Model 2: Single Operator Linear Hodel p = .

72 \ . This implies that either Student 317 does not learn much as the sub trials move on or the difficulty associated with each stimulus is different even with the random assignment of the stimuli to the subtrials of each trial.9214267 .9155475 . = .9047619 .9166667 This implies that student 317 had a In Model 2. b = .1609390 for fixed k for fixed j p = .9404762 .9285714 . b = .9186229 = .9303834.i k Expected Observed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .9411258 .8390610.9024364 .9538462 . In Model 3. If he missed some of the items on the first trial.9629630 .9092284 .9367206 .l .9523810 .9375000 . p = .0365595 k k.. he took care of most of those items on the second trial.9268966 .9319857 . Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model a p j = .9166667 .8390610 X P j-l + ..9634405 X P + .7107843.9490376 a .9452243 . fast learning speed.8902439 .9634405.

.

070114 .139224 .070345 .060976 •085366 Model 1 .069612 .139224 !lodel 2 .133836 .120345 .• 157147 .069612 .072774 .073171 .168905 .048780 . 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 .078573 .060976 .1 2 3 4 5 1 ·2 3 4 5 Observed .069612 .070345 .090772 .149657 .120345 Model 3 .070345 .075536 .070345 .195127 .74 TABLE 8 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U FOR STUDENT 317 Ak j k .078402 .085366 .073103 .120345 .146207 Model 4 .120345 .069612 .139224 .069612 .073171 .139224 .585366 .097564 .085366 .120345 .128943 .144186 .070345 .138915 .081377 .181543 .139224 .048780 .084453 .

088045 .135519 !1ode1 4 .078079 .064766 .082532 .138373 .129532 .065396 .069830 .072400 .057258 .129532 .133712 .328079 .067817 .065396 .112896 .165064 .077320 .112896 .154641 .046401 .065396 .067817 .064766 .112896 .176090 .065396 .064766 .064766 .120566 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 .144799 .067478 .129192 .124811 .065396 .75 TABLE 9 CmlPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED V( U ) FOR STUDENT 317 Ak j k 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Observed .072255 .074755 .064766 .057258 .065198 .129532 .078079 .067759 .112896 Model 3 .046401 .112896 .129532 Model 2 .129532 .078079 Model 1 .

All the C 2k 2k generate a good fit of the models to the data.9183674.9183674 . which is not enough to Review lessons Modell: Simple Uodel p = .9183674 .999999999 j expected . the data on Hodel 2 and !lodel 3 show that the best fit to -the observed data is provided by Hodel 2. None of the models fits well on U the C are too small. \ a = .9260700 . then Model 4 will have much better fit. The poor fit of Model 3 to the data is expected because the degrees of difficulty for each item (or stimulus) are not necessarily the same.i 76 From Table 7. the expected and obserJed probabilities are very close. and variance of U because Ak Ak are 2. In Model 2. lfodel 4 did This may be caused by the I f both Hodel 2 and Model 3 have a good fit. 8 and 9.7777778 1 2 3 .8656716 .9182283 Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model p = .9183674 observed . we can see that Student 317 did learn very well over the trials. Since Model 2 has the best fit. poor fit of Hodel 3 to the data. not provide a very good fit to the data.

and 3 for the review lessons is lower than for a in l!odel 2 and the values of the non-review lessons.9166667 .9166667 .8166667 . Student· 325: Model 1:.8994493 . we see that: p in Models 1.9371894 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 In comparing the review lessons with the nonreview lessons.8849805. the values of b in Model 3 for the review lessons are higher than for the nonreview These imply that Student 317 did not learn as well in the lessons.9333333 .8983051 . but then he picked up slowly as the trials and subtrials went on. 2.9178125 .9827586 1.8924579 .9349897 observed .9011407 j. Simple Model p = .8813559 .9333333 .k .8849805 . .k b = . I think this might be due to the forgetting effect and the feeling of being bored to have to learn something that one has already learned before.9059861 .9328222 .77 Model 3: Serial EUect !lodel p = .9231556 .9000000 .9281512 .9120980 . review lessons as he did in the nonreview lessons at the beginning of the lessons.0000000 expected .

= .9370207 . .9006496 .9734889 . a = .9438041 .8878788.T I ~IDdel 78 2: Single Operator Linear Model p = . can see that the smaller the value of a or b Here. This implies that Student 325 learned little as the subtrials moved on or the difficulty associated with each stimulus was different.9043478 .8601546 .8752171 .8432740.9090909 .9259259 .6973245 1 j Expected Observed 1 2 3 4 5 . b fast learning rate over trials.9294185 .9714286 1.0000000 Hodel 3: Serial Effect lIodel p = .8970588 In lIodel 2.8869565 .9203540 . This implies that Student 325 has a In Model 3.9275362 .8878788 .9208987 .8260870 .9565217 .8432740 . b = .9218151 .6973245.8922922.8922922 k Expected observed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .8873995 .9090909 .8886572 . a = . we the faster the learning rate is over the trials or subtrials.9619817 .9454798 .8869565 .9113504 .9130435 .

8455833 b = p p j p = .0803653 k-1 for a fixed k for a fixed j = k .'3§tt~j 1':1 ~ 79 Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Ilodel a = = .9196347 X p .9196347 .2994082 + .7005918 X p j-1 + .7005918 .

9398180 .9218151 .8878788 .9085065 .8878788 .0000000 .8888889 .9011407 .9006496 .9294185 .8886571 .9210018 .9000000 1.9011407 .9208987 .9218151 .9370207 .9140983 .9491024 .8878788 .8878788 .8601546 .8878788 . m .8913044 .T 80 TABLE 10 COUPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED PROBABILITIES FOR STUDENT 325 j k Observed Hodel 4 l10del 3 Hodel 2 ~lodel 1 T jk C jk 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7.8690476 .9218151 .9273505 .8694055 .9218151 .8601546 .8878788 .9011407 .9011407 .9218151 .9047619 .9011407 17 84 84 84 84 84 82 65 63 54 46 20 20 20 20 20 20 17 16 14 13 9 8 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 2 7 6 5 2 3 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 1 -~.8878788 .9011407 .9113504 .7976191 .9000000 .8752170 .9000000 .9158595 .9065915 .8500000 .9438041 .8823529 1.9438041 .9011407 .9230769 .8928571 .9218151 .8895526 .9218151 .9011407 .9011407 .8878788 .8690476 .9005111 .8886571 .9113504 .9218151 .8878788 .0000000 1. 8 9 -10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .9011407 .9146342 .8984287 .9011407 .9000000 .8432740 .9446545 .9218151 .9006496 .9011407 .9208987 .9011407 .8878788 .8579930 .9370207 .9692308 .8752170 .9011407 .9011407 ..9218151 .9288400 .8455833 .9011407 .8918169 .8888889 .8432740 .9011407 .9226214 .0000000 .9011407 .8799007 .9294185 .9345588 .9011407 .9011407 .

156726 .190306 l10del 3 .142007 .313452 .130595 .222686 .098859 .130952 .112121 .197719 .120099 .197719 .130952 Model 1 .110447 .098859 .112121 .190306 .198701 Model 4 .241496 .T.197719 .204240 .262600 .098859 .302381 .190306 .249566 .095238 .190306 .112121 .197719 Model 2 .130952 .139845 .279691 . 81 TABLE 11 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U FOR STUDENT 325 Ak j k 1 2 3 4 Observed .257143 .111343 .099350 .112121 .124783 .190306 .230952 .222088 .202381 .098859 .107143 .098859 . .197719 .187826 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 5 1 2 3 4 5 .195238 .154417 .112121 .

178172 .113804 Model 1 .178960 Model 4 .211432 .161423 .240577 .171622 .098249 .171622 .099550 .098946 .089480 .178172 .171622 1 1 1 1 1 I 2 2' 2 2 2 I I I I • I I .130572 .086168 .095663 .089086 .169'540 k 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Observed .82 TABLE 12 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED V(U Ak j ) FOR STUDENT 325 Model 3 .178172 Model 2 . I I .113540 .171622 .182736 .178172 .171622 .089086 .099550 .132163 .176168 .264326 .113804 .099550 .099550 .089086 .227052 .178172 .109212 . ! I d2-~*_ I .120289 .089086 .251423 .218424 .223163 .197891 .196662 .113804 .099550 .089086 .105675 .121841 .203804 .

9264706 1. The best fit of U observed probabilities.T I . j a = .9812820 --------------~-------------- 1 2 3 Undel 3: Serial Effect Uodel p = . 11 and 12.Single Operator Linear Hodel p = . independent assumption is too strong. From Table 10.9330568 .9643171 .5245632 observed .8298287. b = . This is because the student learns over the trials and subtrials even is Model 4 as expected.8793104 jk Model 2: .9319759. ) is Model 4.9319759 . the best fit of the expected probabilities to the observed probabilities is provided by !fudel 4.0000000 Expected . even Ak This may be because the Review lessons lfudel 1: Simple Uodel p = . Ak because Uodel 4 has the best fit of expected probabilities to the though b is a bit high. Also. the best fit of V(U though none of the models has a good fit.8705179 .

a (= a = .8863636 p = .8878788 ) of nonreview lessons. implies that Student 325 has not fogotten much when he did the review lessons.8710211 . a = .8947368 .9319759. Student 327: Modell: Simple Model p = . Student 325 did not learn much on both review lessons and nonreview lessons as subtrial went on.9322034 .5245632. than the corresponding p (= .8518497 .9022423 .8135593 .T ! .8474576 .8952286 . that the student who did not forget much recalled more quickly as trials went on.8813559 .999999999 .8344227.8412205 .9152542 .8474576 . k 84 Expected . which is higher This -~------------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 From Model 2 of the review lessons.8620690 .6973245) of nonreview lessons.8347826 jk Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model p = . which is This indicates lower than the .8617674 .8796554 .8965517 .8877116 .9087865 observed .8298287 . Also in model 2 of review lessons.

7796610 -------------~------------ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The large value of a in Model 2 and the value of b in Model 3 imply that Student 327 did not learn much as trials and subtrials went on.8324531 .8349515 .. .8139056 .7211539 ..7821643 .8252427 .7933048 .8640777 . b. .8625000 .8344227 .8410217 .8344227 .8234227 .0001000 k-1 .8491521 .9488585 k expected .8155340 . ..8344227 Observed . { j Expected .7821643.9999000.8118812 .. .3411000 for fixed k for fixed j j-l .6093750 . Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model a p j p k .6589000..8058252 ..8400000 1 2 3 4 Model 3: Serial Effect Model p ..9999000 X P + . . .9000000 .8344227 . ..8707015 . •6589000 X P b .8568667 . p . .8641867 observed .8404119 + .8038755 ..8518519 .

.

165577 .176577 .159556 .182927 ~lodel 1 Model 2 .159540 .331155 .372189 .435671 .121951 .331155 .. .165577 .170732 .264688 .186094 .159588 .146341 .330435 .165217 .331155 .87 TABLE 14 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U FOR STUDENT 327 Ak j k 1 2 3 Observed .182927 .196125 .165217 .170732 .264635 1 1 1 1 .330435 .159524 .264714 .165217 .413391 .331155 .331155 Model 3 .330435 .217836 .165577 .264661 .330435 4 5 1 :! 3 4 5 1 2 2 2 2 2 .165577 .158537 .165577 .121951 .392249 .085366 .165217 .264741 .159572 .206695 .330435 .165217 .121951 .353155 Model 4 .

134120 .275841 .163972 .153480 .160173 Model 1 .134087 .134109 .137921 .275841 .276323 .228196 .138161 .276323 .315319 .157198 .138161 .134076 .170383 .107079 .107079 .124926 .275841 .228139 k Observed .275841 .138161 .276323 .276323 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 4 5 1 23 4 5 .078079 .228215 .276323 .137921 .1 I 88 TABLE 15 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED V(U Ak j ) FOR STUDENT 327 Model 3 .228177 .302927 .275841 Model 2 .228158 .137921 .133403 .151463 .113325 .134098 .145398 .290796 Model 4 .327945 .137921 .138161 .153480 .138161 .157660 .137921 .340767 .

9037736 model.8555886.8983444 .8888889 . 14 and 15 show that VJ 89 ~illdel 1 had the best fit to the This implies that Student 327 did not learn much over trials and subtrials. Review lessons lIodel 1: Simple lfodel p = .9000000 ------------------------1 Expected 2 .9068862 . j a = .9512195 Expected .8677231 .9159727 Observed .9344543 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ~ .3: Serial Effect Model p = .9056604 ..9043825 .8890189 .9245283 .9999999 Observed .8788380 .T Table data.9147103 .8518519 .9284415 .8867925 .8888889 . .9037736. k b = .8555886 .9218770 .9037736 .9259259 .9041353 jk Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model p = .9811321 .8846154 . 13.

7958168 .7958167 .8321871 . This implies that the student did not • forget much when he did the review lessons.7958167 .. Student 366: Modell: Simple Hodel p jk = .9999999 Observed . are as large as those for nonStudent 327 did not recall fast as trials and review lessons.7962227 Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model p = .5250000 .7958168 1 2 3 4 Model 3: Serial Effect Model p = . subtrials went on. . But the values of a b and in Model 2 and Model 3.1132131. Model 2.8255034 .7958167.'i' + 90 Comparing the review lessons and nonreview lessons.9277591 . j a . the values for p in lilldel 1. b" . repectively. and Model 3 for review lessons are higher than for the nonreview lessons.5500000 Expected .

8241758 .8222222 . b = . M 2£.7709845 .0000001 + .7981651 .9999999.8539585 .7132131 . The student did not learn much as trials and The student claimed that she had hearing difficulty.7339309 .0 . = .7818638 .6818182 .8198198 . a and b. are large.91 ------------------------1 k Expected Observed 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . p.8028779 . subtrials went on.7681160 a and the value of b in Model 2 and Model 3 Both the values of respectively.8425868 .7875288 .7531519 .9999999 X P j-l + .9143271 X P ncass.9143271.7927928 .0856729 k-1 for a fixed for a fixed k j p k = .8171181 .8108108 . This may account for the large values of Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model a p j = = .8108108 .8461539 .8303297 .

7958167 .7709844 .7000000 .8750000 1.8539585 .8536585 .7962227 .8461539 .7875287 .7958167 .7132131 . .8303297 .7958167 .8750000 .7333333 .7875000 .7958167 .7962227 .8425868 .7962227 .7958167 .8005522 ..8725507 .7962227 .8539585 .8834697 .8475477 .8606087 .7962227 .8171181 .8028778 .8425868 .~ ~ 92 TABLE 16 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED PROBABILITIES FOR STUDENT 366 j k observed Model 4 Model 3 Model 2 Model 1 T jk C jk 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10' 1 2 3 .8695652 .7901235 .7339308 .7962227 .7962227 .7958167 .7818638 .7962227 .7958167 .7962227 .7962227 .8170732 .7339308 .8292683 .7958167 .9025814 .7962227 .7962227 .7958167 .8176395 .7962227 .7709844 .7962227 .7958167 .8028778 .7962227 .7958167 .8253968 .7958167 .7958167 .7958167 .8934532.8475477 .9025814 .8834697 .6250000 .7132131 .7962227 .8176394 .8934532 .7962227 .8709678 .9375000 .9038462 .8606087 .7531519 .7962227 .8725508 .8005522 .7958167 .8303297 .7958167 .7958167 .8332628 .7818638 .7962227 .8125000 .8171181 .7958167 .7531519 .8000000 .8332628 .7958167 .7958167 .7875287 .8292683 .0000000 .7962227 17 14 12 15 14 17 81 82 82 82 82 80 63 62 52 46 16 16 16 16 16 16 15 15 13 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 11 8 5 6 6 3 2 1 2 0 3 4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 .

146341 .203771 .407555 Uodel 2 .203771 .209871 .408367 Hodel 3 .407555 .458031 .493696 .166737 .207317 .204183 .195122 Uodel 1 .204183 .170732 .436272 .266069 .408367 .203771 .408367 . J.203717 .204183 .246848 .283951 .407555 .364721 .'t-.199448 .573574 .203717 .204183 .182927 . I 93 TABLE 16 CO~WARISONOF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U· FOR STUDENT 366 Ak j k Observed .407555 .424943 Uodel 4 .229016 .333474 .304905 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 .212471 .170732 .532138 .• 152452 .170732 .195122 .286787 .408367 .218136 .398896 .407555 .204183 .182361 .408367 .

165378 Model 1 .162252 .124926 .324504 Model 2 .176567 .162252 .• 324504 .324985 .277872 .159668 .234415 .324504 .162492 .353135 .165828 .371828 .162492 .162252 .185914 .324985 .167327 .390553 .94 TABLE 17 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED V(U Ak j ) FOR STUDENT 366 Model 3 .129211 .170553 .324985 .324504· .409080 .298210 .162492 .319337 .162492 .204540 .149105 .324985 .334654 Model 4 .162492 .161511 .176829 .138936 .195276 .324985 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 .258421 k I Observed .141582 .162252 .141582 .341106 .162252 .149465 .148721 .324504 .

9166667 .9090909 .9002584 .8498452 Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model p = .7726398 .8888889 .5555556 .8018132 .8493789 .7391720 .8281250 .8888889 Model 3: Serial Effect Model p = . Review lessons Modell: Simple Model The large values of a and b p = jk .8859649 .8333333 . k b = .8493789 .9242126 .8716864 Observed Expected ---------------~------------ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .8855763 .8787879 .7391720.8687330 .9130566 .7878788 .9062500 .8484849 . explain it.9999999 Observed --------------------------1 2 3 4 Expected .8272432 .8463035 .8494103 .7272727 .8493789 .8493789 .8493789.95 From above three Tables. j a = . again Model 4 fit best even though none of the models fit the data well.

and b for the review lessons are large.9380282 jk Model 2: Single Operator Linear lIodel p == .9361393 1.0000000 Model 3: Serial Effect lIodel p = . a = . Student 371: Modell: Simple Model p = .The values of p in tilldel 1. b = .9361393.0000000 .00000001 Observed -----------------------------1 Expected 2 .9178340.9471863 . This implies the student did Again the values of a not forget much when he did review lessons. and 3 for the review lessons are higher than for the nonreview lessons. 2.9363242 1.

9500000 .9378531 k j .0000001 for fixed for fixed p k = . 2.9250000 .9625000 .9999999. up very fast as trials went on by showing a = In addition. b = .9999999 X P k-l + . Model 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model a p j = = . indicates that the student had a good start.9500000 .9221735 .9999999.9999999 X p j-l + .0000001.9178340 . p = . and 3 are quite high.9467677 .9495791 Observed .9871795 .0000001 . learn much as the subtrials went on.9437995 . she picked .9125000 . however.9406659 .9373575 .9411765 .9333333 This 1 k 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The values of p in Models I. She did not.9301770 .I! 97 Expected .9125000 .9354839 .9262838 .9338646 .

9178340 .9380282 .9361393 .9378531 .0000000 1.9221735 .0000000 1.9262838 . .9380282 .9378531 .9373575 .0000000 1.0000000 .9361393 1.9378531 .9482759 .9380282 .0000000 1.9378531 .9102564 .0000000 1.9301770 .0000000 1.9378532 .9378531 .9333333 .9361393 .9467677 . 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .9378532 .9380282 .9378531 .9467677 .9380282 .0000000 1.0000000 1.9378532 .9361393 .9495791 .9380282 .9378532 .0000000 1.9221735 .9378532 .0000000 .9378532 .0000000 1.9387755 .9301770 .9615385 .9262838 .9361393 .9380282 .9495791 .0000000 1.9380282 .0000000 1. ! -~ 98 TABLE 19 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED PROBABILITIES FOR STUDENT 371 j k Observed Model 4 }lodel 3 Model 2 Model 1 T jk C jk 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 .9102564 .0000000 1.9178340 .9487180 .9378531 .9378531 .9406659 .9373575 .• 9318182 1.9437995 .9378532 .9406659 .9378532 .9380282 .9868421 .9380282 .0000000 1.9437995 .9380282 .9380282 .9361393 .9378531 .9378532 .9380282 .9380282 .9361393 .9338646 .9361393 .9380i82 7 3 6 7 4 1 4 3 3 3 78 78 78 78 78 76 60 58 49 44 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2.0000000 1.9230769 .9338646 .0000000 1.9380282 .9380282 .9380282 .0000000 1.9380282 .9380282 .9378532 .0000000 1.9361393 .9378532 .T .9361393 .

.i 99 99 I I I I .

059783 .071770 .058285 .071006 .116569 .116569 .058131 .116569 k Observed .061761 .143539 .059783 .123523 Model 4 .068282 .059783 .081690 .036982 .059783 } FOR STUDENT 371 Model 3 .036982 .136564 .058131 .058131 .116263 .058131 . I :.059783 .116569 .vv 100 I i ! TABLE 21 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED j fu~ EXPECTED V(U Ak Model 2 .048652 .059783 .116263 .058285 .058285 .059783 .116263 .081690 .064948 .059783 .081690 .116263 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 2 2 2 2 .116569 ..071006 .081690 .150829 .T .059783 .075415 .059783 .048652 Model 1 .058285 .058285 .116263 .129895 .058131 .

9210607 .8947368 Expected .9302326 1.9545455 .9318182 .9455034 .9299065 .8409091 .8623807.9299065.99999999· Observed .8308796 Observed -------------------------1 Expected . Hodel 2 is extremely small. j a = .8623807 . k b = .9333333 .9623777 .9302326 lwdel 2: Single Operator Linear Hodel p = . 20 and 21.9318735 .9740270 .9547199 .8856550 .0000000 .9299065 1 2 Model 3: Serial Effect Model p = .9049930 . Hodel 2 had a slightly better fit to the data than the other models.9344109 .-v- I 1 I 101 From Table 19.9545455 .9523810 ."' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .8863636 .9687404 .9318182 . This may be because the value· of a in Review lessons Model 1: Simple Model p jk = .

8434783 . j a = .7957603. and 3 are smaller for the review lessons than for the nonreview lessons.8434783.9536281 . Also the values of a and This may be caused by b for review lessons are larger than the nonreview lessons.6718750 .8723995 .8434783 .8947368 Model 3: Serial Effect Model p = . 2.8434783 . forgetting.8427948 jk Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model p = .~ I I I 102 The values of p in Models 1.7410714 .8434783 . This may be due to having to learn something that the student had already learned before.9999999 Observed Expected 1 2 3 4 . I I I I I i I Student 372: Model 1: Simple Model p = . b = .

7957603 .1 >t i k 103 Expected Observed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .0000001 for a fixed for a fixed j-1 p = k .8463918 . !lodel 4: Single Operator Linear and Serial Effect Model a = p .8228761 .8750000 . b = .· j = .99999999.9999999 X p j + .8535149 .8052313 .8641975 . respectively The large values of implies the student did not pick up much as trials and sbutrials went on.8434783 k.8310897 .8100000 .8446602 .8667855 a .8603077 .8985507 .0000001 .8737864 .8446602 .8142631 . p = .8155340 .7758621 and b in Model 2 and Model 3.8235294 .9999999 X P k-1 + .99999999.8389224 .

8414634 .8434784 .8902439 .8463918 .8228760 .8463918 .8434783 . 1 3 8 .8434783 .8434783 .8427948 .8434783 .8434783 .8142631 .8434783 .8434783 .8427948 .8427948 .8434784 .8434783 .7777778 .8427948 13 7 9 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .8434783 .7500000 .8427948 .8310896 .8427948 .8518519 .8434783 .7957603 .8535149 .8667855 .8434784 .8434784 .8667855 .8427948 .8434783 .9146342 .9193548 .8427948 .8434783 . j TABLE 22 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED PROBABILITIES FOR STUDENT 372 k Observed Hodel 4 Model 3 Hodel 2 Model 1 T C jk jk .8434784 .8427948 .9215686 .8052313 .8389223 .8228760 .7957603 .8142631 .8434783 .8333333 .8389223 .5454546 .8227848 .8434783 82 82 82 82 81 79 62 61 51 45 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 10 12 14 5 6 4 10 2 3 4 4 3 2 5 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 .8427948 .8535149 .6666667 .8427948 .8427948 .8427948 .9016393 .8603077 .8434783 .1 .8434783 .8434783 .8434784 .6250000 .8310896 .8434784 .9000000 .8052313 .8434784 .8427948 .8427948 .8427948 . i 104 I .8434783 .8434784 .7500000 .8434783 .8434783 .8181818 .8434784 .8434783 .8434783 .8434783 .8434784 .8427948 .8434783 .8434783 .8427948 .8434785 .8434783 .8434783 .6666667 .8780488 .8427948 .8333333 .8434784 .8603077 .8427948 .

157205 .314410 .408479 .121951 .109756 .185185 Modell .157205 .185737 .157205 .156522 .313043 .170732 .182927 .158537 .314410 .314410 .313043 ..T I I ! 105 TABLE 23 ! --. • j 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 5 .156522 .389537 .313043 .313043 .313043 .354248 .156522 .148148 .156522 .156522 .156522 .1 "i .168910 .314410 .157205 .313043 .121951 .156522 .194769 .156522 .371474 .313043 .157205 .204240 .313043 .156522 .158537 .313043 Model 3 .314410 Model 2 .'J '~ i COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED U FOR STUDENT 372 Ak j I k 1 2 3 4 5 1 Observed .177124 .337821 Model 4 .156522 .085366 .313043 --'\'1.

132023 .132023 .132492 .132492 .291502 .264045 k Observed .132492 .132023 .140380 .156834 .151239 .157198 .264045 .264045 .132023 .264045 .325052 .161866 Model 1 .144111 .113325 .302477 .264984 .264984 .132023 .162526 .132023 .264045 .264045 .126200 .4 106 TABLE 24 COHPARISON OF OBSERVED k'lD EXPECTED V(U Ale j ) FOR STUDENT 372 Model 3 .097710 .264984 .264984 .264045 .132023 .132023 .133403 .107079 .153480 .313668 .280759 Model 4 .264045 .132492 .132023 .078079 .132492 .264045 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 2 .264984 Hodel 2 .132023 .264045 .145751 .

8939558 . j a = .9007491 .9007491.9210592 .9999999 Observed Expected 1 2 .8575468.9056604 .9000000 Model 3: Serial Effect Model p = .9007491 .8770922 .9811321 .9150139 .9041353 jk Model 2: Single Operator Linear Model p = .1 'I 107 t Model 4 fit the data slightly better than the other models.8858350 .8676799 .8575468 .9043825 .9014990 .9085057 . k b = .8727273 .9259259 . but none of the models had a goo~ fit to the data.9288673 Observed Expected 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . Review lessons Model 1: Simple Model p = .9512195 .8867925 .8518519 .9090909 .9266745 .8846154 .8888889 .

b for review lessons are still very large. and 3 for the review lessons are higher than for the nonreview lessons.1 108 The values of p in models 1. this may be because the student The values of a and did not forget much when he did review lessons. 2. '~~!i1a!iJo ~ .

if we regard language mainly as a means of communication and consider that perfect pronunciation is not necessary for effective communication. Also. then we need not ask for perfect pronunciation in foreign-language teaching. Considering-all of my "~f I . From the students' point of view.J . they very much enjoyed receiving the lessons at home. of learning is drastically different from classroom learning. In this case. As a matter of fact. or any place having a push-button telephone whenever the computer was available. the flexibility of the place and time of learning really fit their need. but had only limited time available. it is quite natural to incorporate this idea into an adult education program.CHAPTER 7 1 [ CONCLUSION Even though the data in the summative evaluation are not quite sufficient to generate a strong conclusion about the CAl experimental course in Mandarin conversation. the students felt comfortable about this new way of learning. i the course. The course was quite successful in teaching recognition of sounds but only reasonably successful in teaching the production of sounds. I i I students who had been away from school for a while and were eager to learn something interesting. reading the handouts first and then working on the telephone. This way I am glad that the students could adjust to and feel at ease with this non- 109 . they can still provide us some indication of the strengths o~ 1 j -I J I I ! ! I . However. This idea of flexibility in the place and time of learning seems worth pushing forward. the course was pragmatically successful also in teaching sound production. in the office.

. It seems that no one learned fast when he went from sub trial to subtrial (or item to item). then f The better fit of Model 2 seems to indicate that the students learned effectively from trial to trial. the development of speech recognition by the computer is still at the beginning stage. At present. Those . the enormous potential of a CAl curriculum in teaching foreign-language sound production will be fully recognized. in general. could be either a fast learner or a slow learner in the text. In other words. i. Most of them learn rapidly a in Comparing the values of parameter Model 2 between text and review lessons. we can see that. i llodel 2 fits better than Model 3 and Model4. Others who needed a lot of practice in review lessons also could be a fast learner or slow learner. i I I . ~IDdel Since Model 4 is a 3.mo did well in review lessons. This may be caused by the differing degree . if Model 3 does not fit well. the occasional contact between students and a native speaker is necessary in order to effectively teach a CAl Mandarin conversational course. after their first trial. the retention. combination of Model 2 and neither does Model 4. when a major breakthrough occurs. which was shown by the amount of practice in review lessons. who did not need a lot of review. Until that time. From the fit of the learning models.no traditional way of learning.e. has nothing to do with how fast they learned in the text. This will be facilitated once computer recognition of human speech is accomplished. The students indicated that they needed more chance to talk to a native speaker in order to practice pronunciation. there is no definite pattern.

the effect of the different degrees of difficulty has not been completely eliminated. III i I . . . ~ j . ~ of difficulty of the stimuli in a given trial. .1 . Even thou~h the stimuli have been randomly assigned to the sub trials for each trial. I •.I : . .

).). [133" Lysaught. P" & Williams" C. New York: Wiley. M. 14] [5] I I Carroll.: U. N. L.). 1973. Wellesley. Ill. In E. An introduction !£ mathematical learning theory. Mass. Cronbach. J. Cronbach.: National Textbook Co.: National Textbook Co. 1963 & S!'H2 . Foreign language program evaluation.112 BIBLIOGRAPHY [l] I ! Altman. Atkinson. 1972.). E. J. R. Ill. James (Eds.. Washington. H.ion: ~ overview. Language learning and machine teaching. Department of Health.). 1970. Essentials of psychological testing (3rd Ed. Philadelphia: The Center for Curriculum Development.. Foreign language learning: ~. C. an overview. Skokie. C. R. J'. In D. [12] Lange. Lange & C. D. Birkmaier.: Newbury House. Education and Welfare. 1971. Curriculum evaluation: commentaries ~ purpose.. Clark. & Politzer.S.. 1963.. M. Foreign language education: Skokie. L.. A guide to programmed instruction. J. ' [2] [3] I i . process product. Lange and C. Ill. J. B. D. W. Skokie. Ill.: Heath. D. Foreign language education: A reappraisal. New York: Harper & Row. & James. Foreign language education: A reappraisal. R.: National Textbook Co. In A. 1973. 1972. J. A. James (Eds. Bower. Foreign language education: A reappraisal. M. B. E. 1970 Hancock. R. Student aptitude. attitude and motivation. 1969.. Skokie. Measurement implications of recent trends in foreign language teaching. Foreign language educat. Ill. 16] 17] [8] 19] 110] Hatfield. New York: Wiley.: National Textbook Co.. Conference ~ jndividualizing foreign language instruction. Programmed self-instruction in lfundarin Chinese: observations of student progress ~ ~ automated audiovisual instructional ~evice..C. Rowley. office of Education. C. J.' Skokie.: NationalTextbook co. [11] Jakobovits. J. & Crothers. In D. 1974. L. Barrutia. G. 1965.psycholinguistic analysis of ~ issues. J. Institute of International. Course improvement through evaluation. 1972. Lexington. Mass. David (Ed.. llass. L. Birkmaier (ed. L. L.: Language Testing Fund.

D. [21] Suppes. & Atkinson R. R. H. & Lev. statistical inference. P. 1971. product. process. !lass. New York: Academic Press. E. (Tech. [20] Suppes. Holt. 1972-. . ~ 118] Suppes. S. Unpublished manuscript. Rinehart & Winston. Improving achievement in foreign The Center for Curriculum & Brian.. models. J. Rep. D. [23] Walker. T. P. H. 1973. J. H. 1953. Curriculum evaluation: Commentaries ~ purpose.: D. Computer-assisted instruction: Stanford's 1965-1966 arithmetic program.: Prentice-Hall. D. 1968. Fletcher. Stanford University. Programmed instruction and educational technology in the language teaching field: ~ aporoaches to old problems. R. L. L. P. Evaluation research: Methods of Assessing program effectivenes!!.. Jerman. M. M. Analysis of Ling1ing's corpus. Testing.: Textbook Co. Foreign National New York: [24] Weiss. Englewood Cliffs. M. New York: Academic Press. Philadelphia: Development. M. & Morningstar. C. Jr. P.113 114] Ornstein. & Mueller.. Stanford calif. W. language education: An overview. Heath. 1972.. & Wu. C. Lexington. P. & Weiss. Birkmaier (Ed.. [l7] Suppes. 1960. Markov learning models for multiperson interaction.. 1973. 122] Valette. 1966-1968: data. 214). C.- [19] Suppes.: Stanford University. Ewton. Calif. 1974 116] Politzer. Models of individual trajectories in computer-assisted instruction... Skokie. In E. 1977.. J. & Zanotti.. M.. R. Stanford. 115] Payne. It. P. J. 1972. Computer-assisted instruction Stanford... N. and evaluation of the arithmetic programs.: Stanford University Press. A. language. Institute for Mathematic1 Studies in the Social Science. Philadelphia: The Center for Curriculum Development.). Ill.

I 10. SENTENCE PATTERNS 16. U. OU SPELLING AND TONE PRACTICE . R. Q. I AS A BEGINNING FINAL 21. 4. AO. U AND V AS BEGINNING FIANLS . SENTENCE PATTERNS 11. SPELLING AND TONE PRACTICE 15. REVIEW 19. C. T. x. ANG. Z. F. G. AN. ZH. SH. O. N. I. 2. NEUTRAL TONE REVIEW i j 9. SPELLING AND TONE PRACTICE 18. EI 14. 5. 7. 1 1 8. K. SPELLING PRACTICE TONES OF MANDARIN D. E. 3. 6. UANDARIN PHONOLOGY I UANDARIN PHONOLOGY II B. H. EN. AI. CR. L. S. SPELLING AND TONE PRACTICE 13. REVIEW 20. ER 12.114 APPENDIX A CONTENTS OF THE TEXT INTRODUCTION TIPS WHEN YOU ARE ON THE TELEPHONE 1. ~. U I. ENG. p. A. V 17.

MAKING A PHONE CALL II 33. l II . REVIEW 46. CHINESE FOOD II 43.lLJ 115 22. LANGUAGE I 40.CHINESE FOOD I 42. CHINESE 45.1 'I• ! I 27. REVIEW 39. HOHETOWN II 35. VISITING II 30. COUNTING II RESTA~~T I 1 . COUNTING I 47. 23. CHINESE RESTAURANT I 44. NAHE II 28. I 1 . REVIEW 31 • MAKING A PHONE CALL I 32. REVIEW 24. HOHETOWN I 34. FAHILY II 37. NAHE I I '. REVIEW 'I . REVIEW 38. LANGUAGE. . VISITING I 29. II 41. FAl1ILY I 36. GREETING I 25. GREETING II 26.>''''~ '"I ! :1.

n6 48. REVIE'. VOCABULARY LIST III D.j I i 1 . REVIEW 54. PHONOLOGICAL SOUND DICTIONARY F.l' 55. DATE I 49. FIGURES . VOCABULARY LIST 1 I I . SHOPPING I 51. I i APPENDIX: A. . PATTERN LIST E. SHOPPING II 52. DATE II 50. VOCABULARY LIST 11 C. REVIEW 53. B. REVIEW t I I .

117

APPENDIX B HANDOUT SHEET OF INTRODUCTION TO THE CURRICULill1

INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPUTERIZED

M&~DARIN

(OFFICIAL CHINESE) COURSE:

1. Purpose: to teach daily Handarin conversation.
2. Facility: push-down button telephones rather than computer terminals are used as the teaching medium so that students can conveniently learn at home rather than coming to school. Students listen on the telephone and answer questions by pushing buttons on the dial. 3. Learning procedure for each lesson: about 35-45 minutes. Each lesson lasts for

Before picking up the phone, each

student is required to read a handout to describing what
},

! ,
j

Will be taught over the phone.

The handout requires about

5-10 mimutes to read, and then the student spends about 25-35 minutes, depending on his personal learning rate, on the phone. 4. Number of lessons: 55. The course is intented for a period of

two months, so we suggest that you take one lesson a day. 5. Contents: Lesson land 2 are reading lessons to introduce basic phonological knowledge that is necessary to pronounce accurate Mandarin. Lesson 3 to 23 introduce phonological elements and

tones of Mandarin, while lesson 24 to 60 are conversational. 6. EXercise: Each lesson has several exercises. In order to pass

an exercise, you need to answer at least 80 % of the problems

118

correctly; otherwise, you are required to do the exercise again till the 80 % standard is reached.

SIX TIPS WHEN YOU ARE ON THE PHONE:
1. Bell sound: Each time you hear a bell sound, you must type

'u'

on the dial to continue the lesson or else the lesson

will stop. 2. Replay of Mandarin sounds: Any liandarin sound (phonological element, vocabulary, phrase or sentence) that is not clear to

I

you can be replayed instantly by typing '*q'.

That is,· after

you hear a Mandarin sound you can type either '*#' to rehear the sound, or

'u'

to continue the lesson.

'u'

has the same

funtions as the 'carriage-return' key in the computer terminal. 3. Response time limit: When you are requested to give a response, you must respond within 90 seconds, or else the lesson will automatically stop and you will have to start the lesson all over again. This is to assure that no unattended phone

will be on the line. 4. Response to question: Each response you make to problems in exercises must be followed directly by have typed in the answer. 5. Deleting mistyped answer: Each time you enter a wrong number when answering a question, simply type '0' to delete the

'u'

to show that you

'44if
!

I
i

119

I
1

mistyped number, then type the number for the correct answer. The correction can only be made before you type' ii' (which shows that you have typed in the answer as explained in 4). After you have typed '#', it is too late to make any changes.

~

6. Disconnecting the line: After you have finished a lesson, you
should wait for about 20 seconds for the line to disconnect automatically before you hang up the phone.

FOR SISTER OLDER THAN YOU. LESSONN 35 AND 36 LESSON 35 TEXT: A: NI3 JIAI YOU3 SHEN31fEO REN2? ARE THERE? B: YOU3 BA4BAO. BETWEEN A NUMBER AND A NOUN. LIANG3 GEO XIA03HAI2. YOU CALL HIM GEiGEO. FOR EXAI1PLE.YOU CALL HER JIE3JIEO. ELDER BROTHER. REN2? NI3 JIAi YOU3 SHEN3MEO HOW MANY MEllBERS OF YOUR FAt'1ILY FAMILY I I HAVE A FATHER. IN ENGLISH. GEiGEO. TEACH YOUNGER BROTHER AND SISTER IN THE NEXT LESSON. NOTE: (I)~ FOR CHINESE THE AGE ORDER A1l0NG BROTHERS AND SISTERS IS VERY FOR BROTHER OLDER THAN YOU. BOTHER AND SISTER "GEIGEO" AND "JIE3JIEO". ELDER SISTER. YII ZHII YANi. B: HA03 FU2QI4! A: NA2LI3! NALI3! YOU HAVE GOOD FORTUNE! NOT AT ALL! NOT AT ALL! I HAVE A WIFE TWO CHILDREN. THERE IS SOMETHING. NOUNS CLASSIFIER. ELDER BROTHER AND SISTER CALL THEIR YOUNGER BROTHER AND SISTER BY THEIR FIRST NAMES. IN liANDARIN. (2). WE WILL USUALLY. HOW UAt'lY MEl1BERS OF YOUR FAMILY ARE THERE? A: YOU3 TAI4TAI4. JIE3JIEO. HOWEVER. FOREXAI1PLE. POLITE TO CALL OLOER BROTHER AND SISTER BY THEIR FIRST MAllES. IMPORTANT. ETC. MOTHER. BUT YOUNGER BROTHER AND SISTER CALL OLDER IT IS NOT TOO . -t . ONE BOOK. MAIMAO.120 APPENDIX C SAMPLE LESSONS. TWO SONS.. THER IS NOTHING BETWEEN A Nill1BER AND A NOUN.(ONE CIGRETTE) WHERE ZHIi .

YOU CAN SAY TO HIM (OR HER) !HA03 FU2QI4! (YOU HAVE A GOOD FORTUNE!). IN ENGLISH. CHINESE THINK THAT HAVING SONS AND DAUGHTERS IS A GOOD . TO CHINESE. . AND'. CHINESE. THE FAMILY IS MOST IMPORTANT THING TO THE FAUILY. THIS IS NOT THE CASE IN CHINESE. THE ONLY THING YOU CAN DO IS TO FORTUNATELY. THERE IS NO RULE WHICH TELLS WHAT KIND OF NOUN SHOULD HAVE WHAT KIND OF NOUN CLASSIFIER. WHEN YOU LIST A SEQUENCE OF THINGS. DIFFERENT GROUPS OF NOUN HAVE DIFFERENT NOUN CLASSIFIERS. IS NO 'AND'!HAN4! BEFORE !JIE3JtEO!. THIS IS NOT THE CASE IN YOUR RESPONSE TO HIM ~S "THANK YOU". CHINESE IS A FAMILY-CENTERED SOCIETY. IN CHINESE. WHEN SOMEONE PAYS YOU A COMPLIHENT. THIS NOUN CLASSIFIER DOES NOT HAVE BUT IT MUST BE THERE BETWEEN A NUMBER AND A NOUN. (4). . !NA2LI3!(NOT AT ALL) IS ONE OF THE MOST OFTEN USED EXPRESSIONS. TO AMERICAN. THE FAInLY WILL CONTINUE. HAVE SONS AND DAUGHTERS. i J I ~ I (5). CLASSIFIERS. NOT "THANK YOU !XIE4XIEO NI3!". YOUR RESPONSE TO Hli'! IS "NOT AT ALL! !NA2LI3!". YOU ALWAYS PUT 'AND' BEFORE THE LAST ONE.1 121 IS A NOUN CLASSIFIER. 11EMORIZE WEll. WHEN SOMEONE PAYS YOU A COHPLIl1ENT.1t. I i WHEN YOU KNOW A CHINESE HAS SONS AND DAUGHTERS. ~lliANING. WHEN A FAMILY TO CONTINUE THEREFORE. THERE ARE NOT TOO MANY NOUN (3). OR NAMES. FORTUNE. YOU SIMPLY LIST THE SEQUENCE WITHOUT THERE THE SECOND SENTENCE OF THE TEXT IS AN EXAI1PLE.

IN THE PHONE. THE WAY TO LEARN THESE VOCABULARY IS THE SM1E AS IN PART 1 OF LESSON 24: PRACTICING THE PRONUNCIATIONS OF ALL THE VOCABULARY FIRST. THE LESSON IS PRESENTED IN FIVE PARTS IN THE'FOLLOWING ORDER: 1.REPEAT HANDARIN. THEN SEQUENCE (B) i_ I I 2 SIMPLE VOCABULARY EXERCISE: .122 PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING INSTRUCTION BEFORE YOU PICK UP THE PHONE.HEAR HANDARIN !{ANDARIN (B) HEAR l~NDARIN REPEAT -. HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION -. XIA03HAI2--CHILD FU2QI4--FORTUNE NA2LI3--NOT AT ALL SEE NOTE (2).HEAR l~DARIN -. HEN GE1GEO---ELDER BROTHER JIE3JIEO---ELDER SISTER TAI4TAIO--WIFE. VOCABULARY: REN2--HAN. THEN DO THE FOLLOWING TWO SEQUENCES OF PRACTICES FOR . ALSO HRS (SEE LESSON 27) LIANG3--TWO GEO--A NOUN CLASSIFIER. (A) HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION -.SPEAK CORRESPONDING HANDARIN -.REPEAT MANDARIN.EACH VOCABULARY. I WE WILL DO SEQUENCE (A) FOR ALL THE VOCABULARY FIRST.

CONVERSATION: THIS TIME YOU WILL LEARN TO CONVERSE WITH US. LESSON 24. FOR EACH SENTENCE ARE: (A). WE WILL GO TWO SEQUENCES OF PRESENTATION (B). THEN SEQUENCE (B). HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION---SPEAK CORRESPONDING MANDARIN---HEAR MANDARIN-REPEAT MANDARIN. WE WILL DO SEQUENCE (A) FOR ALL THE SENTENCES FIRST. 3. SECTIONS: (l) SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION IS: HEAR FIRST SENTENCE A (FIRST SENTENCE SPOKEN BY PERSON A)---k~SWER THIS PART HAS TWO WITH FIRST SENTENCE B---HEAR FIRST B---HEAR SECOND SENTENCE A--- SENTENCE B---REPEAT FIRST SE1~ENCE ANSWER WITH SECOND SENTENCE B---HEAR SECOND SENTENCE B---REPEAT . 4. OVER IT SENTENCE BY SENTENCE SLOWLY. PLEASE FOLLOW THE EXACT STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLEH. THERE IS NO PRACTICE PROBLD1 FOR THIS EXERCISE. PLEASE DON'T LOOK AT THE LAST PART WHEN YOU ARE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS. HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION---HEAR MANDARIN---REPEAT MANDARIN--HEAR MANDARIN---REPEAT MJu~DARIN. FOR YOUR THE STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLEH ARE THE SAME AS PART 2 BENEFIT.123 THE EXERCISE IS TO SEE HOW WELL YOU HAVE LEARNED THE VOCABULARY IN THE LAST PART. LEARNING TO SPEAK: YOU WILL LEARN TO SPEAK EACH SENTENCE OF THE TEXT.

. SIMPLE CONVERSATION EXERCISE: THIS TlllE YOU WILL HEAR A }1ANDARIN SENTENCE AND TELL US WHICH IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE SENTENCE TO FOLLOW. THE STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLEM ARE THERE IS NO PRACTICE PROBLEM ..A i I ... THE SAME AS IN PART 5 OF LESSON 24..)---HEAR FIRST SENTENCE A--REPEAT FIRST SENTENCE A.•••• (2) SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION IS: SPEAK FIRST SENTENCE A (IF YOU CAN NOT RalEMBER IT.--HEAR FIRST SENTENCE B--ANSWER WITH SECOND SENTENCE A--HEAR SECOND SENTENCE A---REPEAT SECOND SENTENCE A--"HEAR SECOND SENTENCE B--. PLEASE PICK UP YOUR TELEPHONE.124 SECOND SENTENCE B--. ***ASSIGNMENT: (1) MF1lORIZE THE WHOLE TEXT BY HEART. LOOK AT THE TEXT OF THE LESSON.• s. FOR THIS EXERCISE. NOW.

SIX PARTS IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: 1. VOCABULARY: ~7E WILL ONLY GO OVER ALL THE SENTENCES DI4DIO---YOUNGER BROTHER MEI4MEIO--YOUNGER SISTER ER2ZIO--SON ZU3FU4--GRANDFATHER ZU2MU3---G~~DMOTHER ZHE4--THIS NA4-THAT DONGIXII--THING THE WAY TO LEARN THESE VOCABULARY IS THE SAME AS PART 1 OF LAST LESSON: PARCTISE THE PRONUNCIATIONS OF ALL THE VOCABULARY BY YOURSELF FIRST. 2. THEN SOMETHING NEW. LEA~~ WE WILL REVIEW THE LAST LESSON FIRST.'lDARIN. THEN DO THE FOLLOWING TWO SEQUENCES OF PRACTICES FOR EACH .1 25 LESSON 36 THIS LESSON IS FAHILY II ~~ EXTENSION OF THE LAST LESSON. SENTENCE BY SENTENCE. WE WILL GO OVER IT SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION FOR EACH SENTENCE IS: HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION---TELL THE CORRESPONDING MANDARIN---HEAR MANDARIN--REPEAT MA. ONCE. PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING THE LESSON IS DIVIDED INTO INSTRUCTION BEFORE YOU PICK UP THE PHONE. REVIEW: YOU WILL REVIEW THE TEXT OF THE LAST LESSON.

SPEAK CORRESPONDING llANDARIN -. WE WILL DO SEQUENCE (A) FOR ALL THE VOCABULARY FIRST. GAO? WU2YI1X1l SHI4 SHEI2? L13 XIANlSHENGl SHI4 SHEI2? GA01XIANlSHENGl SHI4 SHEI2? TAlllEN2 SHI4 SHEI2? WHO ARE THEY? . (B) HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION -. THERE IS NO PRACTICE PROBLEM FOR THIS EXERCISE. THEN SEQUENCE (8) 3. 4.HEAR MANDARIN -.l26 VOCAB ULARY• (A) HEAR THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION llANDARIN HEAR llANDARIN -.REPEAT HANDARIN.REPEAT IIANDARIN. PATTERN PRACTICE: YOU WILL LEARN FOUR SIHPLE PATTERNS: (A) XXX SHI4 SHEI2?--WHO IS XXX? TAl SHI4 SHEI2? NI3 SHI4 SHEI2? WHO IS HE(SHE)? WHO ARE YOU? WHO IS YIXI WU? WHO IS IIR.REPEAT HEAR MANDARIN -. PLEASE FOLLOW THE EXACT STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLE/f. LI? WHO IS 1IR. THE WAY TO DO THE EXERCISE IS COllPLETELY THE SAME AS PART 2 OF LESSON 24. PLEASE DON'T LOOK AT THE LAST PART WHEN YOU ARE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS. FOR YOUR BENEFIT. SIlIPLE VOCABULARY EXERCISE: THE EXERCISE IS TO SEE HOW WELL YOU HAVE LEARNED THE VOCABULARY IN THE LAST PART.

'I NA4 SHI4 CHA2. HE IS YIXI WU. HOWEVER.---XXX IS TAl SHI4 W03YIlXIl. FOR EXAMPLE. THIS IS JUICE. IN PATTERN (C) IT IS USED AS AN INTERROGATIVE ADJECTIVE. THE MOST POLITE EXPRESSION IS !QING3WEN4 NI3 SHI4 SHEI2?! (MAY I ASK WHO ARE YOU?) (D). THAT IS TEA. . AS FAR AR MEANING BOTH PATTERNS CAN BE USED INTERCHANGEABLY BUT PATTERN (B) IS MORE POLITE THAN PATTERN (C). I THE WAY TO PRACTICE EACH PATTERN IS THE SAME AS PREVIOU LESSONS: SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION IS: HEAR A FILLER---COMPLETE THE SENTENCE--LISTEN TO THE COMPLETED SENTENCE--~REPEAT THE COMPLETED SENTENCE. THIS SHI4 GU03ZHII. WU IS SHE.l27 (B) XXX SHI4 SHEN3tIEO?---WHAT IS XXX? ZHE4 SHI4 SHEN3MEO? NA4 SHI4 SHEN3MEO? JIl SHI4 SHEN3I1EO? YANI SHI4 SHEN3MEO? JIU3 SHI4 SHEN3I1EO? WHAT IS THIS? WHAT IS THAT? WlLn IS WHAT? IffiAT IS CIGARETTE? WHAT IS WINE? (C) XXX SHI4 SHEN3MEO XXX?---WHAT IS XXX OR WHO IS XXX TAl SHI4 SHEN~lEO REN2---WHO IS HE(OR SHE)? REN2-~-WHO NI3 SHI4 SHEN3MEO ARE YOU? WHAT KIND OF THING IS THAT? (SAME UEANING AS WHAT IS THAT?) WHAT KIND OF THING IS THIS? (SAME MEANING AS WHAT IS THIS?) NA4 SHI4 SHEN3MEO DONG1XIl? ZHE4 SHI4 SHEN3MEO DONGlXIl? NOTE: SHEN3MEO(WHAT) IN PATTERN (B) IS USED AS AN INTERROGATIVE PRONOUN. WU2 XIA02JIE3 SHI4 TAl. INI3 SHI4 SHEI2?1 IS MORE POLITE THAN INI3 SHI4 SHEN3MEO REN2?1. MISS. XXX SHI4 XXX. j ~~.

WHEN THE POSSESIVE ADJECTIVE IS FOLLOWED BY OTHER FOR EXAMPLE. SINGULAR). THE DEO IS DELETED. 10103 NI3 + TAL ZU3FU4 ZU2J. 'HY FATHER' SHOULD BE KINDS OF NOUN. SAID AS W03DEO SHUl. DO EACH PROBLDI ARE THE SA}IE AS IN PART 5 OF LESSON 25. THERE IS NO PRACTICE PROBLEH FOR THIS EXERCISE. PLEASE FOLLOW THE EXACT STEPS TO DO EACH PROBLDI. PLEASE DON'T LOOK AT THE TEXT OF THIS LESSON WHEN YOU ARE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.128 5. SAID ASW03 BA4BAO INSTEAD OF W03DEO BA4BAO. 'HY BOOK' SHOULD BE MORE EXAMPLES ARE GIVING IN THE FOLLOWING. THE STEPS TO FOR YOUR BENEFIT. USE OF POSSESSIVE ADJECTIVE: THE POSSESSIVE ADJECTICE ARE W03DEO (HY). 6. NI3DEO (YOUR. WHEN THE POSSESIVE ADJECTIVE IS FOLLOWED BY A FA}lILY MnIBER. THE DEO IS KEPT. THIS TIME YOU WILL HEAR AN ENGLISH SENTENCE AND TELL US WHICH IS THE HOST APPROPRIATE HANDARIN TRANSLATION FOR THAT SENTENCE. TAlDEO (HIS AND HER). SIMPLE TRANSLATION EXERCISE: THE EXERCISE IS TO SEE HOW WELL YOU HAVE LEARNED ON THE LAST PART. FAIllLY) W03DEO NI3DEO TAiDEO + XUE2XIA04 TU2SHUlGUAN3 JIA04SHI4 BAN4GONGlSHI4 YANl SHUl DOAl DONGlXIl XIA03HAI2 BA04ZHI3 ZA2zHI4 JIU3 .'lU3 BA4BAO }lAlMAO TAI4TAIO XIA1HSHENGl GElGEO JIE3JIEO DI4DIO MEI411EIO ER2ZIO JIAl(HOME.

(2). AND TAiDEO BEFORE XIA03HAI2. YOU SHOULD USE W03DEO. NOW. YOU SHOULD SAY "TAl JIA1" INSTEAD OF "TAlDEO JIA1". YOU SHOULD OR WHEN YOU SAY "HER FAllILY". XIA03HAI2(CHILD) IS EXCEPTION. WHEN YOU USE W03I1EN2DEO(OUR). . THE DEO WILL NOT BE DELETED NO IfATTER WHAT KINDS OF NOUN FOLLOW THEIl. TAlMEN2DEO(THEIR). THERE WILL BE NO PRACTICE FOR THIS PART. ETC •• (3).129 NOTE: (1). PLURAL). WHEN YOU SAY "MY HOME". JIAl IS ANOTHER EXCEPTION. !XIANISHENG1! HERE MEANS HUSBAND. (4). AND NI3I1EN2DEO (YOUR. 'ALSO SEE LESSON 26. NI3DEO SAY "W03 JIA1" INSTEAD OF "W03DEO JIA1". BUT WE WILL HAVE AN EXERCISE FOR YOU TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU HAVE LEARNED FROM THIS PART. PLEASE PICK UP YOUR TELEPHONE.

LARGE--7 BA4BAO--FATHER-8 MAI11AO---MOTHER--8 GAO I--TALL---I2 DENG3---WAIT FOR--12 KAN4---t'ATCH. . ARE AT. SHE.-12 SHUI--BOOK--14 ZAI4---IS AT. 11E---21 YO NG4-USE--2I YU2--FISH---2I DUOI--MANY. AND HER---7 DAOI---KNIFE---7 DA04-GO TO--7 LA03--0LD--7 DA3-"-BEAT---7 DA4--BIG. READ--12 KUI--CRY-12 MANG2--BUSY-. 130 APPENDIX D VOCABULARY LIST * BAI---EIGHT---5 BA4--FATHER---5 MAI---MOTHER---5 MA3---HORSE---5 1IA4--BLAME---5 BU4-~-NEGATION---5 TAI---HE.. AM AT. WERE AT--14 AI 3-"--SHORT--I 4 AI4---LOVE-14 MAI3--BUY-14 MAI4--SELL--14 JII--CHICKEN---17 QII--SEVEN--17 QV4--GO TO-17 XI3-"-WASH--17 YA04---WANT--20 YANI--CIGARETTE--20 JIAI---HOME--20 NI3-"--YOU(SINGULAR)---20 W03-"--I. HIU. MUCH---2I * Number On the righthand side is the lesson number.

HER---25 W03--I. ARE. IS. M&--25 W03MEN2--WE.131 CHUANI---WEAR---21 YU3---RAIN---21 ZA03---GOOD MORNING---24 NI3-~-YOU(SINGULAR)---24 HA03---FINE---24 MAO--QUESTION llARKER---24 XIE4XIEO---THANK--24 ZAI4JIAN4---GOODBYE---24 TAI---HE. SHE.'1E IS--26 XIAN1SHENGl--MR---26 XIA02JIE3--I1ISS--27 TAI4TAIO---MRS--27 W03DEO--MY--27 NI3DEO---YOUR(SINGULAR)---27 TAlDEO---HIS. XUE3JIAl--CIGAR--29 YANl--CIGARETTE---29 CHOUl--SMOKE--29 JIU3---WINE--29 PI2JIU3---BEER--29 NIU2NAI3---I1ILK--29 SHUI3---WATER--29 GU03ZHIl---JUICE--29 I I j . HIM. THEM--25 WAN3ANl--GOOD NIGHT---25 QING3WEN4---1LAY I ASK---26 GUI4XING4--YOUR LAST NAME--26 DA4I1ING2--YOUR FIRST NAJ.'1E---26 XING4---LAST NAME IS---26 MING2---FIRST NAJ. . HER--27 SHI4-·-AM.WAS AND WERE---27 MING2ZIO-NAliE--27 QING3---PLEASE---28 JIN4--COME IN--28 BIE2---DO NOT--28 KE4QI4--HOSPITABLE. US--25 NI31iEN2--YOU(PLURAL)---25 TAlHEN2--THEY. FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE---28 ZU04--SIT DOWN--28 HEl--DRINK---28 CHA2--TEA---28 HAI2SHI4--0R---28 KAlFEIl--COFFEE--28 LEO--EMPHASATIC--28 TAI4--TOO---28.

--33 JIA1--·CALIFORNIA--33 ZHOU1--STATE--33 JIU4JIN1SHAN1--SANFRANCISCo---33 XI3HUANI--LIKE--33 CHIl--EAT---34 CAI4---FOOD--34 XIICANI--WESTERN MEAL--34 FA4GU02--FRANCE-34 RI4BEN3--JAPAN---34 E2GU02--RUSSIA--34 DE2GU02---GEffiiANY--34 YINGIGU02--ENGLAND---34 XIIBANIYA2--SPAIN---34 REN2--!1AN.132 WEI2---HELLO--31 ZAI4--Al1 AT.A. WAS AT. FAMILY--32 BAN4GONG1SHI4--0FFICE--32 FU3SHANG4--HOMETOWN--33 NA2LI3--WHERE--33 ZHONGIGUOI--CHINA---33 SHANG4HAI3--SHANGHAI---33 DEO---POSSESSIVE !~ER---33 MEI3GU02--U. IS AT. LIKE TO---31 QING3--INVITE--31 DIAN4YING3--MOVIE---31 HA03--0K-31 DIAN4SHI4--TELEVISION. MEN---35 GEIGEO--ELDER BROTHER---35 JIE3JIEO---ELDER SISTER---35 TAI4TAIO---WIFE--35 Llfu~G3---TWo--35 I I 1 GEO--A NOUN CLASSIFIER---35 . TELEVISION SET---32 DIAN4HUA4--TELEPHONE--32 DA3--CALL--32 BA04ZHI3--NEWSPAPER-32 ZA2ZHI4---MAGAZINE--32 HUI2--GO BACK-32 XUE2XIA04--SCHOOL--32 TU2SHUIGUANG3--LIBRARY---32 JIA04SHI4-CLASSROOM-32 JIAI--HOME. A WHILE---31 SHEI2--WHO. HAD--31 SHEN3UEO--WHAT--31 SHI4--THING. WERE AT---31 YIIXIA4---A MOMENT. !~TTER---31 XIANG3---Wfu~T TO. ARE AT. WHOM---31 HA03JIU3BU4JIAN4--31 YOU3---HAVE.S.

133 XIA03HAIZ---CHILD---35 FUZQI4---FORTUNE---35 NAZLI3---NOT AT ALL---35 DI4DIO---YOUNGER BROTHER ---36 l1EI4HEIO---YOUNGER SISTER---36 ERZZIO---SON---36 ZU3FU4---GRANDFATHER---36 ZU2HU3---GRANilll0THER---36 ZHE4---THIS---36 NM---THAT---36 DONGIXII---THING---36 W03MEN2DEO---OUR---36 NI3MENZDEO---YOUR(PLURAL)---36 TAIHENZDEO---THEIR---36 HUI4---CAN. COULD~40 HUA4~SPOKEN LANGUAGE---40 ZI4---CHARACTER. COULD---39 JIANG3---SPEAK---39 ZHONGIWENZ---CHINESE---39 TAI4---TOO---39 ZHENG4ZAI4---JUST NOW---39 XUEZ---LEARN---39 YINGIWENZ---ENGLISH---39 XIE3---WRITE---39 EZWENZ---RUSSIAN~40 DEZWENZ-~GERMAN---40 i i FA4WENZ---FRENCH---40 RI4WENZ---JAPANESE---40 XIIBANIYAZWENZ---SPANISH---40 DUZ---READ---40 SHUOl---SPEAK---40 NENGZ---·CAN. WORD---40 GUOZYU3---MANDARIN---40 GUANG3DONGI---CANTON---40 BEI3PINGZ---PEKING---40 BEI3JINGI---PEKING---40 TAI2WANI---TAIW~40 CHANGZ---OFTEN---41 Fk~4DIAN4---RESTAURANT---41 YONG4---USE---41 KUAI4ZIO---CHOPSTICKS---41 SHAOl---COOK---41 YIIDIAN3DIANO---A LITTLE BIT---41 TIAOZGENGl---SPOON---4Z BEI1ZIO---GLASS---4Z PANZZIO---PLATE---4Z DIEZZIO---SAUCER---4Z I • .

FRY---44 NIU2PAI2---STEAK---44 BI3---PEN--46 JI3---HOW MANY---'-46 YIl--ONE"':'-46 ER4---TWo--46 SANI---THREE---46 SI4---FOUR---46 WU3---FIVE---46 LIU4---SIX---46 JIU3---NINE---46 SHI2---TEN--46 ZHII---NOUN CLASSIFIER---46 BAI3---HuNDRED---47 DI4---NUMBER---47 ER4SHI2---TWENTY---47 SANlSHI2---THIRTY---47 .134 Wfu~3---BOlfL---42 YU2-~-FISH---42 ROU4---HEAT(ANY KIND OF MEAT)---42 QINGICAI4---VEGETABLE---42 SHUI2GU03---FRUIT---42 DAN4--EGG---42 MEI2---NEGATION---42 YA04---WANT---43 DIfu~3---0RDER---43 XIANl--~FIRST---43 CAI4DANI---MENU---43 CHUNIJUAN3---EGG ROLL---43 JIA03ZIO---DUMPLING---43 SUANlLA4TANGl---SOUR AND HOT SOUP---43 TANGl---SOUP---43 QINGIZHENGIYU2---STEA}lED FISH---43 BEII---A GLASS OF---43 WAN3---A BOWL OF---43 FAN4---RICE---43 TANG2CU4PAI2GU3---SWEAT AND SOUR RIB---44 BEI3PING2KA03YAI---PEKING CRISP DUCK---44 HA02YOU2NIU2ROU4---BEEF WITH OYSTER SAUCE---44 JIfu~G4BA04JIIDINGI---FRIED CHICKEN CUBE IN THE SAUCE---44 FANIQIE:nlING2XIA2---PRAWNS IN TOMATQ-44 MIAN4---NOODLE---44 NIU2ROU4---BEEF---44 ZHUIROU4---PORK---44 JIIROU4---CHICKEN MEAT---44 KUAI4---PIECE---44 CRA03---FRIED.

135 LING2---ZERQ---47 SUI4---YEAR OLD---47 QIU2---BALL---47 DAOIZIO---KNIFE---47 CHAIZtQ---FORK---47 CAN 1JINI---NAPKIN---47 HIAN4BOAI---BREAD---47 JINITIANI---TODAY---48 XINGIQI2---WEEK---48 DUI4BU4QI3---S0RRY---48 TINGI---HEAR---48 QINGICHU3---CLEARLY---48 YUE4---MONTH---48 HA04---DAY---48 XIAN4ZAI4---NOW---48 DIAN3---0'CLOCK---48 FENI---MINUTE---48 SHENGIRI4---BIRTHDAY---49 ZU02TIANI---YESTERDAY---49 MING2TIANI---TOMORROW---49 NIAN2---YEAR---49 XININIAN2---NEW YEAR---49 SHENG4DAN4JIE2---CHRISTMAS---49 JIE2---FESTIVAL---49 ZHONGIQIUIJIEI---AUTillIN FESTIVAL---49 DUANIWU3JIE2---DRAGON FESTIVAL---49 CHUNIJIE2---CHINESE NEWYEAR---49 KUAI4LE4---HAPPY---49 GU02QING4RI4---NATIONAL BIRTHDAY---49 BAI3HU04GONG1SII---DEPARTMENT STORE---50 JIAN4---NOUN CLASSIFIER---50 YIIFU2---CLOTHES---50 HEN3---VERY---50 PIA04LIANG4---BEAUTIFUL---50 KUAI4---DOLLAR--50 MA02---DIME---50 FENI---CENT--50 .CHEAP-50 KU4ZIO---PANT--51 QIAN2---MONEY---51 !iA04ZIO---HAT---51 XIE2ZIO---SHOES---51 QUN2ZIQ---SKIRT---51 DU01SHA03---HOW lfUCH---51 WA4Z14---S0CKS---51 GUI4---EXPENSIVE--Sl J I . PIAN2YI2---.

1 CHEN4SHAN1---SHIRT---Sl JIA2KE4---JACKET---Sl XIIZHU&~Gl---SUIT---Sl CHU&~l---WEAR---Sl l~O l~ DAI4---WEAR---Sl .

IBU41 IS CHANGED TO nIEI2/.lJ/ 137 APPENDIX E PATTERN LIST S + TV + 0--10 S + BU4 + TV + 0---10 S + SV--1S S + BU4 + SV--IS xxx HA03 MAO?---2S -----1 XIE4XIEO XXX-2S xxx XING4 xxx MING2 XXX-27 xxx XXX. IF ORIGINAL QUESTION SENTENCE IS: . *** IF VERB IS IYOU3/.*** (2) SUBJECT + ADVERB + BU4(NOT) + ADVERB + VERB + (OBJECT) (WITHOUT }LAO).------------1 xxx xxx xxx xxx KAN4 XXX--32 QU4 XXX-32 HUI2 xxx QU4--32 XIANG3 XXX--32 I I I I xxx XI3HUANI XXX-34 XXX XI3HUANI xxx XXX--34 xxx ZAI4 NA2LI3?-34 xxx xxx xxx xxx SHI4 SHI4 SHI4 SHI4 SHEI2?---36 SHEN3MEO?---36 SHEN3l1EO XXX?--36 XXX--36 USE VERB OR AUXILIARY VERB TO ANSWER THE QUESTION---40 QUESTION SENTENCE TRANSFOID1ATION---42 (1) SUBJECT + VERB + BU4(NOT) + VERB + (OBJECT) (WITHOUT MAO) IF ORIGINAL QUESTION SENTENCE IS: SUBJECT + VERB + (OBJECT) + MAO ? f i . xxx (XXX) HA03 MAO?---27 XlL'l: HING2ZIO SHI4 XXX-27 HEI XXX-29 CHOUI XXX--29 QING3 XXX--29 xxx HAI2SHI4 XXX?-29 ------.

AND TllIE---49 XXX KUAI4LE4-49 XXX CHUAN1 XXX-51 XXX DAI4 MA04ZIQ---51 XXX YA04 DU01SHA03 QIAN2?---51 .WEEKDAYS.l38 + + + + SUBJECT ADVERB VERB (OBJECT) !lAO? NOUN CLASSIFIER---44 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX BEll XXX WAN3 XXX PAN2 XXX DIE2 XXX TIA02GENG1 XXX KUAI4 XXX . COUNTING PRACTICE---47 MONTHS. XXX XXX QIAN2---51 COUNTING THE MONEY 51 .

THEN TYPE THE CODE AGAIN. DIAL ANY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING NUllBERS: 321-6262 321-6263 321-6264 321-6265 2. REPEAT STEPS 4-6 AS OFTEN AS YOU WISH. TYPE {j FOR THE NEXT SOUND AND YOU WILL HEAR A BELL SOUND. (APART FROU THE PASSWORD. STEPS 1-2 ARE THE SAUE AS THE USUAL WAY YOU GET INTO A LESSON EACH TD1E) I 3. 7. 4.) 5. 6. TYPE THE CODE FOR THE SOUND YOU WANT TO HEAR. IF DESIRED. CODES: A = 21 AI = 27 AN = 26 ANG = 264 AO = 25 B = 22 C = 23 CH = 24 D = 31 E = 32 EI = 34 EN = 36 ENG = 364 ER = 37 F = 33 i i I I . (IF YOU HAVE UISTYPED THE CODE. TYPE *I! TO REHEAR THE SOUND. HANG UP THE PHONE WHEN YOU HAVE FINISHED. PLEASE TYPE 030131*. THEN TYPE A CODE FOR A NEW SOUND YOU WANT. AFTER HEARING "PLEASE TYPE STUDENT NUMBER OR PASS WORDS". YOU WILL HEAR A BELL SOUND. YOU WILL HEAR "M&"DARIN DICTIONARY".139 APPENDIX F INSTRUCTION ON THE USE OF THE liANDARIN SOUND DICTIONARY 1. *** NOTE: '0' IS STILL AN ERASE KEY. 8.

....... G = 41 H = 42 I = 43 J = 51 K = 52 L = 53 M = 61 N = 62 a = 63 au = 68 P = 71 Q = 91 R = 72 S = 73 SH= 74 T X Z = 81 V = 82 U = 83 = 92 = 93 ZH = 94 .....". 140 ..~IiIJ_liiiIiiliillil!llll ""' ---...

please _ _ _ If so. I think it will help me to understand better the Chinese people and their way of life. I need the credits. AND WE APPRECIATE VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COOPERATION. Name: Major: ~ ~ _ Birth date: __ Sex: ~ Undergraduate/Graduate (Circle one) Race: Black. If so. INFORMATION IN THIS QUESTIONAIRE WILL BE MOST VALUABLE TO OUR RESEARCH PROJECT. Caucasian. ONLY MEMBERS OF THIS RESEARCH PROJECT WILL HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR ANSWERS. Chicano. Chinese. .141 APPENDIX G QUESTIONNAIRE I INSTITUTE FOR MATHniATICAL STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES STANFORD UNIVERSITY ANY INFO~~TION ON THIS QUESTIONAIRE WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. how many? b. please specify: Native language: __ _ ~ ___ Other spoken languages besides native language (include dialects): Do any of the members of your family speak l!andarin? specify Have you ever had the opportunity to hear Mandarin spoken? Do you have any Mandarin speaking friends? I am studying Mandarin because:(Circle one) a. Others (Circle one) IF others.

A knowledge of two languages will make me a better educated person. YOU ARE ASKED TO liARK EACH STATEUENT IN THE LEFT UARGIN ACCORDING TO YOUR AGREmlENT OR DISAGREEUENT AS FOLLOWS: +1: SLIGHT AGREEMENT +2: MODERATE AGREEHENT +3: STRONG AGREEUENT -1: SLIGHT DISAGREEHENT -2: MODERATE DISAGREEUENT -3: STRONG DISAGREmlENT 1. The Chinese way of life seems crude when compared to ours. but the American way of life can lead to a perfect society. . e. 3. Americans are more sincere and honest than Chinese.14L 142 c. Other reasons. (Please specify) THE FOLLOWING 15 STATEUENTS ARE OPINIONS. The Chinese people would benefit greatly if they adopt many aspects of the American culture. 6. d. American may not be perfect. IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT THERE ARE NO MANY PEOPLE AGREE WITH EACH STATEHENT AND MANY DISAGREE. 4. Chinese are interesting people. It will allow me to meet and converse with more and varied people. but they carry it too far when they get too familiar with us. RIGHT OR WRONG ANSI-lERS. 5. Foreigners are all right in their place. 2.

7. 8. 9.

Chinese-Americans contribute to the richness of our society. Chinese-Americans have every reason to be proud of thrir race and their traditions. Americans should make a greater effort to meet ChineseAmerican people.

10. The Chinese has a colorful culture. 11. Computer-assisted instruction is like a tutoring instruction. 12. Computer-assisted instruction is an individualized instruction which can adjus~ to the student's personal learning speed. 13. I have confidence in the computer's teaching ability.

14.1 have confidence in the computer's ability in teaching a
foreign language. 15. I have confidence in the computer's ability in teaching conversational Mandarin.

THERE ARE 5 STATEHENTS BELOW. POSSIBLE CHOICES. APPROPRIATE.

AFTER EACH STATEHENT THERE ARE 4

PLEASE CIRCLE THE CHOICE WHICH YOU THINK IS HOST

1.

This Mandarin course is one of my preferred courses. a. disagreement. b. no opinion. c. agreement. d. none of the above.(explain)

I

• I

i.P

2

Q

~

~.

144

• i
-fi

I
i
~

2.

If Mandarin were not taught

in this school, I would probably

a. not bother to learn Mandarin at all. b. try to have lessons in Mandarin somewhere else. c. pick up Mandarin in everyday situations.( ask my Chinese friends to teach me Mandarin, go to Mandarin movies, etc.) d. none of the above (explain) 3. Considering how I will study for this Mandarin course. I can honestly say that I will: a. do very little work and hope to pass by sheer luck or in telligence. b. do just enough work to keep up with the course. c. really try to learn Handarin. d. none of the above. (explain) 4. My feelings about this Mandarin course are: It is: a. very exciting. b. slightly exciting.
c. so so.

d. none of above.(explain) 5. After I finish this course, I will probably: a. continue to improve my Mandarin.(eg •• daily practice, night school, etc.) b.
t~y

to use Mandarin as much as possible.

c. make no attempt to remember any of the Mandarin. d. none of the above.(explain)

MaT

145
145

APPENDIX H' QUESTIONNAIRE II

INSTITUTE FOR MATHE:lATICAL STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES STANFORD UNIVERSITY ANY INFOmlATION ON THIS QUESTIONNAIRE WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. ONLY
M~lBERS OF THIS RES~~CH PROJECT WILL HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR ANSWERS.

INFORMATION FROM THIS QUESTIONNAIRE WILL BE HOST VALUABLE TO OUR RESEARCH PROJECT AND WE APPRECIATE VERY UUCH YOUR COOPERATION.

Name:

_ yes_____ no

Did you use telephone receiver pick-up coil?

1.

Do you feel that the material presented was worth learning? .
(1). Definitely

(2). Yes

0). Haybe

(4). No

2.

Were handouts clear and well-organized?
(1). Outstanding
(2). Good

(3). Fair

(4). Poor

3.

Were the parts of lessons over the phone well-organized?

(1). Outstanding

(2). Good

0). Fair

(4). Poor

4.

Were exercises valuable in their own right?
(1). Outstanding

(2). Good

(3). Fair

(4). Poor

5.

Was it worth to spend a long time (lesson 1 to lesson 23) on Mandarin phonology?

(1). Definitely

(2). Yes

(3). Fair

(4). No

No (1) • Definitely (2). Computer-assisted instruction is like a tutoring instruction. Yes 10. No 8. Was it heplful (1) • talk to Peter after a short period of learning? (2). Outstanding (2). Good (3). . What is your over all evaluation about this course? (1). IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT DISAGREE. (2). Yes (3). Good (3) • Fair (4) • Poor 7. 3. Was the convenience of learning at home or in the office worth while to you? (1). 2. Fair (4). I have confidence in the computer's teaching ability. Yes (3). Maybe (4).OWING 5 STATEr:1ENTS ARE OPINIONS. Maybe (4). THERE ARE NO }~ YOU ARE ASKED TO MARK EACH STATEllENT IN THE LEFT MARGIN ACCORDING TO YOUR AGREEtfENT OR DISAGREEMENT AS FOLLOWS: +1: SLIGHT AGREEr:1ENT +2: MODERATE AGREEMENT +3: STRONG AGREEMENT -1: SLIGHT DISAGREEr:lENT -2: MODERATE DISAGREEr:lENT -3: STRONG DISAGREEr:lENT 1. Poor THE FOU.146 6. Computer-assisted instruction is an individualized instruction which can adjust to the student's personal learning speed. MANY PEOPLE AGREE WITH EACH STATEMENT AND RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWERS. Outstanding . Was the convenience of being able to use the program any time worth while to you? (1) • Definitely t~ (2). 11aybe (4). No Definitely 9. Do you feel c~nfortable about this neW way of learning? (3).

d. I enjoyed this course. AFTER EACH STATEMENT THERE ARE 4 PLEASE CIRCLE THE CHOICE WHICH YOU THINK IS MOST This Mandarin course is one of my preferred courses. strong· disagreement. d. d.·strong agreement. I have confidence that I did learn as much from this computerassisted instruction as a class teacher. b.147 4. agreement. b. go to Mandarin movies. Strong disagreement. POSSIBLE CHOICES. If Mandarin were not offered in this university. agreement. disagreement. etc. APPROPRIATE.) c. . have a tutor to teach me the Mandarin. c. b. 2. not bother to learn Mandarin at all. 5. disagreemellt c. a. try to have lessons in Mandarin some where else. pick up Mandarin in everyday situations. 1. a. strong agreement. I have confidence in the computer's ability in teaching conversational 11andarin.( ask my Chinese friends to teach me ijandarin. ----------------------THERE ARE 5 STATEMENTS BELOW. I would probably a. 3.

moderate. d. ------------------Suggestions: . c. great. After taking this course. did just enough work to keep up with the course. I: a.148 4. little. My interest in learning Mandarin is: a. worked moderately hard. 5. b. d. very little. worked very hard. did very little work and hope to pass by sheer luck or intelligence. c. In study for this course. b.

PHONOLOGICAL ELEMENTS: RESPONSE SPEED 1 2 3 4 5 '6 CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE LITTLE NO RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION HESITATION HESITATION HESITAHESITAIION nON ACCUR.HESITATION HESITATION HESITAHESITAIION ACCURACY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6 PRONUNCIATION --------------------------------------------------NOT UNDERHARD TO UNDERFAIR GOOD PERFECT STANDABLE UNDERSTAND STANDABLE 3. VOCABULARY: RESPONSE SPEED 1 2 ---------------------~----------------------------- CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE LITTLE NO RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION HESITATION HESITATION HESITAHESITATION TION --------------------------------------------------- 3 4 5 6 .<\CY OF 1 2 PRONUNCIATION -------------_--_NOT UNDERSTANDABLE 2.APPENDIX I EVALUATION SHEET ON STUDENT'S ABILITIES OF SOUND PRODUCTION STUDENT NUlfBER: JUDGE'S NAME: 1. TONES: RESPONSE SPEED 1 -------------------~------------------------------- 3 ~ 4 5 GOOD 6 _ PERFECT HARD TO UNDERS~<\ND UNDERFAIR STANDABLE 2 3 4 5 6 CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE 'LITTLE NO RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION ..

TRANSLATION: RESPONSE SPEED 1 20 % CORRECT 40 % CORRECT CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE LITTLE NO RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION HESITATION HESITATION HESITAHESITATION nON ACCURACY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6 PRONUNCIATION -------------------------------------------------NOT UNDERHARD TO UNDERFAIR GOOD PERFECT STANDABLE UNDERSTAND STANDABLE CORRECTNESS IN MEANING 1 --------------------------------------------------- 2 3 4 5 6 2 3 4 5 6 NONE CORRECT 5. RESPONSE: RESPONSE SPEED 1 -------~-----------------------------------~------~ 20 % CORRECT 40 % CORRECT 60 % CORRECT 80 % ALL CORRECT CORRECT CAN NOT FREQUENT LONG MODERATE LITTLE NO RESPOND AND LONG HESITATION HESITATION HESITATION HESITAHESITATION nON ACCURACY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6 PRONUNCIATION --------------------------------------------------NOT UNDERHARD TO UNDERFAIR GOOD PERFECT STANDABLE UNDERSTAND STANDABLE CORRECTNESS IN MEANING 1 --------------------------------------------------- 2 3 4 5 6 2 20 % CORRECT 3 4 5 6 NONE CORRECT 40 % CORRECT 60 % CORRECT 80 % CORRECT ALL CORRECT .iii't ZC 150 ACCURACY OF 1 2 3 4 5 6 PRONUNCIATION ------------------------------------------------NOT UNDER.HARD TO UNDERFAIR ·GOOD PERFECT STANDABLE UNDERSTAND STANDABLE CORRECTNESS IN MEANING 1 2 3 5 60 % CORRECT 80 % CORRECT 6 ALL CORRECT NONE CORRECT 4.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful