Krashen's Input Hypotheses

Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
PBET 2113 Group 7b (TESL) Semester 2 AY 2009-2010
Language & Literacy Education
Faculty of Education Universiti Malaya KL

Tan Chung Szuan
PET 080017
Group Members
Choo Yin Yin PET 080002
LooKe Sin PET 080005
Sharon Pang PET 080015
PBET 2113 Group 7b (TESL) Semester 2 AY 2009-2010, Department of Language & Literacy Education, Faculty of Education, Universiti Malaya KL

Content

What is input and output?

Five Hypotheses
1. Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

“Fluency in second language performance is due to what we have acquired, not what we have learned. ”
Krashen
Conscious Subconscious
learning acquisition
are NOT able to exist at the same time (mutually exclusive)

2. Monitor Hypothesis
Only involved in learning, x acquisition
Device for editing & making corrections
Krashen, “such explicit intentionally learning should be avoided.”
Should only be applied after fluency is established

3. Natural Order Hypothesis
By following the earlier morpheme order studies of Dulay and Burt…
Krashen claimed that:
we acquire language in a predictable or “natural” order

4. Input Hypothesis
Krashen:
Comprehensible the only true foundation input = of SLA
Comprehensive input: understanding of input language, that contains ‘a bit beyond’ the current level of competence. (i + 1)
Speech will ‘emerge’ once acquirer has built up enough comprehensible input

5. Affective Filter Hypothesis
Krashen: the best acquisition will
occur when we have low anxiety and defensive-free
low “affective filter”
(in Krashen’s terms)

Evaluations of the five hypotheses
1st criticism:
Krashen
McLaughlin (psychologist)
Rather fuzzy distinction between subconscious (acquisition) and conscious (learning)
it is difficult for us to identify the conscious or subconscious distinctions, in language acquistion.

2nd criticism:
Krashen
Gregg
Learning is not as important as acquisition
Learning & acquisition can both be beneficial
depends on the learner’s own styles and strategies

3rd criticism:
Krashen
Gregg & White
Claimed that the
input one understands MUST contains i + 1, that is the comprehensive input
We are unable to define i and 1

4th criticism:
Krashen
Criticism
Speech will ‘emerge’ once acquirer has
built up enough comprehensible
input
Speech will indeed emerge for bright learners
BUT no significant information on Krashen’s theories about learners whose speech does not ‘emerge’

The Output Hypothesis
Introduced by Merill Swain (1985)
Output important role in SLA
She denied Krashen’s claims a person could learn second language without speaking at all.
Her studies in Canada :
English-speaking students learn all subjects
in French
but not having to reply in French
did not achieve full productive competence in French

Three major functions of Output in SLA
1. Get learners to recognize their
linguistic weaknesses
2. A way to try out / test one’s language
3. For the learner to…
think deeper on language

Conclusion
Related to CALL
It includes input and output
4 skills
Our Group’s View
Input go hand in hand with output
They achieve the most efficiency when both of them work together

Source: Brown, H. Douglas. 2007. Principles of
Language Learning and Teaching, 5th Edition.
White Plains, NY: Pearson Education. Chapter 10
Created for: PBET 2113 Participants (TESL)
Semester 2, AY 2009-2010
Department of Language & Literacy
Faculty of Education
University of Malaya KL
Created by: Tan Chung Szuan, LooKee Sin,
Choo Yin Yin and Sharon Pan Xie Mei
Facilitator: Jessie Grace U. Rubrico, PhD

http://www.slideshare.net	44
http://translate.googleusercontent.com	4
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com	1
http://ecampustraining.dcccd.edu	1

Krashen's Input Hypotheses

by Jessie Grace Rubrico on Feb 17, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

4 Embeds 50

Statistics

Krashen’s Input Hypotheses — Presentation Transcript