Job Discussion Forums

[Song&Dance]

I recently read a very negative post about Krashen's 2nd language acuquisition theory followed by [I am not bashing Krashen] or something similar.

I did the painstaking and read through all of that contributor's previous posts to try and understand what Krashen ever did to make the poster so anti-Krashen.

I never found the answer to my inquiry but I did discover five prior statement like [I am not anti-Krashen] or [ I am not bashing Krashen]. Me thinks the lady doth protest too much!

In my many years of teaching in China at top tier, second tier, third tier and even fourth tier colleges and universities in China, summer teacher training and Corporate Training for 3 of China's largest IT companies; I have found that Krashen's theory, in conjunction with many other 2nd language acquisition theories, work very well in China.

Many of my Chinese colleagues state that they have read and understand Krashen, (I suspect with Chinese characteristics) but they simply do not know how to convert theory to practical application.

I do have a solid basis to believe that those who bash Krashen fall into one of the following categories:
1. Have not read Krashen
2. Do not understand Krashen
3. Understand Krashen but do not know how to apply his theories
4. Are in a comfort zone and do not wish to be disturbed
5. Believe that the Chinese issued "Expert Certificate" makes them a real expert.

Frankly, implementing 2nd language acquisition theory requires creativity, hard word and a salmon spawning mentality (you must go against the Chinese current with both students and administrators) and it could cost you your job.

There are as many ways to implement 2nd language acquisition theory as there are teachers. There is no one right way. There is no one program that fits all.

Teaching is a fluid profession, constantly changing as we learn more. We should share and learn from each other rather than criticise and attack one another.

No one should take this post personally, it is not meant in that vein. I am attempting to start a productive dialogue on how we can assist each other to switch from English learning to English acquisition and actually contribute, in a positive way, to our students' educational experience.

Your friend and colleague,

[Song&Dance]

There appears to be some confusion about some of Krashen's 2nd language acquisition theories. Some claim that Krashen requires immersion. I have not found this in any of his published writings. Could someone direct me to this?

There also appears to be some confusion about "comprehensible input in a friendly environment."

I will share my understanding and state that my interpretation and implementation works for me, but may not work for anyone else.

"Comprehensible input" has two elements. First it means that whatever the medium of input, be it reading, listening or watching TV or a movie, the acquirer must comprehend the input. Second, the acquirer must be interested in the input. If the acquirer is very interested in the input but can only comprehend a small percentage, there is no acquisition. On the other hand, if the acquirer can comprehend 100% of something boring to tears, there is no acquisition.

I watch Chinese movies because they are so interesting from many perspectives. I do not understand Chinese so the sound is useless and the subtitles are useless. I do acquire Chinese.

"Friendly environment" means a tea house or coffee shop atmosphere. Hard but not impossible to create in a classroom. Have a close look at the picture in the report. The school spent less than 10,000 rmb converting the classroom to a friendly environment at the request of the foreign teacher. It can be done in China. It has been done in China. It will be done more and more when the foreign teachers stop acting like crybabies and start requesting logical and supportable administrative action like real professionals.

The report has broken the ice on this. download it and show it to your admin as proof of what is being done and ask for what you want and need. Try it before claiming that it is impossible.

[eddy-cool]

Personally I feel Krashen (and Chomsky) is but a convenient name to remember in certain discussions; if your opposite number is not familiar with the name and the theories the name stands for then you win the argument...

I didn't need to read Krashen to start teaching in China; when I read some of his writings I realised he was not pioneering new teaching approaches at all. All he was saying was well-known or at least understood by many in the field.

The same is true of 'total immersion', another very popular buzzword with very little originality. The fact that Krashen and TI are so well-known names or concepts in China is a hint that the Chinese don't understand the underlying truths being represented by these names. Hiring a laowai is to a Chines principal the equivalent of implementing 'Total Immersion' in a very, very Chineseenvironment - extremely unconducive to using English efficiently.

Before Noam Chomsky became a household name, humanity had been learning foreign languages for millenia successfully, without modern gadgets and student-centred classroom management. Life was a student's most reliable instructor. These days, students won't make even a token effort if you don't have videos, glossy textbooks with lots of illustrations and electronic dictionaries to boot.

[Song&Dance]

Input
The input hypothesis states that only comprehensible input will result in acquisition of the target language. Krashen says that learners must be exposed to input that is just beyond their current level in order to make progress. This concept is called i+1. If the level of input is at i+1 the learner will make progress. If it is too high, for instance i+7, the learner will be unable to acquire it.

[Song&Dance]

Affect
The affective filter hypothesis asserts that a learner's emotional states act as adjustable filters that freely permit or hinder input necessary to acquisition. He suggests that adolescence and puberty are not good periods for SLA, as this �affective filter� arises out of self-conscious reluctance to reveal oneself and feelings of vulnerability. (Loss of face?)

[Song&Dance]

Acquisition
Learning

implicit, subconscious
explicit, conscious

informal situations
formal situations

uses grammatical 'feel'
uses grammatical rules

depends on attitude
depends on aptitude

stable order of acquisition
simple to complex order of learning

[vikuk]

A lot of folk have problems with educational theory (Krashen et al) because they don't understand theoretical purpose, and how to put it into practice.

1 - theory shouldn't be thought of as a step by step guide regarding the way one should teach. Teaching theory is something to do with putting teaching practice into words - describing a teaching situation in a literal manner so it can be easily recognised by teachers who encounters the same type of situation.
In such circumstances theory can be best described as giving teaching a language � illustrating what goes on, and introducing ideas with regard to what could be the most effective method.

2 - Educational theory is not truly scientific - since education in the form of organising classroom teaching and leaning isn't a standard countable product - but a situation that�s infinitely variable within the countless number of classrooms in which it takes place. Theory is just a tool for reflection - where one can measure up personal classroom experience with those of a published expert.
In such circumstances, when reading theory, such as Krashen's, the Ft may recognise certain situations, and be influenced by certain ideas � taking that which they find useful, and disregarding aspects they find non relevant to their own situations.. It�s only the idiot teacher who tries to adopt theoretical concepts as dogmatic never to be broken rules!!!

3- as teachers we are forced to be educational pragmatists, but we all should have a theory or two about how we can improve our teaching practice.
In Chinese circumstances, where we're not given resources to make serious change, and indeed any effort we make at doing so are so often badly misunderstood by both employer and student � here, putting theory into practice can be a daunting task. But amazingly, in the face of the crud that is so often China EFL (the mills with all their EF's, Astons, Shanes Kid Castle, ect ect) - so many FT's actually do seem to take an interest in their work and even try to improve their method - the discussions at Dave's seem to prove this.
In such circumstances, the clued-up Ft should say thank-god for Mr. Krashen - because love him or hate him he sure makes us think!!!

[Song&Dance]

For those who have never reaLly read Krashen:

http://www.sdkrashen.com/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning/index.html

[un]

In harmony w/Krashenian perspectives

http://www.ialearn.org/ALElements.php

[El Macho]

I'm a big Krashen fan, too.

[vikuk]

[eddy-cool]

Sometimes theory is a world apart from practice. It's fine and dandy to understand Krashen but that doesn't put everyone in a position to actually help students acquire language.

It's come to my attention recently that most FT's are unable to translate theory into useful actions. In oral classes they do little that would force the student to move from their present status to a zone in which they have to juggle new language or discover new language territory.

In exams we held recently I noticed my FT colleagues did little else but to prompt their own students with key words, key phrases and structures which they had practised with them in class for the past 4 to 6 weeks. The result was that nearly all kids answered in monosyllables seldom venturing beyond 'yes' or 'no' or a single word. For instance, an FT examiner might ask,
'Bob, what's your favourite food?'
To which Bob might answer, 'blue.'
- Examiner: 'Blue? Blue food?'
- Student: 'Yes.'

This scenario reminded me much of the teaching style of Chinese English teachers, and believe me, one of the teachers I include in my criticism was working in a north Chinese kindergarten invested by a British education group that prides itself on using Montessori approaches. (Our students were aged from 10 to 15).

That colleague once lamented I was using 'too complex and new sentence structures in my questions to the students'.

But nothing I said to my students was totally out of the blue; I merely refused to ask the same inane questions the textbooks had prepared the students for.
I do take a wholly different way in tests, varying my questions to elicit whole sentences (who gets that from their learners?), and often I want them to practise grammar structures (tenses, plurals etc.).

Such is life after all - language is not something you can memorise before you use it in real life situations. It is spontaneous, creative and new every time two people communicate with each other. An element of surprise or novelty is natural to any meaningful dialogue.

May more FT's - and all Chinese English teachers! - understand this!

[vikuk]

[un]

Eddy-Cool

[un]

More on Constructivism...
Krashen-related, eh?

When students have computer access in an EFL classroom, rather than have a teacher-centered classroom/INPUT, it can lower the Affective Filter.

BTW...Lozanov/Suggestopedia, going back to early 1970s, have emphasized the power of "suggestion" in lowering the Affective Filter...although they didn't use that phrase.

NOTE the last sentence BELOW...and the teacher's role in the electronic learning environment...all can be linked w/movie scenes/cartoons etc.