Krashens theory of language learning (1).pdf
- 1. Krashen’s Theory of Language Learning
- 2. About 25 years ago, a psychologist named Stephen Krashen transformed language teaching. He had been developing his ideas over a number of years, but several books he published in the 1980s received widespread acceptance.
- 3. STEPHEN KRASHEN’S LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THEORY This theory states that acquisition and learning are two separate processes. Learning is to know about a language - formal knowledge; acquisition is the unconscious mind related activity that occurs when the language is used in conversation. Krashen embodies the following hypotheses in his theory:
- 4. Much has been made of Krashen's theory of second language acquisition, which consists of five main hypotheses: • The acquisition learning hypothesis • the monitor hypothesis, • the natural order hypothesis, • the input hypothesis, and • the affective filter hypothesis. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTsduRreug&feature=related
- 5. According to Krashen’s acquisition-learning hypothesis, there are two independent ways to develop our linguistic skills: acquisition and learning. This theory is at the core of modern language acquisition theory, and is perhaps the most fundamental of Krashen's theories on second acquisition.
- 6. Acquisition Subconscious process where individual is not aware. One is unaware of the process as it is happening and when the new knowledge is acquired, the acquirer generally does not realize that he or she possesses any new knowledge. According to Krashen, both adults and children can subconsciously acquire language, and either written or oral language can be acquired. This process is similar to the process that children undergo when learning their native language. Acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language, during which the acquirer is focused on meaning rather than form.
- 7. Learning Learning a language, on the other hand, is a conscious process, much like what one experiences in school. New knowledge or language forms are represented consciously in the learner's mind, frequently in the form of language "rules" and "grammar" and the process often involves error correction. Language learning involves formal instruction, and according to Krashen, is less effective than acquisition.
- 8. Material created by Sonia Albertazzi, Milagro Azofeifa y Gabriela Serrano for Educational Purposes The Acquisition – Learning Distinction Acquisition Sub-conscious by environment (Ex: games, Movies, radio) Picking up words Learning Conscious by instructors Correct errors Knowing about Grammar rules SLA
- 9. NaturalOrder: Natural progression/order of language development exhibited by infants/young children and/or second language learners (child or adult). Level l: Pre-Production Stage (Silent Period): Minimal comprehension, no verbal production. Level II: Early Production Stage. Limited Comprehension; One/two-word response. Level III: Speech Emergence Stage. Increased comprehension; Simple sentences; Some errors in speech. Level IV: Intermediate Fluency Stage. Very good comprehension; More complex sentences; Complex errors in speech.
- 10. Monitor Learning (as opposed to acquisition) serves to develop a monitor- an error detecting mechanism that scans utterances for accuracy in order to make corrections. As a corollary to the monitor hypothesis, language acquisition instruction should avoid emphasis on error correction and grammar. This might inhibit language acquisition, particularly at the early stages of language development.
- 11. The Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning. The monitoring function is the practical result of the learned grammar. According to Krashen, for the Monitor to be successfully used, three conditions must be met:
- 12. The acquirer/learner must know the rule: This is a very difficult condition to meet because it means that the speaker must have had explicit instruction. The acquirer must be focused on correctness: He or she must be thinking about form, and it is difficult to focus on meaning and form at the same time. Having time to use the monitor: The speaker is then focused on form rather than meaning, resulting in the production and exchange of less information.
- 13. Due to these difficulties, Krashen recommends using the monitor at times when it does not interfere with communication, such as while writing.
- 14. Affective Filter: Optimal input occurs when the "affective filter" is low. The affective filter is a screen of emotion that can block language acquisition or learning if it keeps the users from being too self-conscious or too embarrassed to take risks during communicative exchanges The Affective Filter hypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language acquisition. These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and anxiety.
- 15. Low motivation, low self-esteem, and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other words, when the filter is 'up' it impedes language acquisition. Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition.
- 16. Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self- confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition.
- 17. THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS We acquire language only when we understand language that contains structure that is “a little beyond” where we are now. This is possible because we use more than our linguistic competence to help us understand. Material createdby Sonia Albertazzi, Milagro Azofeifa y Gabriela Serrano for Educational Purposes
- 18. 1. Honeymoon: The sojourner is intrigued by the differences she or he perceives and is excited about everything. 2. Disintegration: The differences between the cultures lead to confusion, isolation and loneliness. New cultural cues are misread and withdrawal and depression can occur. 3. Re-integration: The new cues are re-integrated but even though the individual has an increased ability to function in the new culture, he rejects it and experiences anger and resentment and acts hostile and rebellious. 4. Autonomy: The person is able to see the differences between the two cultures in a more objective way, is able to deal with them and therefore feels more self-assured, relaxed and confident. 5. Independence:The social psychological and cultural differences are accepted and enjoyed (ibid.). And the person is able to function in both the old and the new culture; he has achieved bi- culturality. In addition, the Cultural Adaption / Cultural Shock cycle for students, upon introducing themselves to a new language and its culture is to experience the following:
- 19. THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS Input needs to be comprehensible. Input + 1/Zone of Proximal Development- Input/instruction that is just above the students' abilities. Instruction that is embedded in a meaningful context, modified (paraphrasing, repetition), collaborative/interactiveand multimodal. We acquire language only when we understand language that contains structure that is “a little beyond” wherewe are now. This is possible because we use more than our linguistic competence to help us understand.
- 20. The input hypothesis says that we acquire by “going for meaning” first, and as a result, we acquire structure. It also states that speaking fluency cannot be taught directly. It emerges over time, on its own. The best way to teach speaking, according to this view, is simply to provide comprehensible input. Early speech will come when the acquirer feels “ready:” It is typically not grammatically accurate. Accuracy develops over time as the acquirer hears and understands more input.
- 21. BIBLIOGRAPHY Krashen, Stephen D. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Prentice-Hall International, 1987. Krashen, Stephen D. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Prentice-Hall International, 1988.