KRASHEN’S THEORY

OF SECOND-
LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION
 5 Hypotheses

1. Acquisition/learning
2. Natural order
3. Monitor
4. Affective filter
5. Input
 Affective Filter
 refers to the emotional
factors that allow or block
access to language
 it is influenced by
learner’s motivation , self-
confidence, and anxiety
The higher the level of
positive motivation and
self-confidence and the
lower the level of
anxiety, the less the
affective filter is
activated.
According to Krashen,
an activated affective
filter diminishes the ELLs’
abilities to process
English input and
produce English output
Language learning is more
likely to occur in positive
environments with
appropriately challenging
materials and where
mistakes are encouraged
as a part of the learning
process.
Ms. Pat Kelley, an
experienced in-service
teacher asked? “Why
won’t my English Language
Learners volunteer more in
class?
An ELL’s nonparticipation is
because of the ELL’s affective
filter has been activated.
1. Fear of making mistakes
2. Embarrassment caused by
limited English proficiency.
3. Nervousness about speaking
4. Other negative emotions
that activated their affective
filter
When the filter is activated,
even comprehensible input is
blocked and the ELL has
difficulty comprehending as well
as expressing language
Example: Math phobia,
activation of affective filter
when taking a timed writing test
How to engaged ELLs in
carefully-planned activities?
1. small-group activities/work
2. One-on-one conversation
with ELLs
3. Interview
 Input Hypotheses
 Krashen hypothesized that
language is acquired
through on-going exposure
to input that is
comprehensible and always
just beyond the current
ability of the ELL
comprehensible
input + 1, commonly
referred to as simply i
+1
Krashen proposes
that speaking and
writing are outcomes
of language
acquisition
The importance of
comprehensible input
has been accepted by
most second-language
researchers and
educators
It is important that input is
sufficiently sophisticated to
ensure that ELLs continue to
develop academic-
language proficiency; overly
simplified input may result in
underdeveloped language,
in which correct form is not
acquired
When uncorrected errors
become practiced and
ingrained, they become
extremely resistant to change
which is known as fossilization
of errors.
 Providing
Comprehensible Input
 one of the easiest ways in
which teachers can provide
comprehensible input and
maintain high academic
standards is to provide
context for instruction
 The model of context
embedded versus context-
reduced language of
Cummins, 2000 provides a
framework for embedding
context into classroom
instruction
Cummins (2000) explained that
language constructions such as
casual conversations and rote
tasks are cognitively
undemanding, whereas other
constructions, such as
participating in academic
conversations or writing
academic papers, are
cognitively demanding.
Cummins theorized that context
improved the comprehensibility
of even cognitively demanding
tasks. The context-embedded
versus context-reduced
framework is depicted in Model
2.1
Context-Embedded Versus Context-Reduced
Language (Cummins Quadrant)

Cognitively Undemanding (BICS)

A C
Art,

B D

Cognitively Demanding (CALP)

Cognitively undemanding tasks
(Quadrants A and C) are those
tasks for which ELLs have
developed language skills and
can apply these skills with near
automaticity (without thinking).
The activities and tasks within
this quadrants requires relatively
little cognitive attention.
Examples of tasks in Quadrant A
include engaging in day-to-day
conversation, such as exchanges
between students in the hallway
(e.g., the conversation of Katy, Cha,
Juan, and Magaly near their locker),
or a casual exchange about a
known topic between a teacher and
student (such as a conversation
between an ELL football player and
a teacher who attends the football
games).
Quadrant C consists of tasks such as
copying notes from the whiteboard
or completing fill-in-the-blank work
sheets (Cummins, 2000). Although
little context is provided for these
tasks, the tasks themselves do not
require substantive cognitive
attention on the part of ELLs.
Quadrants B and D include tasks and
activities that place a high cognitive
demand on ELLs. An example of tasks in
Quadrant B is participating in academic
conversations within the classroom – the
activity is cognitively demanding, yet the
responses of others in the discussion provide
contextual clues.
Example of Quadrant D task is independently
completing an essay about an academic
topic without scaffolds, such as graphic
organizers, multiple opportunities to draft
and revise, and conference with peers and
the teacher.
Teachers can adjust instruction to provide
context for the most challenging academic
tasks, such as writing an essay, writing geometry
proofs, solving word problems for probability,
analyzing poetry, or discussing cause and effect
in history.
One of the best ways teachers can begin to
provide context is to plan instructional units
around the enduring understanding and
essential questions of the content area.
Teachers provide context-embedded
instruction by activating student schema,
building relationships between student
knowledge and new concepts, and making
apparent the relationship between concepts.
Other common ways
in which content-area
teachers provide
context and
comprehensible input
include the following:
Adjusting the rate and clarity of speech

 teacher should be aware of their tempo

and pronunciation
 when teachers are unaware of their rate of
speech, ELLs will hear speech that is too
rapid, and sounds will be blurred
 it is not suggested that teachers speak with
exaggerated slowness or increase their
volume, which can be equally disconcerting
to ELLs
 Words and constructions
 new words that students need
to know should be introduced,
written, and paraphrased
often.
 Teachers should be aware of the
vocabulary and constructions
they use while introducing and
explaining concepts.
 Rhythm of the lesson
 teachers must provide time to
check for understanding and
allow students to make
connection
 Embed context into
instruction
 teachers can build schema through
teaching for enduring understanding
focusing instruction with essential
questions and accompanying lectures
with props, visuals and video
 teachers should include visual cues in
the form of pictures, diagrams, models,
videos, and PowerPoint and provide
time to process both content and
language