THE NATURAL APPROACH (Tracy Terrel and Stephen Krashen)

In the USA, there was an increasing interest towards a more communicative orientation in the field of
language teaching. It acted as bridge between psycholinguistic theories and the communicative approach
between North America and European tendencies.
Background
It is a learner-centered method. It tried to balance the role of the learner individual and the learner social
being. (Natural Method)
Communicative orientation: it is a strategy based on the communicative approach but taking into
consideration the psycholinguistics theories.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE NATURAL APPROACH AND THE DIRECT METHOD
The emphasis is not on the teacher, the repetition or the accurate production of target language sentences
as in the direct method. On the contrary, the natural approach puts emphasis on:

 (Exposure) or input (listening) rather than practice (speaking)

 optimizing emotional preparedness for learning (to be ready for learning)
 listening for long period before to produce language
 a willingness to write and other materials of comprehensible input
 the central role of comprehension
OBJECTIVES
It depends upon learner needs and the skill (reading, writing, listening, or speaking) and the level being
taught:

 basic personal communication: oral and written (reading and writing personal letters)
 academic learning skills: oral and written (listening to a lecturer and taking notes in class)
It is not expected that the students at the end of a particular course have acquired a certain group of
structures. It is enoguhg if they can deal with a particular set of topics in a given situation.
THE ROLE OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR

 Krashen and Terrel see communication is the primary function of language (in order to interact with
other people (The role of language). Their approach focuses on communicative abilities.
 The grammar determines how the lexicon (vocabulary) is exploited to produce messages and
communicative meaning (the role of grammar)
PSYCHOLINGUITIC THEORY
The principal tenets on with the Natural Approach is based are the 5 famous hypotheses on Krashen’
theory:

 The acquisition/learning hypotheses

 Acquisition: The ‘natural’ unconscious process to language proficiency through meaningful
communication.
Learning: Conscious process in which language rules are developed through formal teaching and correction
of errors.
Therefore, Learning cannot lead to Acquisition.
  The Monitor Hypothesis
Conscious learning can function only as a monitor or editor that checks and repairs the output of the
acquired system.
Three conditions limit the successful use of the monitor:
• 1) TIME: There must be sufficient time for a learner to choose and apply a learned rule.
• 2) FOCUS ON FORM: The language user must be focused on correctness of the output.
• 3) KNOWLEGDE OF RULES: The performer must know the rules.

1. 8. THE NATURAL ORDER HYPOTHESIS The acquisition of grammatical structures

proceeds in a predictable order. Errors are signs of naturalistic developmental processes,
and during acquisition similar developmental errors occur in learners not matter what their
mother tongue is.
2. 9. THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS It relates to acquisition and not to learning. People acquire
language best by understanding input. The ability to speak fluently emerges independently
in time.
3. 10. THE AFFECTIVE HYPOTHESIS • The learner's emotional state or attitudes is an
adjustable filter that freely passes, impedes, or blocks input necessary to acquisition. •
There are three kinds of affective variables: Motivation- Self-Confidence-Anxiety

Time. There must be sufficient time for a learner to choose and apply a learned rule.

 Focus on form. The language user must be focused on correctness or on the form of the output.

 Knowledge of rules. The performer must know the rules. The monitor does best with rules that are
simple in two ways. They must be simple [0 describe and they must not require complex movements and
rearrangements.

 The Natural Order Hypothesis  The acquisition of grammatical structures proceeds in a predictable
order.  Research has shown a certain order in first language acquisition of English, and a similar
natural order is found in second language acquisition.  Errors are signs of naturalistic
developmental processes.

The Input Hypothesis

 It explains the relationship between what the learner is exposed to of a language (the input) and
language acquisition.
 The hypothesis relates to acquisition, and not to learning.
 People acquire language best by understanding input that is slightly beyond their current level of
competence “by understanding language containing I + 1” (Krashen & Terrell, 1983).
 Clues based on the situation and the context, extra linguistic information, and knowledge of the
world make comprehension possible.
 The ability to speak fluently cannot be taught directly; it "emerges" independently in time, after
the acquirer has built up linguistic competence by understanding input.
 If there is a sufficient quantity of comprehensible input, I+1 will usually be provided automatically.
Comprehensible input refers to utterances that the learner understands based on the context in
which they are used.
 Input need not to be tuned to a learner’s current level of linguistic competence and in fact cannot
be so finely tuned in a language class, where learners will be at many different levels of
competence.

  The Affective Filter Hypothesis: Krashen sees the learner's emotional state or attitudes as an
adjustable filter that freely passes, impedes, or blocks input necessary to acquisition.

 Motivation. Learners with high motivation generally do better.

 Self-confidence. Learners with self-confidence and a good self-image tend to be more successful.
 Anxiety. Low personal anxiety and low classroom anxiety are more conducive to second language
acquisition.
 Acquirers with a low affective filter seek and receive more input, interact with confidence, and are
more receptive to the input they receive.
 The affective filter is said to rise in early adolescence, and this may account for children's apparent
superiority to older acquirers of a second language.