Krashen
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Krashen

el

  • 11,388 reproducciones

 

Estadísticas

reproducciones

reproducciones totales
11,388
reproducciones en SlideShare
11,388
reproducciones incrustadas
0

Actions

Me gusta
1
Descargas
398
Comentarios
1

0 insertados 0

No embeds

Accesibilidad

Categorias

Detalles de carga

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Derechos de uso

© Todos los derechos reservados

Report content

Marcada como inapropiada Marcar como inapropiada
Marcar como inapropiada

Seleccione la razón para marcar esta presentación como inapropiada.

Cancelar
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    ¿Está seguro?
    Tu mensaje aparecerá aquí
    Processing...
  • Informative
    ¿Está seguro?
    Tu mensaje aparecerá aquí
    Processing...
Publicar comentario
Edite su comentario

Krashen Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Krashen
    Stephen Krashen: specialises in 2nd language acquisition & development – non- English & bilingual
  • 2. Theory of Language
    Reject grammar being central part of lang – in fact gramm structure not require explicit analysis/explanation by lang teacher, learner or teaching materials.
    Communication as main function: eg of communicative approach
    No emphasis on ‘theory of language’ at all – some say there is none – such as Gregg,1984.
    Main focus vocabulary – lexicon – used to send messages – grammar is a by-product
    Although they say they it is ‘communicative’, similar to audiolinguists in that they see learning occurring in stages.
  • 3. Led to collaboration Krashen& Terrell (Tracy, Spanish teacher in California -1977; 1982 – ‘The Natural Approach’).
    Wanted language to be learned along more naturalistic principles of langacqn. Using Krashen’s theories, ‘The Natural Approach’ published in 1983 – langacqn – Krashen, procedures – Terrell.
    Emphasis is on:
    exposure/input not practice
    making ss emotionally prepared to learn
    allowing ss to listen before production
    need to use written & other sources for input
  • 4. 5 main hypotheses
    acquisition-learning
    monitor
    natural order
    input
    affective filter
  • 5. Acquisition learning - 2 independent systems of language: acquired & learned.
  • 6. Monitor
    Relationship between these 2 aspects of a learner.
    Monitor part of the learner corrects errors or makes speech more acceptable.
    Can only happen if the learner has enough time to think, if they focus on what is correct and if the rule is known to them.
  • 7. Natural Order
    Research findings by Dulay & Burt, 1974; Fathman, 1975; Makino, 1980 show grammar structures seem to be acquired in a ‘natural order’.
    So some structures are acquired early & some late. Findings show that the learner’s L1, age, background or how they learned the language make no difference to this.
    However, according to Krashen, syllabuses should not be designed in a manner which takes this order into account. In fact, it should not be this way at all.
  • 8. Input
    How he tries to explain how the learner acquires the new language.
    Learner acquires language in this way, not learns it
    Input needs to be slightly higher than the learner’s level
    So natural communicative input is essential – ‘comprehensible ‘ input -> with this go 2 further hypotheses: 1) speaking is a result of acquisition & NOT its
    cause
    2) if input is understood, and there is enough
    of it, the necessary grammar is
    automatically provided
     (Krashen, 1985, p2)
  • 9. Affective Filter
    ‘affective variables’ play a role in 2ndlangacqn
    Motivation, self-confidence & anxiety – affects the mental block or ‘willingness’ of the acqn- impede langacqn
  • 10. Evidence for Input hypothesis: (Krashen, 1985a)
    People speak to children acquiring 1stlang in certain ways
    People speak to L2 learners in certain ways
    L2 learners often go through an early Silent Period
    Difference in langacqn success reflected in younger/older learners from comprehensible input
    The more comprehensible input, more L2 proficiency
    Opposite goes for lack of comp. input
    Teaching methods are dependent on comprehensible input
    Immersion teaching works as the input is comprehensible
    For bilingual programs to be successful, comp. input is nec.
  • 11. 5 hypotheses have implications for lang teaching:
    Present as much comprehensible input as poss
    Things that help comprehension are NB – such as pics/realia- exposure to wider lexicon
    Focus should be on reading & listening – speaking comes later when ss ready
    For a lower filter to work, class needs to be relaxed & ss should focus on meaningful communication
  • 12. Syllabus
    See course organisation from 2 perspectives:
    1)Some general goals of most courses – 4 areas:
    basic personal communication skills: oral e.g. listening to announcements in public spaces
    basic personal communication skills: written eg reading & writing personal letters
    Academic learning skills: oral eg. Listening to a lecture
    Academic learning skills: written eg taking notes in class
  • 13. But ‘Natural Approach’ focuses mainly on basic communication skills.
    2nd perspective is that “ the purpose of a language course will vary according to needs of the students and their particular interests” – Krashen & Terrell 1983:65.
  • 14. BUT – how do you do this for all the ss? Needs differ – so list of topics understood as suggestions not set.
  • 15. Types of learning & teaching activities:
    Focus on comprehensible input – teacher talk focuses on things in classroom & on pics & ss don’t need to say anything till feel ready – less stress ( filter) , but do need to reply to T’s commands & qns in other ways.
    T talks slowly & clearly
    Asks qns – 1 word answers
    Charts/ pics/maps/ realia focal point for qns, then when ss able, talk about other ss
    Pair/group, followed by whole class activities
    Techniques often borrowed from other methods & adapted to suit their needs: such as Command-based Act’s from Total Physical Response; Direct Method – mime, gesture, context; CLT – group-work
  • 16. Nothing really new, but the way they use them & the COMPREHENSIBLE INPUT, classroom env. that helps with learner anxiety and helps to increase learner confidence.
  • 17. Learner roles:
    Learners trying to ‘acquire’ lang,not learn it in usual way. Slightly more difficult input is given than at level, but by context & extralinguistic info, can understand.
    Learner’s roles change depending on level and a major aspect is the learner deciding when to speak, what to speak about & what lang to use when speaking.
    3 phases: 1) pre-production: no response but participate by
    egpointing
    2) early-production: either/or qns, single words,
    short phrases, fill in charts, use fixed
    conversational patterns eg ‘How are you?’
    3) speech-emergent: role-play, games, personal
    info, opinions, group problem solving
    ( Krashen & Terrell, 1983:76)
  • 18. Learners have 4 responsibilities:
    Give info on their goals so that topics & situations can be comp. input
    Take an active role in comp. input.: learn & use conversational man. techniques
    Decide when to start using speech & what grade to use
    Where learning exercises such as grammar are a part of program, decide with teacher how much time to spend on them & try to do & check by themselves.
    PROBLEM – Ls need to comm. with other Ls, so may not get good comp.input slightly above their level – they (K&T) are aware of this, but give no solutions.
     
  • 19. Teacher Roles:
    3 main roles
    Main source of comprehensible input – constant flow of langnec plus non-linguistic clues to meaning – so very teacher-centred
    Atmosphere – friendly, interesting, allowing a low affective filter. This is achieved through not expecting production of speech, int topics & not correcting errors
    Materials need to be of a high standard, very varied & interesting, based not just on what T thinks is nec, but also on ss needs & interests.
  • 20. Materials
    Primary goal of materials to make classroom activities as meaningful as possible by giving “the extralinguistic context that helps the acquirer to understand and thereby to acquire” (Krashen & Terrell, 1983:55).
    Thus REALIA are of paramount NB, and not textbooks.
    So pictures, visual aids, schedules, brochures, ads, maps, simple books, games. Thus a lot of work for the teacher!!
  • 21. Dialogues
    Pairwork interviews with personal info
    Personal charts & tables
    Preference ranking – opinion polls
    Giving personal info about self
    Using imagination
    Problem-solving activities
    Games
    Content activities such as academic subject matter
  • 22. Lev SemenovichVygotsky (1896-1934) University of Moscow- teacher of literature but led to developmental psychology, education and psychopathology.
    influence on Krashen’s second language acquisition theory – application of their theories to second language teaching produces similarities.
  • 23. Krashen'sinput hypothesis similar toVygotsky's concept of zone of proximal development. According to the input hypothesis, language acquisition takes place during human interaction in an environment of the foreign language when the learner receives language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her current stage of linguistic competence.
    For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then maximum acquisition takes place when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i + 1'.
    Krashen'sacquisition-learning hypothesis - influenced by Vygotsky.
  • 24. Vygotsky speaks of internalization of language, Krashen uses the term language acquisition, both based on a common assumption: interaction.
    Lang acq defined by Krashen & NB in achieving proficiency is parallel of Vygotsky's view of cognitive development of the person's social history and being a product of it.
  • 25. Lots of opposition to these ideas
    Krashen under pressure from bilingualists – bilingual teaching following his approach is considered by many to be controversial.
    Other linguists, such as Michael Long, do not agree with Krashen that language acquired through acqn & not learning is better.
    Reasons…formal teaching seems to be better for the learner in the long run.
    Although through formal instruction, Ls seem to make more errors initially, they do get better.
    For naturalistic learners, these errors are still evident much later on.
  • 26. As to the question of which type allows you to learn a language faster, hhhmmmm?
    Does a person who received formal instruction in a language go further in the long run ?? Long feels the answer is yes (1987).