Impressive Truth or Misleading Stats?
Language training providers love to post impressive engagement stats. But what do those big numbers actually mean?
Exhibit A: Voxy.
Their 2024 wrap-up post had me do a double-take.
Here are the numbers:
- 200,000+ learners engaged globally
- 80,000+ group lessons with 30,000 unique users
- 55,000+ learners advanced or maintained their levels
Sounds great–until you take a closer look.
The Truth Behind Voxy’s Big Numbers
The truth behind Voxy’s big numbers is that their learners aren’t engaged.
If only 55,000+ learners advanced or maintained their levels, then that means nearly 75% of their learners didn’t advance–or even maintain their level. What happened to the rest?
And what about their 80,000+ group lessons with 30,000 unique learners? We can’t say for sure without knowing the average class size, but the numbers suggest they only attended class every month or two at most.
We know that being forced to speak is what really moves the needle on language learning. If these learners are barely attending classes, are they really making progress?
What Solid Engagement Numbers Really Look Like
A lot of language training providers throw out big numbers–users enrolled, total hours spent on the platform–to try to show they have impressive engagement metrics.
Why? Maybe their true engagement numbers–what percentage of their learners participate, how frequently they use the platform–are too depressing to share.
If a company won’t show you the frequency, effectiveness, and quality of the participation, take their big numbers with a grain of salt.
A company with solid learner engagement will let you look behind the curtain and see how often the average learner actively participates in language learning.
At IMMERSE, we are committed to transparency with our data. On average, we see a participation rate of 3.67 classes per week from active members. That’s real engagement.
True Engagement Builds Workplace Communication Skills
The real question isn’t how often learners log in, it’s how actively engaged they are.
Clicking through exercises or mindlessly reading explanations about grammar or sentence structure doesn’t develop practical workplace communication skills.
To transfer language training to the workplace, learners need consistent, frequent, meaningful interaction in the target language.
Real Engagement Means Real Progress
A language training platform that fosters real engagement doesn’t just track attendance–it drives real progress.
- Frequency matters. Learners understand and retain more by consistently spending an hour or two per week than by sporadically cramming in a few marathon sessions.
- Quality matters, too. The best platforms keep learners actively engaged, not just passively watching videos and clicking through exercises. Real engagement means discussing, negotiating problem solving, and role playing real-world scenarios in the target language.
How To Tell If a Language Training Provider Really Delivers Results
Not all engagement is created equal. Here’s how to tell if a language training provider actually gets results or is just throwing big numbers at you.
Quality: Is the learning experience active?
Real language learning requires active, meaningful interaction, not passive exposure to content. A platform should immerse learners in real-world communication to prepare them for using their language skills on the job.
Watch out for buzzwords like “active” and “immersive,” though. If there’s no real-world application, then it’s not active, immersive learning.
Frequency: How often do learners engage?
Frequent participation is the key to building and retaining language skills.
If a language training provider shares numbers that clearly show high frequency of engagement, that’s a sign the learners are finding the training useful and are motivated to keep coming back for more.
Outcomes: Are learners making progress?
If a program is truly engaging learners, they will improve and progress.
But if a program has high dropout rates or learners’ skills are stagnating, then the engagement (and the results) just aren’t there–even if the program claims high numbers of participating learners.
