Deciphering Rosetta Stone: A Case Study

Rosetta Stone seems to be everywhere. Bright yellow advertisements grace the pages of national magazines appealing to a variety of audiences. Television ads run day and night on cable television. Kiosks in malls around the world beckon customers. In the last few years, the language software has become for many synonymous with the idea of language learning, even replacing foreign language classes in some cash-strapped school districts (Guevara, 2009). Where did this software come from and how did it become so popular? What is the future for the company behind it, and how might educational technology for language learning develop?

Emergence

The company behind the Rosetta Stone software began in 1992 in Harrisonburg, Virginia. Allen Stoltzfus, his brother Eugene Stoltzfus, and their brother-in-law Dr. John Fairfield envisioned a program that would allow students to immerse themselves in language in the same way a baby learns their native language. Allen compared his frustrating experience with learning Russian in a classroom with his more fulfilling experience of learning German by actually living in Germany. For him, the classroom experience felt forced and unpleasant, while the immersion experience felt relaxed and natural. Their company, Fairfield Language Technologies, began producing a software product they dubbed “Rosetta Stone” after the famous artifact that helped linguists unlock Egyptian hieroglyphics (Rosetta Stone, n.d., Our History).

Adoption

An early difference between Rosetta Stone and other CD-ROM language learning products was the emphasis on “natural learning.” Unlike programs which drill vocabulary or rely on repeating common phrases until they are memorized, Rosetta Stone tapped in to the communicative approach to language learning which had been advocated by Stephen Krashen and James Asher. In this approach, students first encounter simple spoken language with lots of visual cues and feedback, and the production facilities emerge naturally (Stoltzfus, 1997). A typical feature of this approach has been the use of the target language almost exclusively, with very little explanation or translation into the native language of the learner. The software embodied the “natural learning” approach by presenting students with a series of short cues accompanied by four pictures. When a student selects the correct picture, the program responds with a pleasant noise and an affirming visual cue like a check mark (Kaiser, 1997).

Foreign language educators were impressed by the theoretical foundations behind the software, and many colleges and libraries began to adopt the program for use at their institutions (Kaiser, 1997; Macrae, 1997). A typical course requirement for college language courses is to spend time reinforcing language skills in a “language laboratory”, which usually offers a variety of software programs, video and audio offerings in the target languages, and other language learning technology and multimedia tools (Kaiser, 1997). The Rosetta Stone software was a natural fit in college language labs.

The company also struck deals with government agencies and non-governmental organizations to increase the product’s visibility. NASA astronauts used the Russian version of the program to prepare for life on the Mir space station, and an agreement with West Point to use the program in training cadets helped build a bridge for a contract with the United States Army to provide access to the program for all military personnel (Derber, 2006). By targeting respected institutions for reduced rates or even for free product licenses and then using those institutions as examples of clients using their product, the company was able to brand itself as both popular and well-established.

Adaptation

As the program became more widely used, not everyone gave it rave reviews. The company adapted its offerings by releasing subsequent versions of the software with significant modifications.

Some early users had technical complaints about early versions of the software, saying that the non-linguistic interface was confusing and that the speech recognition functions were underwhelming (Brown, 2002). Over successive versions, the company modified the interface and added proprietary speech recognition, as well as offering their program online and in CD-ROM format.

Other concerns have been of a pedagogical nature. Numerous critics have noted that the vocabulary and pictures are not culturally contextualized. Every language follows the same sequence of pictures and sentences, whether or not the particular vocabulary (like “elephant”) or grammatical structures (such as “The boy is in the car”) fit with the language as it is commonly spoken (Kaiser, 1997; Farivar, 2006). Because of the way the program is produced, the company has only made minor modifications for individual languages, though it has introduced four different picture sets for its programs: Western, Latin, Swahili, and Asian (Farivar, 2006).

Some educators have warned against the idea that the program can or should replace instructor-led courses. During the course of encountering language in the program, students will have questions about the grammar rules at work which the program will not be able to answer (Macrae, 1997). Additionally, some students may lack the discipline to pace themselves for the time-consuming task of language learning, and would benefit from the structure that a classroom experience provides (Mossberg, 2005). Furthermore, the effectiveness of the Rosetta Stone in rivaling classroom instruction is unclear. The company commissioned a study of adult language learners and found that after 55 hours of time using Rosetta Stone Spanish, most students would not be able to test out of a one-semester course, though the author of the study hypothesized that after 70 hours of instruction most of the students would have attained enough language proficiency to equal a semester of classroom study (Vesselinov, 2009). It is worth noting that this study dealt with college-educated adults and it is unknown whether similar results would be obtained with younger students (those likely to actually be taking classroom courses at the secondary or tertiary levels). Nonetheless, some schools are beginning to use the program to replace elementary-school foreign language courses (Guevara, 2009).

Diffusion and Integration

The early diffusion of the product relied on increasing acceptance of the software as a legitimate tool and a worthwhile expenditure for individuals. From early on the software was generally recognized by language educators as having a strong, sound theoretical foundation which helped sell the product to educational institutions (Saury, 1998). It is also a widely-held belief that use of the program helps motivate students for language learning. This belief seems to be borne out in student surveys such as those conducted by a Japanese teacher who says Rosetta Stone helped reduce his course attrition rate (Rosetta Stone, 2004). The company also targeted the government as a potential client, and has hired lobbyists to push its ongoing relationship with the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security, among other federal agencies. Around 70,000 soldiers use the company’s product for training purposes (Schlosser, 2007).

The story of Rosetta Stone’s success is not, however, completely explained by its technological or pedagogical superiority to other similar products. The company behind the software has shrewdly positioned itself to dominate the field through advertising and brand awareness. When Tom Adams joined the company as CEO in 2003, he embarked on a “global brand-building” campaign that jump-started the company’s growth (Baar, 2004). His approach emphasized wide-run ad campaigns and sales kiosks in airports and malls, where likely consumers would see the product prominently displayed (Schlosser, 2007). The company now operates 155 kiosks around the world and has recently started opening larger retail locations to let consumers try the software before committing to the significant purchase price of $395 (Ruth, 2009). Thanks to aggressive advertising, the company has had a 69% compound annual growth rate, growing revenue from $25.4 million in 2004 to $209.4 million in 2008 (Rosetta Stone, 2009). Of that, approximately 20% of sales are generated from institutions, 22% from kiosk sales, and 58% from direct-to-consumer sales through the company’s call center and website (Rosetta Stone, 2009).

Future Implications

For the time being, Rosetta Stone seems to have cornered the market in its field. According to the company, awareness of the Rosetta Stone brand was over 40%, which was more than seven times any of its U.S. competitors (Rosetta Stone, 2009). However, the field has changed quickly in favor the company and could just as quickly change again.

The company recognized in its recent prospectus that its competitors include not only other brands like Pimsleur and Berlitz language courses, but also online services which provide language learning solutions very similar to Rosetta Stone for free. The company notes that, “If these free products become more sophisticated and competitive or gain widespread acceptance by the public, demand for our solutions could decline.” (2009, p. 15). Better artificial intelligence can make these free courses more responsive to individual student needs, and open source alternatives based on common technological standards could become the norm for creating instructional units (Godwin-Jones, 2007). In the meantime, competitors like Babbel are already gearing up by creating free tutorials around public domain images and user-generated content. Babbel recently secured venture capital funding to continue its progress and to continue its fight for dominance among other free online services like Mango Languages, LiveMocha, and LingQ (Butcher, 2008).

Conclusion

Rosetta Stone has had a meteoric rise since its first days in 1992, and much of that rise has been in the last few years. While the increasingly interconnected world provides a vast potential market for products like the Rosetta Stone software, technological advancements are making it likely that the company will have to reshape its product to offer something more than what can be found for free online. If the company can manage that while continuing to put its product front and center in the minds of consumers and institutional buyers, it may have a shot at continued growth rates that make other companies drool. In any case, Rosetta Stone has shown the world that computer-assisted language learning is a serious competitor to traditional classroom learning, both in popularity and in results.

References

Baar, A. (2004, Sept. 2) Martin is Runner-up in Rosetta Stone Review. Retrieved May 3, 2009 from Adweek website: http://www.adweek.com/aw/google/article_brief/1000623679

Brown, K.S. (2002, April 19). Language software thorough, but aural technique is limited. Retrieved May 3, 2009 from Silicon Valley Business Journal: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2002/04/22/newscolumn4.html

Butcher, M. (2008, July 29). Babbel secures funding for language learning. Retrieved May 3, 2009 from TechCrunch UK: http://uk.techcrunch.com/2008/07/29/babbel-secures-funding-for-language-learning/

Derber, Mark (2006) Language Training at West Point: Developing Future FAO’s. Retrieved

May 3, 2009 from Foreign Area Officer Association website: http://www.faoa.org/journal/Lang_USMA.html

Farivar, C. (2006, January 16) Rosetta Stone 3.0. Retrieved April 13, 2009 from MacWorld website: http://www.macworld.com/article/48966/2006/01/rosettastone3.html


Godwin-Jones, Robert. (2007). Emerging Technologies: Tools and Trends in Self-Paced Language Instruction. Language Learning & Technology, 11(2), pp. 10-17. Retrieved April 13, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol11num2/emerging/default.html

Guevara, E. (2009, April 19). Schools face teacher shortage, language barriers with computer program. Retrieved May 3, 2009 from Beaumont Enterprise website: http:// www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/local/schools_face_teacher_shortage__language_barriers_with_computer_program_04-17-2009.html

Kaiser, M. (1997). Review: The Rosetta Stone for Russian. Retrieved April 12, 2009 from CALL@Chorus Web Site: http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/chorus/call/reviews/rosetta_russian/rosetta_russian_2.html


Macrae, D. (1997) Review: The Rosetta Stone for German. Retrieved April 12, 2009 from CALL@Chorus Web Site: http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/chorus/call/reviews/archives/rosettagerm.html


Mossberg, W. (2005, September 7). Language Learning, the Natural Way. Retrieved April 13, 2009 from http://webreprints.djreprints.com/2057660580889.html


Rosetta Stone (n.d.). Our History. Retrieved April 23, 2009 from Rosetta Stone website: http://www.rosettastone.com/global/history

Rosetta Stone (n.d.) Research Basis for Rosetta Stone Dynamic Immersion Method. Retrieved April 13, 2009 from http://www.plato.com/Secondary-Solutions/ELL-World-languages/~/media/Technical%20and%20White%20Papers/2Rosetta_Stone_Research_Basis_pdf.ashx

Rosetta Stone (2004). Study on High School Japanese Program Attributes Lowered Attrition Rates to Usage of Rosetta Stone. Unpublished Manuscript obtained via email from Rosetta Stone representative.

Rosetta Stone (2009, April 16). Form 424B4 - Prospectus. (SEC Accession Number 0001047469-09-004213). Retrieved May 3, 2009 from U.S. Securities and Exchange

Commission website: http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1351285/000104746909004213/a2192325z424b4.htm

Ruth, J (2009, April 29). Rosetta Stone opens doors at the mall. Retrieved May 3, 2009 from NJBIZ website: http://www.njbiz.com/article.asp?aID=77962

Saury, R. (1998) Creating a Psychological Foundation for the Evaluation of Pre-Packaged Software in Second Language Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED428718). Retrieved April 13, 2009 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/

Schlosser, J. (2007, March 13) Parlez-Vous Profits? Fortune, March 19, 2007. Retrieved April 14, 2009 from CNNMoney: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/03/19/8402331/index.htm

Stoltzfus, A. (1997, February). The Learning Theory behind the Rosetta Stone Language Library from Fairfield Language Technologies. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Bilingual Education, Albuquerque, NM. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED404883). Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/

Vesselinov, R. (2009, January) Measuring the Effectiveness of Rosetta Stone: Final Report. Unpublished Manuscript obtained via email from Rosetta Stone representative.