It would be awesome if everybody in Immersion use the "Explain your correction" tool, instead of just editing the sentence.
I've learned a lot lately because someone edited a lot of my sentences, and he EXPLAINED WHY!! YES!! He explained and I was so grateful for that.
So, please, explain!
The thing about the Immersion tool is that for it to be an effective learning tool, all corrections/modifications should be explained unless they're visibly obvious (e.g., typos.) Or you don't know what you've done wrong/how to improve.
So yes, I agree.
In general, that's a good rule. However, if you're going to make corrections and explain everything, corrections will take longer than the editing. That's a great discouragement for editing overall which does a disservice to duolingo and what their overall goal is while they provide such a wonderful service to us all. If you've been corrected you need to grow a thicker skin and let it roll off your back. I've had several edits on my work, and often it makes the work better. I don't require an explanation.
I disagree for the most part. If someone wants to contribute without helping others learn, they can simply translate the blue (previously untranslated) parts of an article without having to offer any input whatsoever.
The main exception I can think of are sponsored articles. Those, obviously, need to be corrected as correctly and quickly as possible, since those are places that help keep DuoLingo in existence.
However, as far as I can tell, the majority of articles are Creative Commons and other such articles uploaded by users (e.g. Wikipedia articles) and have no particular time constraints. DuoLingo isn't being paid to translate those articles, they are "practice" so to speak.
I don't know why you're going on about "thicker skin." There hasn't been a single mention about people being upset about corrections in all contexts. Rather, they are seeking constructive criticism. It's about the opposite of "needing thicker skin" or letting corrections "roll off their back." That's entirely counter-intuitive to DuoLingo as a learning process - a person can't improve if they're receiving no input, again, unless the mistake is obvious. DuoLingo is supposed to be an educational experience, not a "Meh, whatever" one.
I would understand your statement if people were complaining about receiving corrections, period. But most of peoples' frustrations relate to not understanding and being able to improve their mistakes. So your comment doesn't make much sense. If you're fine with that, great, but generally speaking constructive criticism is a good thing.
I have corrected hundreds of articles and translated a lot more blue text than you. I do offer feedback on much of my corrections. I've also been corrected far more often than you, I'm quite sure. So first of all, I do offer constructive feedback. However, there are plenty of times when it doesn't make no sense to explain a correction as the correction itself IS often all the feedback needed. Does a person absolutely need that to learn? Furthermore, I've made corrections with comment and been summarily ignored by a bonehead. The thicker skin comment is because this isn't the first discussion to ever try to elicit feedback from their correctors. The problem could just as well be people who need feedback as if the correction bothers them in the first place. My response not rosy enough for you? How about write another book response back...
For someone complaining about people needing thick-skin, you're taking generic responses not specifically directed toward you very personally.
I see. So when we agree with you, we're discussing and if not, then we're "complaining"... Thanks for the update!
I leave an explanation of why your statement doesn't make sense in the context of the OP or my commentary (with the exception of sponsored articles. ) You seem to take everything very personally and defensively, all the more bizarre because you claim you usually don't do the thing the original poster or I were talking about most of the time. And then claim the only problem is that you "disagree."
You also seem to assume this has anything to do with how I'm treated in immersion. (Which it isn't. You can find plenty of studies on the importance of feed back and constructive criticism in learning. Which as I said, if something isn't
obvious like a typo, a student actually needs.)
But given DuoLingo's threading limitations as well as your transparent attempts to goad people, it's not particularly worth my time.
Whenever I choose to edit
I go to the stream of the translator
and suggest my edit there
I make so many mistakes myself
that it is nice to collaborate
immersion is fun collectively
as translations can be diverse
and have the meaning conveyed
in various, different facets
sometimes nothing is correct
and yet again
perhaps everything is also correct
strange. but lovely
with words .........
I sometimes do that too, because I agree with you collaboration can be a lot of fun as well as being useful :-))
Speaking personally, I always try to explain my corrections, or, if there are lots of small things, I say so and invite questions about any unclear points. I also appreciate it when others take the time to do that for me. So far I have had quite a few people write to thank me but only a minute proportion who were offended.
I wholeheartedly agree that if we are trying to learn then explained corrections are essential, otherwise it's like a school teacher giving a low mark and telling a pupil they're wrong but not telling them why and expecting them to improve.
I therefore add my plea to yours MikaelMello: Please, will anyone making corrections explain why even if it's only to say "typo". Thanks :-)
This sounds great. When I tried immersion for a while, I found that some articles had some individuals go through and 'edit' my translations minutely (like add a space or an optional 'that' or a comma) and then claim full credit or some such? It made me leave those articles and look for places where people were in fact collaborating, not scoring points. There were plenty of those, as well, thankfully!
It's the only fair way to do it really, at least in my view and it's great to know how many others feel the same. There is nothing so disheartening as having changes made with no explanation, particularly the small changes like a comma here or there or a space etc. In other words the changes which look trivial but could actually change the meaning completely, if you (one) don't explain the reasons it just looks petty, whereas if you do, it helps someone. The other thing I often do if I've made very small changes is to add unnecessary commas at the end of the sentence with a note to the original translator explaining that they are there to enable them "amend" my amendments and put the corrected version back under their own name. It seems fair that they get the credit if they've done all the work.
As you say it's nice to know that there are so many helpful, friendly and cooperative people out there. Long may they continue. :-))