Input Hypothesis

Time for the second installment of Krashen's hypotheses for language acquisition! Last week I talked about the Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis. If you missed it, you can check it out here, or, you know, go back through your email. :)

Connected to the acquisition hypothesis is the Input Hypothesis. If language is truly acquired through a subconscious process, not learned consciously, as Krashen has found, then how do we facilitate the process of acquisition? The answer is input in the target language, but not just any kind of input--comprehensible input. Language (either speaking or reading) that is able to be understood by those listening.

The "comprehensible" part of comprehensible input is so important. Most people have heard that immersion is the best way to learn a language. "Just go to France! You'll pick it up in no time!" Well...not necessarily. If you have no language background in French and someone starts speaking at you in rapid-fire French, how much of it are you going to understand? Most likely, next to none of it, and not only that, but you will immediately get stressed out and unable to take in anything they're saying (that's called the affective filter...we'll talk about that next week!).

However, if someone started talking to you in French slowly, using gestures and other ways to show what they meant, you would understand and start to learn! For example, I could say, "Je..." (point to myself) "...mange..." (motion like I'm eating) "...une pomme" (act like I'm holding an apple and taking a bite), you would understand that I was saying "I'm eating an apple." It's exactly like how we talk to babies and small children...slowly, repetitively, using gestures, using simple language...except maybe not so much baby voice. :)

The ideal level of input is described by Krashen as i+1, with i being the student's current language ability and +1 being just one step beyond their current linguistic competence. +1 language is not immediately understandable to the student. Examples may be unknown vocabulary, new grammar, or unfamiliar topics. By speaking naturally about interesting topics in class, using a variety of methods to make myself understood, I hopefully hit the i+1 level for all my students for at least part of the period.

How does this hypothesis apply to the classroom?

• Avoid forced output. Making a student talk isn't going to help them learn English any faster, and is just going to stress them out. They just need input--reading and listening. Output will come naturally after enough input--just like with babies!
• Make sure students are comprehending. Even if you think they should understand at the level or way in which you're speaking, if the students don't actually understand it, then it's not comprehensible input and has little value. Perform comprehension checks often to make sure students are understanding.
• Create a community where it's okay to not understand. As much as you can, avoid situations where students understand very little of what is going on (speaking and reading). Praise those who let you know that they don't understand.
• Use differentiated comprehension questions when possible. Know your students' comprehension levels and give them appropriate questions. That will not only be a more accurate indicator of what they actually understood, but will also give them a healthier self-concept when they feel like they know the answers to the questions they get.

I could share so much more here, but for the sake of brevity, I'll leave it at that! Feel free to email me if you want to know more or have any questions. I hope you find this as interesting as I do (or at least a little bit interesting)!