Krashen and his ideas

[Ever Student]

Hi,
Did Krashen believe that 'output' itself generated 'input'? Or such an argument claimed by Swain and Lapkin?

 

[Raymott]

Hi,
Did Krashen believe that 'output' itself generated 'input'? Or such an argument claimed by Swain and Lapkin?

Krashen's hypothesis was about Comprehensive Input. It was Swain who developed the Comprehensible Output Hypothesis.

She developed this after studying Canadian students who studied in "immersion" studies in French, but were able to respond in either French or English. She found that those who responded always in English did not gain productive fluency in French. Therefore Input alone (as per Krashen) could not be sustained as a valid and complete scientific theory for Second Language Acquisition.

There have also been convincing arguments against the other components of Krashen's Monitor Model.

 

[Ever Student]

Thanks for clarifying this qiestion.

 

[orangutan]

I have recently found some interesting discussions of Krashen's work, for example a not terribly favourable one here:

Krashen's Theory of Second Language Acquisition by Vivian Cook

I would be interested to hear any further comments, as there are people around here who know a lot more about these things than I do.

 

[Frank Antonson]

Krashen's distinction between "acquisition" and "learning" I find weak.

I don't like the term "acquisition" for what he means.

 

[Frank Antonson]

Also, "affective filter" brings "affection" to mind, and he really means "dissaffection".

 

[Raymott]

Also, "affective filter" brings "affection" to mind, and he really means "dissaffection".

I'd defend him on this count.
"Affective" is simply the adjective for "affect", another word for mood. For example "affective disorders" include both depression and mania. Having a persistently elevated affect is nothing to be dissatisfied about. An "affective filter" just means that there is a filter which can block learning dependent on the learner's affect.
It's a neutral term which covers the whole spectrum - like, say, 'physical', which can be applied to physical fitness or physical illness.
'Affective' is used in this way more often in psychology/medicine than in education.

I agree with you about the problems of the learning/acquisition distinction and the lack of empirical evidence for it.

 

[mayita1usa]

One thing you CAN say for Krashen is that he certainly provided ample fodder for research and debate, whether or not his theories all hold up in the end.

Of his five main hypotheses, I can say at this point that I stand by all of them to a point, but with adaptations and reservations:

- Natural Order: Has anyone ever really proven this? On the other hand, there must be a reason that my students, even after many years of study and harassment, still don't remember to put the -s on the end of their 3rd-person singular verbs!

- Acquisition/Learning: In fact, I do agree with this distinction; what I don't agree with is that they are mutually exclusive. I think that adults, in particular, use both "aquisition" (by whatever name you wish) and "learning" to process and ultimately acquire new language, whether L1 or L2, L3, etc.

- Monitor: Krashen makes this sound like a bad thing, but this awareness is how both adults and children perfect their ability to use languages. L2 learners (especially adults) just use it more!

- Input: Swain had the critique of this one right.

- Affective Filter: I have lots of personal and personally acquired anedotal evidence to support this one!

;-) There's my 2 cents, for what it's worth nowadays!

 

[Tdol]

Some have an issue with his views on bilingual education about how scientific or academic the research he uses to back his theories really is.

 

[Ever Student]

Krashen's distinction between "acquisition" and "learning" I find weak.

I don't like the term "acquisition" for what he means.

Would you please give an explanation in a logical analysis that why "acquision" is not useful term as Krashen called it?