STEPHEN KRASHEN’S SECOND LANGUAGE

ACQUISITION THEORY

Sharonda Walker

Texas Woman’s University

KRASHEN SPEAKS

LANGUAGE ACQUISITION HYPOTHESES:

•Acquisition-Learning•Monitor

•Natural Order•Input•Affective Filter

ACQUISITION-LEARNING• Hypothesis: The belief  that

English Language Learners (ELLs) 'acquire' and 'learn' the target language. – To 'acquire' the language, the

ELLs subconsciously process the target language based on feelings (Lightbown& Spada, 2006, p.36).

– 'Learning' the language is when the ELLs are aware that they are processing the target language through formal instruction and rule learning (Lightbrown & Spada, 2006, p. 36).

MONITOR• Hypothesis: The belief that

acquisition results when the English Language Learners (ELLs) can consciously correct errors while speaking in the target language.– The ELLs are able to understand

the grammar rules associated with the target language in order to correct their errors by acting as an editor or 'monitor' (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 37).

NATURAL ORDER• Hypothesis: Krashen's belief that

English Language Learners (ELLs) acquire the target language in predictable sequences. However, the ELLs may be able to acquire the target language early on, or it may develop later in the acquisition process (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 37).

INPUT• Hypothesis: Based on

comprehensible input (language that a learner can understand) that is provided to the ELLs that is above their level of understanding. This does not take place through learning, but through acquisition (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 37).

AFFECTIVE FILTER• Hypothesis: The belief that the

English Language Learners (ELLs) ' affective filter ' must be maintained at a low level in order for them to acquire the target language.  The 'affective filter' is a barrier that prevents the ELLs from acquiring the target language (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 37).

• Positive self-confidence, high motivation, and low anxiety (stress) must be maintained in order for the ELLs to progress through the acquisition process (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 37).

CURRENT RESEARCH• One of the principal critics of

Stephen Krashen's second language acquisition theory has been Barry McLaughlin. In "Conscious" versus "Unconscious" Learning, McLauglin disagrees with Krashen's Acquisition-Learning hypothesis.

• McLaughlin believes that ELLs learn the target language through "rule" or "feel;” that the ELLs are feeling their way through the target language and can recognize the grammar "rule" while speaking (McLaughlin, 1990, pp. 619-620).

CURRENT RESEARCH• In the article Myths and

misconceptions about second language learning, McLaughlin states that younger is not always better when acquiring a second language (McLaughlin, 1992, p. 129).

• Beginning language instruction early for English Language Learners (ELLs) gives them more exposure to the target language; however, this does not predict language acquisition (McLaughlin, 1992, p. 129).

CURRENT RESEARCH• Rod Ellis is another researcher

that does not fully support Krashen's second language acquisition theory. In Principles of instructed second language acquisition, Ellis believes that implicit and explicit knowledge play a role in language acquisition and that Krashen's "monitor" hypothesis does not take these two concepts into consideration (Ellis, 2008, p. 3).

• Ellis states that input of implicit knowledge needs to be incorporated into language acquisition and not entirely focused on Krashen's "comprehensible input,” (Ellis, 2008, p. 4).

CURRENT RESEARCH• In Anniversary article :

Classroom SLA research and second language teaching, 

Lightbown discusses ten generalizations from SLA research that favors and opposes certain aspects of Krashen's second language acquisition theory.

• Lightbown concurs with Krashen that ELLs 'acquire' the target language; however, she and other researchers believe that ELLs can acquire the target language 'incidentally.' (Lightbown, 2000, p. 439). 

CURRENT RESEARCH• In Anniversary article :

Classroom SLA research and second language teaching, Lightbown and other researchers agree with Krashen's belief that reading is a positive medium to promote comprehensible input(Lightbown & Spada, 2000, p. 440).

• ELLs should be provided comprehensible input above their current level of understanding as stated in Krashen's input hypothesis (Lightbown, 2000, p. 443).

CURRENT RESEARCH• In the article Pedagogies Proving

Krashen’s Theory of Affective Filter, Grace Hui Chin Lin, believes that language acquisition can be effective and efficient for ELLs when the experience is relaxing and provides means in which they can be confident and motivated (Lin, 2008, p. 117).

• Lin believes that in order for Krashen’s affective filter theory to be effective, there must be a connection between ELLs’ interests, self-esteem, attitudes and motivation to promote confidence in the language acquisition process through the use of games, music, and movies (Lin, 2008, p. 115).

C URRENT RESEARCH• Supplementing Krashen's

SLA Theory, written by Xiao-Yue-Hai, discusses Krashen's second language acquisition theory. Yue-hai believes that Krashen’s SLA theory can have a better outcome if a few elements were added.

• Yue-Hai believes that L1 can promote comprehension, reading, and writing in L2; that when L1and L2 are utilized together, L2 acquisition is obtained more efficiently and effectively due to prior knowledge (Yue-hai, 2008, p. 17).

CURRENT RESEARCH• In the article, Supplementing

Krashen's SLA Theory, Yue-hai believes that Krashen’s SLA theory does not address how children and adults acquire a second language (Yue-Hai, 2008, p.17).

• Yue-Hai believes that children acquire a second language by listening, speaking, reading, and writing in this order. Adults, on the other hand, acquire a second language by reading, listening, writing, and speaking (Yue-hai, 2008, p. 17).

SLA in the Classroom• Principle 6: Successful

instructed language learning requires extensive language input (Ellis, 2008, p. 3). This principle states that language learners must be exposed to the new language in order to acquire it.

• The new language needs to be present inside the classroom and the schools need to provide resources to aid in language acquisition, such as extensive reading programs and self-access centers (Ellis, 2008, p. 4).

SLA in the Classroom•Principle 9: Instruction needs to accommodate the individual differences of language learners (Ellis, 2008, p. 5). Learning will be more successful when the instruction is matched to the ELLs’ particular aptitude for learning and when the ELLs are motivated (Ellis, 2008, p. 5).•The teacher should be aware of the learning styles and pace of their ELLs and offer motivation to enhance the language acquisition process.

SLA in the Classroom• Generalization 6:

Isolated explicit error is usually ineffective in changing language behavior (Lightbown, 2000, pp. 446-448).

• Error correction can be utilized through recasts, or utterances by the teacher that rephrases the utterance of the learner, preserving the original meaning, but correcting the error(s) that occurred in the original utterance (Long and Robinson 1998).

SLA in the Classroom•The ESL teacher must be prepared to work with children from various cultural, social, and linguistic backgrounds (Fillmore and Snow, 2001, p. 5).•The ESL teacher must respect the ELLs’ home languages and cultures and incorporate these values into the classroom and learning experience(Fillmore and Snow, 2001, p. 12)

SLA in the Classroom• The ESL teacher should

emphasize comprehension in the second language acquisition process because comprehension leads to better acquisition, better retention, and positive student attitudes (Krashen, 1985, p. 15).

• The ESL teacher should provide instruction to promote and enhance the language learners’ comprehension level and skills through reading, role-playing, and talking to each other (Krashen, 1985, p. 15).

REFERENCESFillmore, L. W., & Snow, C. E. (2000). What teachers

need to know about language. Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, Special Report. Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/ericll/teachers/teachers.pdf

Krashen, S.D. (1985a). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman

Lightbown, P. (2000). Anniversary article: Classroom SLA research and second language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 21 (4), 431-462.

REFERENCESLightbown, P. & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are

learned, (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford  University Press.

Lin, Grace Hui Chin. (2008). Pedagogies Proving Krashen’s Theory of Affective Filter. Hwa Kang Journal of English Language and Literature, n14, p. 113-131. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb

McLaughlin, B. (1990). "Conscious" versus "Unconscious" Learning. TESOL Quarterly, 24 (4), 617-634.

REFERENCESYou Tube (Constantinide, M.). (1982). Stephen

Krashen on Second Language Acquisition, Part 1 of 2. [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vh6Hy6El86Q

 Yue-hai, X. (2008). Supplementing Krashen's SLA

theory, US-China Foreign Language, 6 ,(7), 15-18. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.