Krashen's understanding of how we learn languages is not only very interesting but very helpful - for both learners and teachers:
Jay Doubleyou: theories of language learning and teaching: input
Jay Doubleyou: second language acquisition
Jay Doubleyou: behaviourism >>> krashen... pinker... skinner... chomsky
The Frankfurt International School has some excellent resources:
A guide to learning English - esl.fis
The following has been taken from a piece on Krashen:
An introduction to the work of Stephen Krashen
This page contains an introduction to the work of Stephen Krashen, Emeritus Professor of Linguistics and Education at the University of Southern California. It was written in advance of Dr. Krashen's visit to Frankfurt International School (FIS) in October 2009 to lead the school's two-day professional development.
Teachers who are interested in further information about the various issues can click [More] at the end of each section.
Second language learning
Krashen believes that there is no fundamental difference between the way we acquire our first language and our subsequent languages. He claims that humans have an innate ability that guides the language learning process. Infants learn their mother tongue simply by listening attentively to spoken language that is (made) meaningful to them. Foreign languages are acquired in the same way.
The claim that humans possess an innate language learning ability stems from Chomsky (1965), who rejected Skinner's (1957) behaviourist theory that language learning is habit formation through stimulus and response. Chomsky called the special inborn language capability the Language Acquisition Device (LAD). From this he developed the theory that all languages share an underlying system named Universal Grammar. The hypothesis that the ability to learn language is innate has been restated more recently by linguist Steven Pinker who claims that this ability is "hard-wired in the genes".
Chomsky and Pinker are nativists. Their theories are opposed by contemporary empiricists such as Sampson (2005), who reiterate Skinner's claim that language develops in response to environmental influences. Other linguists and cognitive scientists, such as O'Grady (2005), agree that humans possess significant innate capabilities. However, they suggest that language learning depends on general cognitive faculties rather than on a specific language acquisition mechanism.
The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis
There are two ways of developing language ability: by acquisition and by learning. Acquisition is a sub-conscious process, as in the case of a child learning its own language or an adult 'picking up' a second language simply by living and working in a foreign country. Learning is the conscious process of developing a foreign language through language lessons and a focus on the grammatical features of that language.
[More]
The Natural Order Hypothesis
Language is acquired in a predictable order by all learners. This order does not depend on the apparent simplicity or complexity of the grammatical features involved. The natural order of acquisition cannot be influenced by direct teaching of features that the learner is not yet ready to acquire.
[More]
The Monitor Hypothesis
We are able to use what we have learned (in Krashen's sense) about the rules of a language in monitoring (or self-correcting) our language output. Clearly, this is possible in the correction of written work. It is much more difficult when engaging in regular talk.
[More]
The Input Hypothesis
We acquire language in one way only: when we are exposed to input (written or spoken language) that is comprehensible to us. Comprehensible input is the necessary but also sufficient condition for language acquisition to take place. It requires no effort on the part of the learner.
[More]
The Affective Filter Hypothesis
Comprehensible input will not result in language acquisition if that input is filtered out before it can reach the brain's language processing faculties. The filtering may occur because of anxiety, poor self-esteem or low motivation.
[More]
Free voluntary reading
Free voluntary reading (FVR) is the reading of any book (newspaper, magazine or comic) that students have chosen for themselves and is not subject to follow-up work such as comprehension questions or a summary. Krashen (2003) makes the claim that Free voluntary reading 'may be the most powerful educational tool in language education'. It serves to increase literacy and to develop vocabulary.§§
Extensive voluntary reading provides non-native students with large doses of comprehensible input with a low affective filter, and thus is a major factor in their general language acquisition.
More on free voluntary reading
Krashen (2004) expands on his claim in his book The Power of Reading. His own and other's research has led him to the following conclusions:
- Students who read more do better on a wide variety of tests.
- Reading is the most significant factor in the development of vocabulary.
- Reading is the major factor in the development of writing competence.
- Students who read extensively have a greater general knowledge.
- Self-selected reading is extremely enjoyable and probably the most popular means of achieving of what Csikszentmihalyi (1991) calls flow, the psychology of optimal experience.
Whole Language
Krashen is a strong advocate of the whole language approach to the teaching of reading, and has written many articles in support of it. In essence, whole language proponents claim that children learn to read most enjoyably and efficiently by exposure to interesting stories that are made comprehensible to them through pictures and discussions. This is in contrast to structured decoding programmes (usually designated phonics) in which children learn to read by sounding out the various parts of words.
[More]
Comments
The whole language/phonics debate has become politicised and increasingly vitriolic. Constant media reports about falling literacy standards have alarmed parents, many of whom vehemently protest if they consider their child's school to have chosen the wrong approach. The issue is further complicated by the involvement of publishing houses which stand to make large profits if school districts can be persuaded to buy their comprehensive sets of phonics-based materials. Such an entanglement of interests is rarely conducive to making the best pedagogical decisions.
[More]
Cognitive development
Krashen (2003) claims that cognitive development, including the acquisition of concepts and facts, is more likely to occur through problem-solving than through deliberate study. It is a confusion of cause and effect to teach facts and thinking skills in order that students may then solve real problems. Instead, it is the case, Krashen says, that learning is the result of working on real problems.
Writing that synthesizes knowledge gained from various sources, incorporates personal insights, and presents these in a structured way is an excellent example of a problem-solving activity that leads to cognitive development.
[More]
Writing
Krashen's (1984) early work in this field draws the distinction between writing competence and writing performance. Competence is the largely sub-conscious, abstract knowledge of what constitutes good prose. Competence is acquired for the most part through reading.§§ Performance, on the other hand, refers to the conscious application of strategies or rules that have been learned and practised. The distinction between competence and performance in writing parallels that between acquisition and learning in second language development.
In his later work Krashen (2003) investigates how writing can contribute to cognitive development. He summarizes research that shows how various writing activities, in particular note-taking and summary writing, are significant aids to learning §§.
[More]
An introduction to the work of Stephen Krashen
See also:
Jay Doubleyou: questioning and problem-solving
Jay Doubleyou: task-based learning
Jay Doubleyou: play and learning
Jay Doubleyou: processes and procedures
Jay Doubleyou: thinking fast and slow
Jay Doubleyou: the trivium method of critical thinking and creative problem solving
Jay Doubleyou: appreciative inquiry is not problem-solving
Jay Doubleyou: critical thinking
.
.
.
