Krashen's Second Language Acquisition Theory

Krashen's Second Language Acquisition Theory

Whether one is an advanced degree student in education or linguistics, or

simply attending a four-week program in teaching English as a foreign language

(TEFL), he or she will be exposed to Stephen Krashen's theories and hypotheses

about how people acquire a second language. They are, by far, the most influential

and predominant theories in use today—despite the fact that his theories have

come under considerable academic criticism over the years.

Stephen D. Krashen, PhD

Professor Emeritus, USC

The major criticism of Krashen's theories essentially consists of two main

points. First, most of them are not based on or have ever been subjected to

empirical research. Hence, they have not been "scientifically proven." Apropos to

this criticism is the story behind California's bilingual education program during

the 1990s, of which Krashen was the chief architect. In what was referred to as the

"whole language program," teachers were forbidden from teaching grammar,

writing, phonics, or using other traditional tools of academia. Essentially, the

program proved to be a dismal failure and was challenged in a massive grassroots

movement through the landslide approval of California Proposition 227 in 1998,

which allowed parents the right to petition the schools to end it, (see, for example:

Stewart, 1998; Crawford, 1999).

The second and related criticism, is that many of his terms are loosely and very

broadly defined and, thus, may actually defy verification through use of the

scientific method altogether (Gregg, 1984). For example, how does one measure

(or operationally define) "subconscious process," which Krashen claims is critical to

second language acquisition?

Despite academic criticism from a few corners and the scandal surrounding

California's bilingual education program during the 1990s, Dr. Krashen's theories

are widely and enthusiastically embraced by the TEFL community-at-large

primarily because they

feel

intuitively correct. In addition, the absence of empirical

research does not necessarily invalidate the accuracy or reliability of a theory: It

simply means it remains scientifically unproven and will be regarded with far

greater skepticism by some.

Input Hypothesis

Second language acquisition theories tend to fall under two broad categories:

Those that can be classified as naturalistic or innate and those that can be

classified as environmental or interactional, i.e., requiring interaction with the

proper environment . For example, Noam Chomsky's Universal Hypothesis holds

there is an inborn or innate neurological faculty for learning language that he

refers to as the Learning Acquisition Device (LAD): this would be an example of the

first type of theory (Shannon, 2005). Krashen's Input Hypothesis (originally

referred to as the Monitor Model) consists of five correlates or sub-hypotheses

and would be broadly classified as an interactional or environmental model.

Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

This hypothesis, which is the most fundamental of the five, draws a clear

distinction between language

learning

and language

acquisition

. Krashen argues

that language learning alone does not lead to the acquisition or functional use of a

language. Thus one can be an expert in English grammar and syntax, i.e., have a

great deal of knowledge about a language, but still not be able to use the

language with which to effectively communicate with others: herein lies the

greatest criticism of China's foreign language program (Fabisz, 1998).

Chinese English teachers teach English almost exclusively in Chinese as if it

was a course in math or science. Typically what they will do is write a complex

sentence in English on the blackboard and then spend 15 minutes analyzing and

discussing the sentence structure, i.e., parts of speech, structure and syntax,

completely in Chinese. Thus, most Chinese students have an excellent academic

understanding of the English language and most are far more aware of the

mechanics of the language than are their Western counterparts: The problem is,

they rarely acquire a functional use of the language, especially in regard to

listening and speaking skills. Most college-educated Chinese, however, can read

and understand simple English sentences because that is what they practiced

doing for so many years in school.

Monitor Hypothesis

The monitor hypothesis attempts to bridge the schism between language

learning and language acquisition by illustrating the relationship between them

and it parallels how children naturally acquire their first language (L1). Obviously,

children learn how to speak years before they ever attend school and this is where

they will then learn about the language, i.e., acquisition precedes learning.

As the child learns about the form and rules of the language over time, he or

she then begins to self-monitor speech productions that are checked against this

"knowledge base" of rules and form. That is, even native speakers will occasionally

make a grammatical error or produce a "slip of the tongue" in speech now and

then but, if they are aware of the proper form or rule, they will usually catch the

error and correct themselves immediately afterwards. This would be evidence of

the Monitor (ibid).

However, a considerable fear of making a mistake or the absence of proper

language acquisition to begin with can result in what Krashen refers to as a "type

one performer," that is, someone who overuses the Monitor. This results in speech

production that is unnatural and far too controlled or measured. Chinese EFL

students are notorious "type one performers" and, as will be discussed in the next

unit, your greatest and most difficult task as a foreign English teacher will be to get

them to relax and not worry so much about making a mistake in front of you or

their peers, i.e., you will need to temporarily neutralize or suspend their fear of

losing face.

Natural Order Hypothesis

This hypothesis simply states that grammatical structures are acquired in a

natural or predictable order in English as a second language. For example, EFL

students will acquire mastery of the progressive verb tense well before the use of

the possessive noun form, which typically comes last (if at all).

It is not a coincidence therefore that the Chinese have considerable difficulty

with the use of possessives as discussed in the previous unit. Even most

well-educated Chinese English teachers and professors will write out "the bicycle

of Mike is in the garage of the house of Emily" instead of more naturally and

simplistically writing, "Mike's bicycle is in Emily's garage." In fact, this is the only

hypothesis for which there is clear and compelling empirical research evidence

derived from morpheme studies conducted with both children and adults (Krashen

and Terrell 1983:29).

Input Hypothesis

The input hypothesis seeks to directly answer the question "How do learners

actually acquire a second language?" Simply stated, the answer is that they acquire

a second language by receiving input in the target language that is just slightly

above their current level of acquired understanding. Krashen illustrates this as i + 1,

with "i" representing the current level of acquired understanding and "1" being

equal to the next level of input that is just above the students' current level. It

needs to be emphasized here that the input hypothesis addresses itself to

acquired meaning in communication, and not to classroom language learning in

the traditional sense. That is "understanding" here is not used to refer to an

intellectual understanding of the correct rules of grammar or form, but an

understanding of what was originally intended in meaning (Krashen, 1981, p. 103).

If there is any validity to the input hypothesis, then it is a theoretical

justification for the abundant use of activities and games for facilitating the

acquisition of a foreign language—assuming that the level of input required by the

task is just slightly above the current acquired level of understanding. However, it

is doubtful that showing entire Western films in an EFL class is an effective way to

facilitate speaking and listening skills

unless

it can be demonstrated that there is

not a significant percentage of vocabulary in excess of the students' current level

of understanding. In such an instance, even if the teacher were to have the

students memorize lists of "movie vocabulary words" beforehand, doing so would

not theoretically facilitate second language acquisition if the percentage of new

words exceeded i + 1 (because memorizing a word and acquiring its use

functionally are two different things, according to Krashen as well as others).

Audiovisual aids, therefore, will be most effective when used in a limited and

measured manner and especially when combined with a corresponding textbook

and played for a relatively brief period of time, such that the film or audiotape

helps facilitate acquisition. A good example of this application are companion CDs

that often accompany EFL textbooks for beginning second language learners

featuring 10-minute video segments for each unit.

"Foreigner talk" or "teacher talk," i.e., the use of simplified or reduced-rate

communication during class, also referred to as "roughly-tuned input" (speaking

around or near-to the students' current acquired level of understanding) is

theoretically justified by the input hypothesis, although career EFL teachers appear

to be divided on this issue. However, in reality, this is

very tricky

to effectively put

into practice because it necessarily requires erring in one direction or the other,

assuming the current acquired levels of understanding among one's students are

widely dispersed (as they almost always are). That is, speaking "near to" one

particularly weaker student's current level of understanding could easily be

perceived as infantilizing or insulting to the more advanced students. What most

EFL teachers do is either teach towards the predetermined middle or divide the

class into fairly homogenous groups, based on level of understanding, and then

assign differential group tasks to realize i + 1 for each group.

Affective Filter Hypothesis

The affective filter hypothesis essentially refers to how tense, angry, anxious,

or bored the student is. Simply stated, those who are emotionally disturbed or

distracted will employ high affective filters and will acquire very little of the

language, while those who are relaxed, comfortable and at ease will present with

very low affective filters and will acquire the most of a second language. In

Krashen's own words:

Performers with high or strong filters will acquire less of the language directed

at them, as less input is "allowed in" to the language-acquisition device. The

presence of such a filter, according to Dulay and Burt, may explain which of

alternative models the acquirer will internalize (e.g. why children acquire the

dialect of their peers rather than that of their elders), why acquisition prematurely

ceases in some cases, and often what parts of language are acquired first. Thus,

attitudinal factors relating to language acquisition will be those that contribute to

a low affective filter (ibid, p. 26).

According to the affective filter hypothesis, there are three attitudinal or

affective (emotional) factors that contribute to the presence of either a high or low

filter. These factors are:

1. Motivation. Performers with high motivation generally do better in second

language acquisition.

2. Self-confidence. Performers with self-confidence and a good self-image

tend to do better in second language acquisition.

3. Anxiety. Low anxiety appears to be conductive to second language

acquisition, whether measured as personal or classroom anxiety.

For anyone who has spent any time at all teaching English as a foreign

language, these three aforementioned factors are self-evident and intuitively

correct and constitute common knowledge. The next unit will delve more

specifically into the educational psychology of motivation, especially as it applies

to Chinese EFL students.