Krashen's Monitor Model: 1982 SLA Theory that was inspired by Chomsky. Consists of five interrela...

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Krashen's Monitor Model: 1982 SLA Theory that was inspired by Chomsky. Consists of five interrelated hypotheses. by Mind Map: Krashen's Monitor Model: 1982 SLA Theory that was inspired by Chomsky. Consists of five interrelated hypotheses.

1. Acquisition Learning Hypothesis: States that we acquire a new language subconsciously (Ex: Going to the grocery store in a foreign country and the possibility of acquiring new vocabulary or syntactic structures during the process of trying to understand what the clerk is saying)

1.1. Acquisition allows us to speak and understand, read and write in a language. While learning allows us to talk about concepts of the language.

1.1.1. Learning is often associated with classroom instruction and is usually tested. Many students who take foreign language courses, and do well, do not really acquire the language as they are mainly tested on grammar and vocabulary. Krashen believes that acquisition accounts for almost all of our language development and that learning plays a minimal role.

1.1.1.1. LAD: Language Acquisition Device that both children and adults possess; this device enables them to learn additional languages.

2. Krashen’s second hypothesis claims that language is acquired in a natural order. This is evident in the fact that grammatical morphemes are picked up in a certain order, as well as questions and negation.

2.1. Natural Order applies to language that is acquired, not language that is learned. Students may be asked to learn aspects of a language before they are ready to acquire them. The result may be good performance of the items on a test but inability to use the same items in a natural setting.(Student performance exceeds competence)

2.1.1. Krashen points out that all learners of a particular language, such as English, seem to acquire the language in the same order no matter what their first language is.

3. Monitor Hypothesis: helps explain the difference between Acquisition and Learning. While Acquisition results in the phonology, vocabulary, and syntax we can draw on to produce utterances in a new language; learning provides us with the rules we can use to monitor our output as we speak or write.

3.1. The Monitor acts as an editor, checking what we produce. It operates best when we have time, when we focus on grammatical form and when we know the rules.-Monitoring is best helpful if it is not over or under-used. One must find a perfect balance between the two.

3.1.1. Note that while using Monitoring during speaking, one must sacrifice meaning for accuracy. This is due to the fact that a person cannot concentrate on the form and the meaning simultaneously. On the other hand, Monitoring is useful during the editing stage of writing. This is because a writer has time to focus on the form,rather than the meaning.

3.1.1.1. Teachers can help students become optimal monitor users, however, they should avoid error correction. Krashen claims that error correcting in learning situations may allow students to modify their knowledge of learned rules, but it will have no effect on their acquired language. Since the monitor can only be accessed under certain conditions, error correction has limited value. Learning, according to Krashen, has no effect on basic language competence.

4. Input Hypothesis: this is the key to Krashen’s theory of language acquisition. He claims that people acquire languages in only one way-through written or oral messages that they understand. He also asserts that these messages provide comprehensible input.

4.1. In order for acquisition to take place, learners must receive input that is slightly beyond their current ability level. Krashen indicates this at i+1 (input plus one). If the input contains no structures beyond current competence (i+0), no acquisition takes place. If the input is too far beyond a person’s current competence (i+10), no acquisition takes place.

4.1.1. Comprehensible input is the source of all acquired language, according to Krashen. Only input leads to acquisition, so students do not necessarily have to produce language in order to acquire it. Output, such as speaking and writing, leads to cognitive development and at times comprehensible input needed for acquisition.

4.2. Simplified Input:Hatch (1983) suggests that the kind of input that leads to language development is simplified input. This includes caregiver talk, teacher talk and talk to nonnative speakers.

4.2.1. -Some characteristics of Simplified Talk include: fewer reduced vowels and contractions, slower speech rate, longer pauses, less slang, vocabulary characterized by more high-frequency items, fewer idioms, fewer pronouns, shorter sentences (with more repetitions and restatements), more requests for clarification, fewer interruptions and the use of gestures and pictures.

4.2.1.1. -Problems: 1)Simplified input may not contain any new language structures or items. This contradicts Krashen’s claim that we acquire language when we receive input that contains language slightly beyond our current level of competence.

4.2.1.1.1. 2)This may result in unnatural language with short sentences and short, everyday words. Language that is not natural is more difficult to acquire since it does not follow predictable language patterns. Additionally, texts with short sentences and words do not prepare students for the academic language in school textbooks.

5. Affective Filter Hypothesis: explains the role of affective factors in the process of language acquisition.

5.1. Affective Factors such as anxiety or boredom may serve as a filter that blocks input. When the filter is up, input can't reach those parts of the brain (the LAD) where acquisition occurs. Many language learners realize that the reason they have trouble is because they are nervous or embarrassed and simply can't concentrate. Lack of desire to learn can also clog the affective filter. In other words, the affective filter can prevent a person from getting more comprehensible input.

5.1.1. Positive affective filters such as high interest or motivation can help keep the filter down.

5.1.1.1. This does not apply to a person's output, only the ability to acquire language. So, Krashen is only referring to an affective factors that block input.

6. Schumann's Acculturation Model: (1978) Claimed that acquiring a new language is part of a more general process of acculturation. Language acquisition can best be understood by looking at what happens when people from one cultural group are transplanted into a new setting. This theory is based on studies of individuals acquiring a second language.

6.1. Focuses on sociocultural factors that act on the language learner.This theory does not discuss any internal cognitive processing that might take place.

6.1.1. Hypothesis that the greater the social distance between two cultures, the greater the difficulty the learner will have in learning the second language. The smaller the social distance (the greater the social solidarity between the two cultures), the better will be the language learning situation. There are 8 factors that influence social distance.

6.2. Social Dominance: Power relationships between two groups. Greatest when one group dominates the other. Diminishes if the two groups have roughly equal power in society.

6.2.1. Integration Pattern: Social distance is greatest when there is a pattern of limited integration between the two cultures, and it decreases when there is a greater integration

6.2.1.1. Enclosure: Increased social distance when the learner group is self-sufficient and doesn't need to interact with members of the target culture in daily activities. Social distance decreases when the enclosure is lower.

6.2.1.1.1. Cohesiveness: Increased when the learner group is tight-knit and social distance is reduced when the learner group is less united.

6.3. Psychological Distance is another factor that can be used to predict the degree of language acquisition.

6.3.1. Motivation: Those with a high motivation to learn the language are more likely to learn the language than those with low motivation.

6.3.1.1. Attitude: Those wit a positive attitude toward the language and culture are more likely to learn the language than those with a negative one.

6.3.1.1.1. Culture Shock: When a newcomer experiences culture shock, he experiences more difficulty in learning the new language.

6.4. It is important to note that acculturation is separate from assimilation. A person can take on a new culture without giving up their primary culture. This usually results in bilingualism and biculturalism, which is awesome!

6.4.1. Teachers are encouraged to create a classroom environment in which students can interact with and develop positive attitudes toward speakers of the target language.

6.5. Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) object to Schumann's Theory by stating that this theory may not be explicably successful because it ignores linguistic and cognitive variables. It may due to this reason that Schumann's theory has not led to specific methods of second language teaching.

6.6. Schumann's Theory compliments Krashen's Monitor Model. Schumann focuses on external, social factors that lead to SLA, while Krashen explains the internal, psychological process that results in acquisition.

6.6.1. Krashen (1982) comments that Schumann's acculturation hypothesis is "easily expressible in terms of comprehensible input and low filter lever. Acculturation can be viewed as a means of gaining comprehensible input and lowering the filter". He believes that with good teaching, a student can acquire a foreign language in a school setting without ever traveling to another country.

7. Output is just as important as input. Ellis (1990) refers to theories such as Krashen's as reception-based. He classifies theories that focus on output as production-based.

7.1. Johnson (1995) claims that reception-based theories hold that interaction contributes to SLA via learners' reception and comprehension of the second language, but production-based theories credit this process to learners' attempts as actually producing the language.

7.1.1. Long (1983) developed the interaction hypothesis, a reception based theory of SLA. Long claims that learners make conversational adjustments as they interact with others, and these adjustments help make the input comprehensible.

7.1.1.1. Swain (1985) argues that language learners need the opportunity for output. She proposes that SLA depends on output as well as input.

7.1.1.1.1. Van Lier (1988) developed a model of SLA that includes emphasis on both input and output. Van Lier claims that certain conditions are necessary for certain outcomes. He also claims that that the ability to use language creatively is a measure of proficiency.