Some users defend Duolingo's engagement focus as acceptable for a language app while many others criticize the CEO's stance as enabling an exploitative model with deceptive education branding.
Based on 5 visible X reactions from 8 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.
He argues educational tools cannot teach users who quit.
@blakeir I think this would be totally fine if Duolingo was in the entertainment category. The fact that they market themselves as "language lessons" and are listed in education category makes this somewhat unacceptable.
@blakeir @tylerfleisch This is totally fine. We're talking about engagement of a language learning app. It's not some terrible unhealthy thing. I'm not concerned about "Duolingo exploiting people". If people are not engaged they will not learn.
@sarthakgh Where it goes wrong with Duolingo is in branding. They claim to be a "language learning app" but it's 100% entertainment.
@tylerfleisch Maybe, but I don't think Ogilvy was wrong when he said: "You can't save souls in an empty church
@blakeir A lame excuse for an exploitative business model
@akothari I think this assumes engagement and education are a zero-sum tradeoff. They’re often complements. A lesson that’s even 60% as effective but completed every day can absolutely produce better learning outcomes than a “perfect” lesson most people abandon.
Props to him for being so honest and not politically correct This is exactly right. If the goal is to teach, you have to make it fun enough for people to come back first
Some users defend Duolingo's engagement focus as acceptable for a language app while many others criticize the CEO's stance as enabling an exploitative model with deceptive education branding.
Based on 5 visible X reactions from 8 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.
Luis von Ahn on how Duolingo manages the conflict between building for engagement vs. education. (The Verge, Oct. 2024)