Language Acquisition vs. Language Learning

Language Acquisition
vs.
Language Learning
Jason Fritze - Nashville, TN

www.comprehensibleinput.com
jasonfritze@mac.com
A moment for
reflection
 How do you view your role as
a teacher?
 What do you consider the role
of the student?
 What informs your
perspective?
What is the big picture?
How do we acquire language?
HOW and WHY have
languages been taught
in school?
How do we acquire language?
Dr. Stephen Krashen says that
we acquire language in only
one way…
by understanding messages
 comprehensible input
Input Hypothesis (CI)
 Humans acquire language in only one way - by
understanding messages or by receiving
"comprehensible input”
 CI = i + 1
Language Acquisition
 Similarities & differences between

first and second language
acquisition
 L1
 L2
 SLA
Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses: the
Monitor Model
 Acquisition - Learning Distinction
 Natural Order Hypothesis
 Monitor Hypothesis
 Input Hypothesis
 Affective Filter
Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses
Acquisition
leads to spontaneous,
unplanned communication.
Acquisition vs. Learning
 Implicit  Explicit
 Subconscious  Conscious
 Informal situations  Formal situations
 Uses grammatical feel  Uses grammatical
 Depends on attitude rules
  Depends on aptitude
Stable order of
acquisition  Simple to complex
PAIDEIA philosophy
The 3 columns of
instruction
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
QuickTime™ and a
QuickTime™ and a
are needed to see this picture. are needed to see this picture. are needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and a
QuickTime™ and a QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.
are needed to see this picture. are needed to see this picture.

Natural Order Hypothesis
 We acquire the rules of language in a
predictable order
 We do not yet know the exact order of
language acquisition
 Implications for grammar syllabus
instruction…

Monitor Hypothesis
 Conscious learning ... can only
be used as a Monitor or an
editor (Krashen & Terrell 1983)
Input Hypothesis (CI)
 Humans acquire language in only
one way - by understanding
messages or by receiving
"comprehensible input”
 CI = i + 1
Providing Input for
Acquisition
 In classrooms we can provide input

that is optimal for language acquisition
 Focus on the message / not the form
 Interesting topic (Intake)

Evidence for the Input
Hypothesis
(chiefly Krashen 1985)
 We speak to children acquiring their
first language in special ways
 We speak to L2 learners in special
ways
 L2 learners often go through an
initial Silent Period
 Comparative success of younger and
older learners reflects provision of
CI
Hypothesis
(chiefly Krashen 1985)
 More comprehensible input

greater L2 proficiency
 Lack of CI delays language
acquisition
 Immersion teaching is successful
because it provides CI
 Bilingual programs succeed to the
extent they provide CI
Hypothesis
According to Stephen Krashen:
“teaching methods work

according to the extent
that they
use comprehensible input”
I would add “work” for
acquisition
How can we encourage
subconscious acquisition?
We must devote our major

pedagogical efforts to encouraging
language acquisition.
Acquisition or Learning?
1. repetition of sentences in a dialogue
2. reading a story aloud followed by questions
3. students exchanging views about their
favorite music
4. students listening to grammatical
explanation
5. studying a poem together
6. learning lists of vocabulary with
their translation
7. listening to how an activity should be
done and then carrying it out
8. Role play - students act out going by train
Optimal Input for
Acquisition
 Comprehensible
 Interesting and Relevant
 Not grammatically sequenced
 Sufficientquantity
 Context for messages
Signal meaning visually
 Gesture or act out meaning of words
 Use props
 Draw or show other visuals
The Affective Filter
How do we lower the affective filter?

 Interesting topic (Comprehensible)
 Student should “forget” that the message
is encoded in another language
 Not insisting on too-early production
(before the student is ready)
How do we raise the affective filter?
 Pushing students to speak

before they are ready
 INCOMPREHNSIBLE INPUT
 Uninteresting message
 Error correction
Errors in the target language
 Errors are inevitable
 Errors are plentiful in the early stages
 EC puts students immediately on the
defensive
 EC encourages a strategy in which the
student will …
 try to avoid mistakes & difficult constructions
 and focus less on meaning and more on form
 Errors are actually “interlanguage”

INTERlanguage
Selinker (1974) coined the term
INTERLANGUAGE
“the language of the learner”

INTERlanguage
an individual language system created by
second language learners
resulting from 5 cognitive processes:
Native language interference
Effects of instruction
INTERLANGUAGE Overgeneralization of rules
L2 learning strategies
L2 communication strategies
Error correction is NOT the
basic mechanism for
improving second language
performance.
 A safe procedure is simply to

eliminate error correction entirely in
communicative-type activities
“We can prepare them for the certainty
that they will not be able to find the
right word, that they will not be able
to understand everything, and we can
help insure that they will continue to
obtain comprehensible input.”
-Krashen
Types of errors
 Strong errors - interfere with meaning
 Weak errors - poor grammar usage
but doesn’t affect meaning
Long’s Interaction Hypothesis
1983
 Input can be made comprehensible in

three ways
 Simplifying the input (using familiar
structures and vocabulary)
 Using linguistic and extralinguistic features
(background knowledge, gestures…)
 Modifying the interactional structure of the
conversation - negatiation of meaning
Long’s Interaction Hypothesis
 Students and teachers make input more
comprehensible by negotiating meaning
 Students need to ask more questions to
negotiate meaning and negotiate the type
of input they receive in order to acquire
language
 Students who acquire best negotiate most
Negotiating Meaning
Both parties in the teacher-student and

student-student interaction must seek
clarification, check comprehension and
request confirmation that they have
understood or are being understood by
the other.
After two years of instruction
the student who is willing to
participate in a conversation
with a speaker of the language
is rare!
Solution? -Make them

conversationally competent
By giving them the means of
managing conversations, we
can help them participate in
conversations despite their
inadequacies.
Devices to control the quantity
and quality of INPUT
 Asking the native speaker for help
 Verbal and non verbal cues:
 Uh, yeah, I mean …
 Nodding appropriately, eye gaze, behavior
 Changing the subject to something easier

to understand
Input Processing
Instruction
Input Processing
INPUT
(simplified and tailored to the learner’s level)
INTAKE
(a filtered, processed version of the input)
Professional
Literature
and Research
Standards for Foreign
Language Learning S
 COMMUNICATION
 CULTURES
 CONNECTIONS
 COMPARISONS
 COMMUNITIES
From Standards for Foreign Language Learning:

Preparing for the 21st Century
COMMUNICATION
 Standard 1.1 (interpersonal): Students engage in
conversations, provide and obtain information,
express feelings and emotions, and exchange
opinions.
 Standard 1.2 (interpretive): Students understand
and interpret written and spoken language on a
variety of topics.
 Standard 1.3 (presentational): Students present
information, concepts, and ideas to an audience of
listeners or readers on a wide variety of topics.
CULTURES
 Standard 2.1 - Students demonstrate an
understanding of the relationship between
the practices and the perspectives of the
cultures studied.
 Standard 2.2 - Students demonstrate an

understanding of the relationship between
the products and perspectives of the
cultures studied.
CONNECTIONS
 Standard 3.1 - Students reinforce and further
their knowledge of other disciplines through
the foreign language.
 Standard 3.2 - Students acquire information

and recognize distinctive viewpoints that are
only available through the foreign language
and its culture.
COMPARISONS
 Standard 4.1 Linguistic comparisons
 Standard 4.2 Cultural comparisons

COMMUNITIES
 Standard 5.1
 Students use the language both within
and beyond the school setting
 Standard 5.2
 Students show evidence of becoming
life-long learners by using the language
for personal enjoyment and enrichment
ACTFL K-12
Performance Guidelines
Comprehension
Comprehensibilty
Language Control
Vocabulary Usage
Communication Strategies
Cultural Awareness
K-12 Performance Guidelines
Advanced
Int. High
Int. Mid
Int. Low
Novice
High
Novice
Mid
Novice
Low
K-4 K-8 K-12 5-8 5-12 7-12 9-10 11-12
ACTFL K-12
Performance Guidelines
Perhaps the single most useful
document to inform our teaching and
assessment of student language and
culture acquisition
Available at ACTFL.ORG
Professional
Literature
and Research
The Standards
In the past, foreign language
instruction focused primarily on
the memorization of words and
grammar rules.
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for
the 21st century. Lawrence, KS: Allen Press, 1996, p. 97
The standards require a much
broader definition of the content
of the language classroom, one
in which students are given
ample opportunity to explore,
develop, and use communication
strategies, learning strategies,
and critical thinking skills….
as well as the appropriate
elements of the language
system and culture.

the 21st Century, p. 97
Unfortunately, as generations
of language students have
taught us, grammar by itself
does not produce individuals
who can speak or understand
the language they studied.

Foreign languages are not
“acquired” when students learn
an ordered set of facts about the
language (e.g., grammar facts,
vocabulary).

Students need to be able to use the
target language for real
communication … to carry out a
complex interactive process that
involves speaking and understanding
what others say in the target language
as well as reading and interpreting
written materials
Incorporating Comparisons
Standard 4.1 into Foreign
Language Teaching
Serafima Gettys
Stanford University
Foreign Language Annals

Vol. 36, No. 2 p. 188
“…instruction might be more
effective and students might benefit
more if teachers and textbook authors
start thinking about language in
terms of words, as contemporary
linguistics and psycholinguistics
suggest
(and not so much in terms of
grammar or structure).”
Gettys, Serafima. Incorporating Comparisons Standard 4.1 into
Foreign Language Teaching p 188 Foreign Language Annals
Vol. 36, No. 2
“…In a word-oriented approach,
learning outcomes are seen by the
teacher more in terms of concrete
lexical items. Grammatical skills
are acquired through the
acquisition of the most common
words and their grammatical
properties.
Vol. 36, No. 2
Put differently, students learn not
so much grammar, but rather
engage in exploring individual
words in the entirety of their
syntactic, morphological, and
semantic features.
Vol. 36, No. 2
VYGOTSKY - “Scaffolding”
the expert takes control of those

portions of a task that are
beyond the learner’s current
level of competence, thus
allowing the learner to focus on
the elements within her/his
range of ability
Teachers Handbook:
Contextualized Language
Instruction
Shrum, Judith, and Eileen Glisan, 2000
(Heinle)
Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based

Approach to Teach Grammar
by Bonnie Adair-Hauck, Richard Donato and
Philomena Cumo-johanssen
Teachers Handbook: Contextualized
Language Instruction
Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based
In the past, a traditional classroom

with its emphasis on grammatical
competence and explicit knowledge
of language rules…
did not provide occasions for
learners to “communicate” in the
ways that communication is
currently being defined and
understood by psycholinguists,
applied linguists, materials
developers, and the language
teaching profession.
Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language
Instruction - Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based
Unfortunately, many learners who
spend years learning the formal
properties of the language
(sound system, verb conjugations, rules of syntax, vocabulary
could not, in the end, exchange
lists, etc.)
information, express ideas or feelings,
construct and control problem solving,
or develop and nurture a social
relationship in a second-language.
…we need to remember that
understanding grammatical
structures apart from their use
and function is pointless unless
one wants to be a linguist and
describe a language scientifically
without necessarily becoming a
communicatively competent user
of that language.
Like road signs, grammatical
structures take on meaning only
if they are situated in a context,
in people and in connected
discourse.

Furthermore, Krashen (1982)
reminds us that grammatical
structures will become
internalized only if the
learners are placed in a
situation in which they need to
use (process) the structures for
communicative purposes.
Consequently, an important role
of the teacher is to create learning
situations in which the learners
feel a need to call upon and make
use of the grammar in order to
comprehend and communicate in
the target language.”
…Many of us have probably
experienced this method of
grammar instruction, since most
textbooks present grammar
in this fashion.

Unfortunately, many of the
textbooks manipulative drills
are grounded in shallow and
artificial contexts (Walz, 1989)
that have little importance to
the real concerns of learners.
Thus the practice opportunities
are meaningless to learners and
are not capable of engaging their
commitment to learning, their
imaginations, or their desire to
communicate using the forms
they are learning.
It is common for teachers to
observe that these mechanical,
repetitive drills often result in
unmotivated and lethargic
responses in learners, no matter
how much context is given in
the directions or how much
personalization is provided.
…we believe that it is time to
begin a serious reappraisal
regarding the teaching of
grammar and a new vision that
goes beyond dichotomies in
approaches. In this chapter, we
are advocating a story-based and
guided participatory approach.
But what about
GRAMMAR?
Case against a grammatical
syllabus
 All students may not be at the same stage
 The “structure of the day” may not be i + 1
for some students
 Each structure often only presented once
 Assumes that we know the order of
acquisition
 Places serious constraints on what can be
discussed
In other words a grammatical
focus will usually…
PREVENT COMMUNICATION USING THE
SECOND LANGUAGE !!!!!!
Grammar within context
 Content (a story, etc.) provides a
context for detailed grammar study
 First the students acquire language,

then they hone their communication
skills with a more specific grammar
focus
Shumann’s Acculturation
Hypothesis
 Acculturation is the major casual variable in
SLA
 The degree to which the learner acculturates to
the target culture group will control the degree
to which he acquires the language
 Acculturation may be the most affective way of
lowering the active filter and getting input for
immigrants and long-term visitors
Multiple Intelligences
 Mini-Documentary: The Key Learning

Community: Cultivating "Multiple
Intelligences”
 Interview: Howard Gardner on Multiple
Intelligences and New Forms of Assessment
Clips from the George Lucas Educational Foundation http://glef
.org/index.html#
 PERSONAL  EXPRESSIVE
 Intrapersonal /  Bodily / Kinesthetic
Introspective  Visual / Spatial
 Interpersonal /
 Musical / Rhythmic
Social
 ACADEMIC  EMERGING
 Logical /  Naturalist
Mathematical
 Verbal / Linguistic
 INTRAPERSONAL / INTROSPECTIVE
 Journals, personal reflection, problem-

solving activities, autobiographies and
family heritage study, open-ended
expression
 INTERPERSONAL / SOCIAL
 Cooperative tasks such as think-pair-share

(interpersonal communiative activities)
and jigsaws; creative group tasks such as
collages and storybooks; interactive
technology such as email, CD-ROM, and
Internet
 LOGICAL / MATHEMATICAL
 Graphic organizers that show patterns

and relationships; problem-solving and
manipulatives, puzzles and games;
challenge tasks
 VERBAL / LINGUISTIC
 Graphic organizers to promote

brainstorming and generating ideas; list
making; mnemonics, verbal games,
speakers, interviews, peer teaching,
personal expression (opinions and
reactions), logs or journals
 BODILY / KINESTHETIC
 TPR; creative dramatics and mime;

creating things; role playing and
interviews; projects, field trips, active
learning
 VISUAL / SPATIAL
 Learning experiences using drawings,

charts, props, posters, photographs;
illustrations, demonstrations; use of
overhead projector, chalkboard, video
 MUSICAL / RHYTHMIC
 Songs, music, dance of the target culture;

music mnemonics, jingles, raps, cheers;
using movement or dance to illustrate
ideas or concepts
 NATURALIST
 Data collection; demonstrations; research

projects; logs; reports
Content-Based
Instruction
 Foundation of immersion programs since
the 60s
 Research confirms that CB approaches
result in student attainment of advanced
levels of proficiencies
 Researchers suggest implementing CBI at
the high-school level by offering content-
based electives such as art, PE, and music
Content-Based
Instruction
 What is CBI?
 CBI uses the content, learning objectives,
and activities from the school curriculum
as the vehicle for teaching language skills
Content-Based Art Units
 Frida Kahlo
 Fernando Botero
 Pablo Picasso
 Francisco de Goya
 The Huichol people
 The Aztecs V
 Henri Matisse • Las Meninas 1656
e
l
 Claude Monet á
Miró z
q
 Cézanne u
• Chiffres et
Constellations e
 Georges Seurat z
Content-Based Units
Based on Videotext (film clips)
 Sequencing game -simplified,  Timed writing in groups with

adapted text whiteboards
(86 words in 5 minutes)
Videotext Content-Based Units
Les Parapluies de Cherbourg
• French musical directed by Jacques Démy,
Music by Michel Legrand
• Highly comprehensible
• Authentic language and

culture
Reading
 An essential source of CI
Reading in the language
 Short Stories
 Free Voluntary
Reading
 Classroom Libraries
 Reading Log
 Graded Readers
 Cultural Readings
 Provides research
supporting reading
in FL programs
 Makes a strongs
case for Free
Voluntary Reading
Free Voluntary Reading
 The missing ingredient in FL instruction

 Reading for pleasure
 Rich print environment
My classroom libraries
Spanish French
Children’s Literature and
Classic Tales
An excellent source of repetitive, highly predictable yet
interesting CI
The Natural
Approach
Krashen & Terrell,
1983
Natural Approach
Techniques
a) Affective-Humanistic activities
* dialogues – short and useful - 'open'
dialogues
* interviews – pair work on personal information
* personal charts and tables * preference
ranking – opinion polls on favorite
activities
* revealing information about yourself – e.g.
what I
had for breakfast
* activating the imagination – e.g. give a
historical figure advice
Natural Approach
Techniques
b) Problem-solving activities
* task and series – e.g. components of an activity
such as washing the car
* charts, graphs, maps – e.g. busfares, finding
the way
* developing speech for particular occasions –
e.g. What do you say if …
* advertisements
c) Games, e.g. What is strange about … a bird
swimming?'
d) Content activities, e.g. academic subject
matter such as math
The Natural Approach
 Limitations:
 Often incomprehensible input

i + 32
 Lack of sufficient quantity of input
Total Physical
Response
“Classical TPR”
Created by James Asher
TPR steps
 Model
 Assess
 Delay modeling
 Remove modeling
 Vary the groups
 Novel commands
PACE model
 Presentation
 Attention
 Co-construction
 Extension
Developed by Donato and Adair-Hauk

Total Physical
Response
Storytelling
TPRS
created by Blaine Ray
TPRS =
Teaching
Total Physical
Proficiency
Response
through Reading
Storytelling
& Storytelling
TPRS
created by Blaine Ray
STORYTELLING
ASKING
StepTHE
3- 7 STEPS Step 1 -
Literacy Vocabulary
 Vocabulary - Pre-teach it
 Personalize - Ask questions
 Mini-Situation - Ask a story
 Retell (Teacher)
 Reading
 Discuss the reading & personalize
 Assess (Student retell)
Step 2 -
Story
ASK the STORY
Questioning is the key!
 State and question
 Attempt to ask four questions for each
statement
 Low to high level questions
 yes / no
 either / or
 Fill in the blank
 Who? Where? When? What?
 How? Why?
Popular Songs
EL BARQUITO
Había una vez un barco muy chiquito … ( x 3 )
que no podía … ( x 3 ) navegar.
Pasaron una, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 semanas… (x 3)
pero el barquito todavía, no podía navegar.
Y si esta historia no les parece larga… (x 3)
Volveremos, volveremos, volveremos a empezar…
Methods I use to teach
language and culture
 Total Physical Response (TPR)
 TPR Storytelling (TPRS)
 Content-Based Instruction (Immersion)
 Thematic Units
 Children’s Literature
 Culture: Art, Food & Music
 Reading
 Traditional and Popular Music
Assessment
 Accuracy - ACTFL proficiency guidelines
 Informal vs. Formal
 Class participation
 Performance Based assessment
 Quizzes
 Timed writings
 Use informal assessments to indicate when
students are ready to perform on more formal
assessments
I believe
that all students
can successfully
acquire more
than one
language, and
that I am
responsible for
making that
happen.
My Philosophy
In order for all students to acquire and
language, I must provide the motivation
and the language input in my classes. I
am only successful when each student is
successful to the best of his/her ability.
“The purpose of language instruction is
to provide students with what they
need so they can progress without us.”
-Krashen
Recommended Reading
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL),
1995. Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for the
21st Century. Yonkers, NY: American Council on the
Teaching of Foreign Languages, Inc.
ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines, 1989. Yonkers, NY: American Council

on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, Inc.
Asher, James, 2000. Learning Another Language Through Actions. Los
Gatos, CA: Shy Oaks.
Curtain, Helena and Carol Ann Bjornstad Pesola, 1994.
Languages and Children - Making the Match. White
Plains, NY: Longman Publishing.
Krashen, Stephen, 2003. Explorations in Second Language Acquisition
and Use, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Recommended Reading Cont.
Krashen, Stephen, 1995. Foreign Language Education the Easy Way.
Krashen, Stephen, 1993. The Power of Reading: Insight from the research.
Englewood, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Krashen, Stephen, & Tracy Terrell, 1983. The Natural Approach: Language
acquisition in the classroom. Hayward, CA: The Alemany Press.
Pennac, Daniel, 1992. Comme un roman, Paris: Gallimard.
Ray, Blaine and Contee Seely, 2000. Fluency Through TPR Storytelling:
Achieving Real Language Acquisition in School. Berkeley, CA: Command
Performance Language Institute.
Shrum, Judith, and Eileen Glisan, 2000. Teacher’s Handbook -
Contextualized Language Instruction, Boston: Heinle.
Williams, Marion and Robert Burden, 1997. Psychology for Foreign Language
Teachers: a social constructivist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Language Acquisition vs. Language Learning

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Language Acquisition vs. Language Learning

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Language Acquisition vs. Language Learning

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Language Acquisition

Jason Fritze - Nashville, TN

 Similarities & differences between

 Acquisition - Learning Distinction

 Acquisition - Learning Distinction

 In classrooms we can provide input

 Interesting topic (Intake)

 More comprehensible input

“teaching methods work

We must devote our major

 Interesting and Relevant

 Not grammatically sequenced

How do we lower the affective filter?

 Pushing students to speak

 Errors are actually “interlanguage”

“the language of the learner”

Native language interference

INTERLANGUAGE Overgeneralization of rules

 A safe procedure is simply to

 Input can be made comprehensible in

Both parties in the teacher-student and

Solution? -Make them

 Changing the subject to something easier

From Standards for Foreign Language Learning:

 Standard 2.2 - Students demonstrate an

 Standard 3.2 - Students acquire information

 Standard 4.2 Cultural comparisons

Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for

Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for

Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for

Foreign Language Annals

the expert takes control of those

Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based

In the past, a traditional classroom

Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language

Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language

 First the students acquire language,

 Mini-Documentary: The Key Learning

 Journals, personal reflection, problem-

 Cooperative tasks such as think-pair-share

 Graphic organizers that show patterns

 Graphic organizers to promote

 TPR; creative dramatics and mime;

 Learning experiences using drawings,

 Songs, music, dance of the target culture;

 Data collection; demonstrations; research

 Sequencing game -simplified,  Timed writing in groups with

• Authentic language and

 The missing ingredient in FL instruction

 Often incomprehensible input

 Vary the groups

Developed by Donato and Adair-Hauk

 Culture: Art, Food & Music

ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines, 1989. Yonkers, NY: American Council

You might also like