1, Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition
According to Krashen (1982, p. 10), there are five primary hypotheses that make up his theory of second language acquisition: the Acquisition-Learning, Monitor, Input, Natural Order, and Affective Filter hypotheses. Careful attention is required throughout the five-hypothesis cycle, as shown in Figure 2.1.
2. Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis
Krashen posits that linguistic proficiency can be acquired through two distinct methods (p. 10). This process of native language development involves the unconscious assimilation of knowledge, with information being stored in the brain via speech. The intentional acquisition of knowledge regarding a language, including its grammar and structure, is referred to as learning. Krashen states that this often results from formal language instruction. The acquisition-learning hypothesis also emphasizes the importance of classroom organization and learning environments that encourage active participation from learners rather than passive engagement.
The setting is extremely necessary to permit them to be less anxious and worried and vice versa. In that respect, the learning environment should be flexible so that it can afford the range of learning styles and preferences within a class (Reid, 2007, p. 43). There should be a sense of ownership and freedom as it is integral that learners see the classroom environment as their own home and that they will definitely practice what they have learned naturally without the sense of anxiety and worry.
The most effective method for language acquisition occurs within a natural communicative environment, grounded in the principle that successful language learning arises from the necessity to convey authentic meaning (Krashen, 1981, p. 104). When students participate in real-world communication, their inherent language acquisition strategies are activated, enabling them to effectively utilize the language. Creating a learning situation in which language is actively used (Knibbeler, 1989, p. 16) is crucial for enhancing language proficiency and fostering motivation in language learning. Therefore, it will certainly assist students in “acquiring” the language rather than merely “learning” it.
3, Natural Order Hypothesis
Krashen posits that learners acquire linguistic components in a systematic sequence. Some grammatical structures are acquired early in language learning, while others are learned subsequently. This hypothesis posits that the natural order of language acquisition occurs independently of intentional teaching, suggesting that educators cannot modify the sequence of grammatical instruction. When learners engage in natural communication tasks, they demonstrate the standard order. However, when individuals participate in activities that necessitate or permit the application of metalinguistic knowledge, a distinct order will arise (Ellis, 1985, p. 262). This hypothesis posits that educators ought to consider specific linguistic structures that are more comprehensible than others. Therefore, the sequence of language structures should facilitate effective and meaningful learning. Educators may start by presenting language lessons or concepts that are straightforward for learners to grasp, subsequently employing scaffolding to introduce more complex ideas.
The natural order hypothesis facilitates a state of relaxation for both educators and students. Educators are relieved from the anxiety of failing in their teaching efforts, while learners benefit from the opportunity to engage with the material at their own pace, free from external pressures. Piaget’s Cognitive-Stage Theory also provides a comprehensive explanation. It is widely explained by Piaget’s Cognitive-Stage Theory too. For Piaget, a stage is a developmental period of time which during the child’s thinking and acting in a variety of situations tend to reflect a particular type of underlying mental structure (Miller, 2011, p. 35). The stages can be understood as sequential levels of adapting and diverse cognitive levels provide varied ways of adjusting to the environment (Anderson, 2015,p. 340). As a result, the natural order theory argues that learners’ developmental psychology is matched with language learning and the ability to comprehend and utilize it effectively.
4, Monitor Hypothesis
This hypothesis elucidates the interplay between the acquisition and learning systems: the acquisition system commences speech, whereas the learning system observes the utterance for errors. Krashen posits that editing may also take place through acquired competence (Ellis, 1985, p. 262); however, while monitoring can enhance the accuracy of an utterance, its application should be constrained (Krashen S. D., 1982, p. 16). He posits that the “monitor” may occasionally serve as an impediment, compelling learners to decelerate and concentrate more on precision rather than fluidity (p. 19).However, he strongly believes that second language learners or performers can only utilize conscious rules if three requirements are met (p. 16). They are as follows:
- Time: learners or performers needs sufficient time to think and use conscious rules effectively. In general, conversation does not allow them to manage to think about and apply the rules.
- Emphasize form: learners or performers should concentrate on the language structures and consider correctness, as there are instances when they must prioritize expressing themselves appropriately within a specific context.
- Know the rule: it may be a very formidable condition. He gives the evidences based on the claims of linguistics that the structure of language is extremely complex.
Moreover, the monitor hypothesis demonstrates the individual differences in “monitor” use among language learners. He categorizes the use of the monitor into three types (Krashen S. D., 1982, p. 18):
Monitor Over-users are those that consistently use the monitor (Krashen S. D., 1982, p. 19). They prioritize precision above fluency. Such learners are categorized as introverts or perfectionists, since they are averse to making errors in their speech. He notes that a deficiency in self-confidence often correlates with excessive reliance on the monitor.
- Monitor Under-users are those who have not engaged with the forms of language use or who choose not to use its formal norms or conscious knowledge, even when circumstances permit it (ibid.). Such learners are categorized as extroverts.
- Most favorable Monitor users are those that use the monitor correctly.
Striking a balance between fostering accuracy and fluency in pupils is a continual challenge for second language educators. The balance will be influenced by several elements, including the learners’ language skill, the language use context, and each learner’s specific goals. This balance is known as communicative competence, which may improve meaningful engagement in the target language, or natural communication, when learners prioritize the messages they communicate and comprehend rather than the patterns of speech. Therefore, it is advisable to use the monitor optimally, and the educator should meticulously organize and arrange classes to provide favorable circumstances for learners to regulate their monitor properly. Subsequently, learners find their educational experience more pleasurable inside a communicative and interactive environment.
5, Input Hypothesis
This hypothesis posits that language acquisition occurs when learners are presented with messages that they can understand, a concept known as comprehensible input (Krashen S. D., Language Acquisition and Language Education: Extensions and Applications, 1989). The Input Hypothesis posits that when input is provided in adequate quality and quantity, it inherently includes the necessary structures for learners (Krashen, 1985, p. 9; Kumaravadivelu, 2006, p. 57). As a result, explicit grammar instruction is not necessary (Krashen S. D., 1989, pp. 9-10). Krashen posits that comprehensible input must be slightly more advanced than the learner’s existing language proficiency, denoted as i + 1, to facilitate ongoing language development (Krashen S. D., 1982, pp. 21-2). This hypothesis underscores the importance of employing the Target Language within the classroom setting. The objective of any language program is to enable students to communicate effectively. Providing ample comprehensible input, particularly when learners lack exposure to the language outside the classroom, enables the teacher to enhance opportunities for language acquisition (Krashen S. D., 1989, p. 14).
Moreover, the input hypothesis requires the suitable and productive tasks for learners to practice and challenge in order to gain more understanding and lead them to the next level of language proficiency (Redfern, 2015, p. 145), in particular speaking competency. The hypothesis implies that certain types of tasks can be sufficient to motivate or demotivate them. Hence, the effective and productive input is a sort of tasks which facilitate the learners to actively engage in the learning process and ultimately attain good outcome.
Nunan (2001, pp. 10-1) submits the components of communicate tasks which contain some forms of input data that might be verbal or non-verbal, and an activity which captivate the learners’ attention to put more effort in order to accomplish objectives or goals of the tasks. Furthermore, the task should establish the friendly environment (setting) which allows both teacher’s and learners actively participate in the task.
In conclusion, effective learning occurs when learners are actively engaged and challenged to learn just beyond the boundary of their comfort zone (i + 1), whilst being given the appropriate level of assistance to meet their needs (Redfern, 2015, p. 3).
