•
Background
•
In 1977, Tracy Terrell developed a language teaching proposal that incorporated the
“naturalistic” principles researchers had identified in studies of second language acquisition.
•
The NA: Proposed by Tracy Terrell & Stephen Krashen
•
The Natural Approach/
The Natural Method (NM)
•
The NM: Gouin and other language teaching reformers focused on the natural principles of
language learning. L. Sauver (1826—1907) used intensive oral interaction in the target language,
employing questions as a way of presenting and eliciting language. This method soon became
referred to as the NM.
•
Time Difference
•
The Natural Approach: 1977
•
The Natural Method: 1901
•
Conform to What
•
The NA: Conforms to the naturalistic principles found in successful second language acquisition
•
The NM: Conform to the principles of naturalistic language learning in young children
•
Focus
•
NA: emphasizes exposure or input, rather practice; optimizing emotional preparedness for
learning; a prolonged period of attention to what the language learners hear before they try to
produce language; and a willingness to use written and other materials as a source of
comprehensible input.
•
NM: emphasizes teacher monologues, direct repetition, and formal questions and answers, and
focus on accurate production of target language sentence
•
Approach
•
Theory of Language
•
Krashen & Terrell see communication as the primary function of language; since NA focuses on
teaching communicative abilities, they consider the NA as an example of a communicative
approach.
•
They criticize other language teaching theories are not based on actual theories of language
acquisition, but theories of something else.
•
Theory of Language
•
In contrast, others criticize that Krashen has no theory of language at all either.
•
Language is viewed as a vehicle for communicating meanings and messages. They state that
acquisition takes place only when people understand messages in the target language. Krashen
refers this with the formula “i+ 1”.
•
Theory of Learning
•
Language acquisition (an unconscious process developed through using language meaningfully)
is different from language learning (consciously learning or discovering rules about a language)
and language acquisition is the only way competence in a second language occurs. (The
acquisition/learning hypothesis)
•
Theory of Learning
•
Conscious learning operates only as a monitor or editor that checks or repairs the output of
what has been acquired. (The monitor hypothesis)
•
Grammatical structures are acquired in a predictable order and it does little good to try to learn
them in another order. (The natural order hypothesis).
•
Theory of Learning
•
People acquire language best from messages that are just slightly beyond their current
competence. (The input hypothesis)
•
The learner's emotional state can act as a filter that impedes or blocks input necessary to
acquisition. (The affective filter hypothesis)
•
Five Hypotheses
•
The Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis
•
The Natural Order Hypothesis
•
The Monitor Hypothesis
•
The Input Hypothesis
•
The Affective Filter Hypothesis
•
The Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis
•
Language Acquisition: It is a process similar, if not identical, to the way children develop ability
in their first language. It is a unconscious process; language acquirers are not usually aware of
the fact that they are acquiring language, but are only aware of the fact that they are using the
language for communication.
•
The result of language acquisition, acquired competence, is of course also unconscious.
•
The Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis
•
Language Learning: It refers to conscious knowledge of a second language, knowing the rules,
being aware of them, and being able to talk about them. In other words, it is a conscious
process.
•
The Natural Order Hypothesis
1. Brown (1973) reported that children acquiring English as a first language tended to acquire certain
grammatical morphemes, or functions words, earlier than others.
2. Dulay and Burt (1974) reported that children acquiring English as a second language also show a
“natural order” for grammatical morphemes, regardless of their first language. The child second
language order of acquisition was different from the first language order of
•
The Natural Order Hypothesis
1. acquisition of their first language order, but different groups of second language acquirers showed
impressive similarities.
2. Kessler and Idar, (1977); Fabris, (1978); Makino, (1980) confirmed Dulay and Burt’s results.
•
The Natural Order Hypothesis
Stages Grammatical Morpheme/Function Words
1.1
ING (progressive)
1.2
PLURAL
1.3
COPULA (“to be”)
2.1
AUXILIARY (progressive, as in “he is
going”)
2.2
ARTICLE (a, the)
3
IRREGULAR PAST
•
The Natural Order Hypothesis
4.1
REGULAR PAST
4.2
III SINGULAR-s
4.3
POSSESSIVE-s
•
Why does irregular past precede regular past and III singular-s precede possessive-s?
•
English morpheme order
•
The Monitor Hypothesis
•
It posits that acquisition “initiates” our utterances in a second language and is responsible for
our fluency. In contrast, learning has only one function—as a monitor, or editor. Learning
comes into play only to make changes in the form of our utterance, after it has been “produced”
by the acquired system.
•
Conscious learning is available only as a “Monitor," which can alter the output of the acquired
system before or after the utterance is
•
The Monitor Hypothesis
•
actually spoken or written. It is the acquired system which initiates normal, fluent speech
utterances.
•
the second language performers can use conscious rules only when the three conditions,
necessary but not sufficient, are met.
a. Time: To think about and use conscious rules effectively, a second language performer needs
to have sufficient time.
b. Focus on form: To use the Monitor effectively,
•
The Monitor Hypothesis
•
the performer must also be focused on form, or thinking about correctness (Dulay and Burt,
1978).
c. Know the rule.
•
The Input Hypothesis
1. The Input Hypothesis relates to acquisition, not learning.
2. We acquire by understand language that contains structure “a little beyond” our current level of
competence ( i + 1). This is done with the help of context or extra-linguistic information.
3. When communication is successful, when the input is understood and there is enough of it, “i + 1” will
be provided automatically.
•
The Input Hypothesis
4. Production ability emerges. It is not taught directly.
•
The Affective Filter Hypothesis
•
It states how affective factors relate to the second language acquisition process. It was first
supported by Dulay and Burt (1977). It can be placed into the three categories:
1. Motivation: Performers with high motivation generally do better in second language acquisition.
2. Self-confidence: Those with self-confidence and a good self-image tend to do better in second
language acquisition.
•
The Affective Filter Hypothesis
3. Anxiety: Low anxiety appears to be conductive to second language acquisition.
•
Design
•
Objectives
•
it is designed to help beginner become intermediates.
•
It is designed to depend on learner needs.
•
First, NA is primarily designed to develop basic communication skills both oral and written.
•
Second, the purpose of a language course will vary according to the needs of the students and
their particular interests (Krashen and Terrell 1983: 65).
•
Objectives
1. Basic personal communication skills: oral (e.g., listening to announcements in public places)
2. Basic personal communication skills: written (e.g., reading and writing personal letters)
3. Academic learning skills: oral (e.g., listening to a lecture)
4. Academic learning skills: written (e.g., taking notes in class.
•
Types of Learning and Teaching Activities
•
At the beginning stage, comprehensible input presenting is the main teaching focus.
•
Charts, pictures, advertisements, and other realia serve as the focal point for questions, and
when the students’ competence permits, talk moves to class members.
•
“Acquisition activities”: those focus on meaningful communication rather than language form
are emphasized.
•
Types of Learning and Teaching Activities
•
Command-based activities: (Total Physical Response), mime, gesture, and context used to elicit
question and answers, (Direct Method). To minimize learner anxiety, and to maximize learner
self-confidence.
•
Learner Roles (Guesser, Immerser)
•
The pre-production stage: to participate in the language activity without having to respond in
the target language
•
The early-production stage: To respond to either-or questions, use single words and short
phrases, and involve themselves in role play and games
•
The speech-emergent phase: To involve themselves in role play and games, contribute personal
information and opinions, and participate in group problem solving.
•
Teacher Roles (Actor, Props User)
1. The primary source of comprehensible input in the target language. “Class time is devoted primarily
to providing input for acquisition.” The primary generator of that input. (center-stage role)
2. S/he creates a classroom atmosphere that is interesting, friendly, and in which there is a low affective
filter for learning
3. S/he must choose and orchestrate a rich mix of classroom activities, involving a variety of group sizes,
content, and contexts.
•
The Role of Instructional Materials
•
Primarily to make classroom activities meaningful by supplying “the extra-linguistic context that
helps the acquirer to understand and thereby to acquire” (Krashen and Terrell 1983: 55).
•
To promote comprehension and communication. Pictures and other visual aids are essential
because they supply the content for communication.
•
Procedure
1. Start with TPR commands
2. Use TPR to teach names of body parts and to introduce numbers/sequence
3. Introduce classroom terms/props into commands
4. Use names of physical characteristics and clothing to identify members of the class by name
5. Use visually, typically magazine pictures, to introduce new vocabulary and to continue with activities
requiring only student names as response
•
Procedure
6. Combine use of pictures with TPR.
7. Combine observations about the pictures with commands and conditionals
8. Using several pictures, ask students to point to the picture being described.
•
The Syllabus
•
a communicative/topical/situational syllabus—basic communication goals (both written and
oral) are achieved mainly through topics and situations; and each topic and situation includes
various language functions that the students will acquire.
•
It is a semantic, or notional syllabus, simply "a series of topics that students will find interesting
and the teacher can discuss in a comprehensible way" (Krashen, 1985:55).
•
The focus of each classroom activity is organized by topic, not grammatical structures.
•
The Syllabus
•
A grammatical syllabus may be used in learning classes where learners are given conscious
knowledge about the target language.
•
Needless to say, the relative weight of acquisition activities is to be over that of learning
activities. Similarly, practice of specific grammatical structures is not focused on in the above
mentioned semantic syllabus.
•
Techniques and Activities
•
Comprehensible input is presented in the target language, using techniques such as TPR, mime
and gesture.
•
Group techniques are similar to Communicative Language Teaching.
•
Learners start to talk when they are ready.
•
Learning/Teaching Activities
•
The 1st stage: Learners remain silent but not inactive—to understand the teacher talk that
focuses on objects in the classroom or on the content of pictures.
•
Students are only expected to respond to teacher commands without having to say anything.
•
The purpose: not to make students perfect but to help them proceed to the next stage.
•
Learning/Teaching Activities
•
The 2nd stage: They feel ready to produce speech, the teacher asks questions and elicit one
word answers—yes/no questions, either-or questions, and wh-questions that require single
word utterances.
•
They are not expected to use a word actively until they have heard it many times. Pictures,
charts, advertisements are utilized to proceed to the third stage
•
Learning/Teaching Activities
•
The 3rd stage: acquisition activities are emphasized (e.g., group work and whole class
discussion).
•
The NA instructor uses techniques that are borrowed from other methods and adapted to meet
the requirements of the NA theory--TPR activities of Asher, Direct Method activities in which
gesture and context are used to elicit questions and answers, and group work activities that are
often used in CLT.
•
Learning/Teaching Activities
•
What makes the NA different is that every specific technique has a theoretical rationale. i.e., the
Natural Approach theory is so strong that within its framework classroom activities can be
accounted for.
•
This feature of the NA makes it superior to other methods like Communicative Language
Teaching which lacks a sound theory of language learning.
•
Teacher Roles (3 crucial roles )
1. the primary source of understandable input—teachers attempt to maintain a constant flow of
comprehensible input. If they maintain students' attention on key lexical items or uses context to help
them, the students will 'naturally' succeed.
2. They create a friendly classroom atmosphere where there is a low affective affective filter.
3. They choose the most effective materials and employs a rich mix of classroom activities.
•
Learner Roles (processor, Acquirers)
•
Processors of comprehensible input—challenged by input that is a little beyond her/his present
level of competence.
•
Expected to be able to assign meaning to this input through dynamic use of context and
extralinguistic information.
•
Acquirers' roles vary according to their stage of linguistic development. Some roles are to make
their own decisions on when to speak, what to speak about, and what linguistic expressions to
use while speaking.
•
Procedure
•
It adopts techniques and activities from different sources but uses them to provide
comprehensible input.
•
Conclusion
•
We are on the eve of a new paradigm shift in foreign language teaching methodology. The
Communicative Approach or 'Preparation Presentation Practice' is no longer a dogmatically
accepted best method. Its impact is about to fade away. Methodologists are in search of a
successor of the Communicative Approach.
•
The NA with its strong learning theory and easily applicable techniques is the strongest nominee
for the most common method of the 21st century.
•
Conclusion
•
Using our reasoning faculty, we can speed up the process of reaching the conclusion that the NA
or comprehension-based methods are more efficient than grammar-based ones.
•
Otherwise, we have to follow the footsteps of old-fashioned English Language Teaching
literature which is preconditioned against the NA. Such a literature will most probably seek the
successor of the Communicative Approach among production-based methods.
•
Conclusion
•
If we are to follow this literature, then we are to accept losing another decade before arriving at
comprehension-based methods.
•
Discussion
•
How to create instrinsic motivation: challenge, fantasy, and curiosity.
•
Challenge depends upon activities that involve uncertain outcomes due to variable levels,
hidden information or randomness.
•
Fantasy should depend upon skills required for the instruction.
•
Curiosity can be aroused when learners believe their knowledge structures are incomplete,
inconsistent, or unparsimonious.
•
Critique of Language Acquisition/learning Hypo.
•
Krashen does not really tell us :
a) what the process of acquisition is. (How does the learner build up a usable model of second language
behaviour from input alone?)
b) why learned information is not accessible in the same way as acquired information
•
the distinction between learned and acquired knowledge is in fact more properly a distinction
between two stages of the learning process.
•
Critique of Natural Order Hypo.
1. It oversimplifies the cognitive processes of learning, and draws too rigid a distinction between
acquisition and learning:
2. It is based mainly on the observation of learners acquiring an L2 that is generally used in the
surrounding environment - that is immigrants to the US learning English. In other situations one may
expect classroom learning, of the conscious kind, to be important.
•
Critique of The Input Hypothesis
1. Muddled definition.
a) He appears sometimes to mean that the input should be written or spoken in such a way that the
language itself is comprehensible to the student—hence he refers to Motherese, caretaker language
and foreigner talk. This kind of speech, he says, is 'roughly tuned' to the learner's language level, and
tends to get more complex as the learner progresses. In this case, it is the language input itself that is
modified.
b) On other occasions, he stresses that the language used must be backed up with a scaffolding of
environmental clues—pictures, gestures, objects, etc., which make the
o
meaning clear. In this case, it is the context, the environment, that is modified.
2. Although most theorists now accept that it’s desirable to offer a far richer range of input, and that
teachers should be spending more time on the receptive skills than has heretofore been the case. But
many feel that to abandon output altogether would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Output of some kind is seen as a necessary phase in language acquisition. There are two kinds of
arguments put forward here :
a) - on the one hand, the teacher needs the output from the student in order to be able to judge the
learner's progress,
o
and adapt material to her needs—this is, as it were, a minimalist argument. It’s only by
correcting your written work, that I can come to some idea of which students need to revise
which grammar points.
b) on the other hand, it could be argued that it’s when the student is called upon to produce language
that he’ll feel a real need to reorganise and elaborate upon his knowledge of the L2 .
•
Critique of The Monitor Hypothesis
1. Some observers have pointed that if the learner is not asked to produce language, the teacher cannot
know what her needs are, and therefore cannot provide appropriate material. So even if we accept K's
argument that only input leads to acquisition, we need output in order to provide the input. Note, in the
experiment reported by Lightbown, the learners were largely responsible for choosing their own
material.
2. Jacqueline Boulouffe and others suggest that the learner needs to produce language in order to learn
it. Boulouffe holds that, if we stick to the input method, the learner will understand the language only at
a superficial level—in
•
particular, she’ll not be able to either understand or to produce language which implicates the
speaker's own judgements, feelings, beliefs, etc.—as expressed through modality. In order to
reach this level of understanding, the learner needs to struggle with the demands imposed by
self-expression. The teacher must force him to produce as well as to understand. Ultimately,
we understand through using language—I do not know what I mean until I've said it?
3. Lydia White criticises the idea that input should be comprehensible. If we make understanding too
easy, through contextualization, the learner will not make the
•
effort necessary to appropriate the language—hence the tendency of learners in immersion
programs to produce a 'classroom pidgin'
•
Critique of The Affective Filter Hypothesis
•
Why is this order
•
Why might the Plural and Possessive be learned before the Third Person? Since all three regular
suffix morphemes of Plural, Possessive and Third Person have exactly the same sound
forms/s/,/z/ and /iz/ and the selection of any of these suffixes are governed by the same sound
rules, the reason for the ordering must be attributable to some factor other than the sound
system.
•
Why might the Present (Progressive) be learned before the Past (Regular or Irregular)?
•
Why might the Past Irregular be learned before the Past Regular?
•
Why might the Auxiliary 'be' be learned in the Regular form before the Contracted form?
•
Drawbacks
•
Lack of form-focused instruction.
•
Lack of corrective feedback.