Five Hypotheses of ‘Krashen’s Monitor Model.’

Discuss and evaluate the five hypotheses of ‘Krashen’s Monitor Model.’ 

Stephen Krashen proposed the Monitor Model in the 1970s and 1980s. It revolutionized the understanding of second language acquisition (SLA). Krashen’s model consists of five interrelated hypotheses. They focus on how languages are learned and acquired. These hypotheses emphasize the difference between acquiring a language naturally and learning it consciously. Krashen’s work has significantly influenced language teaching methodologies worldwide.

The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis: This hypothesis forms the foundation of Krashen’s model. It distinguishes between two processes: acquisition and learning. According to Krashen, acquisition is a subconscious process. It is similar to how children pick up their first language through meaningful interaction without knowing grammatical rules. 

On the other hand, learning is a conscious process where learners study explicit grammar rules and structures. Krashen asserts that acquisition is more effective than learning in achieving language fluency. However, critics point out that some degree of conscious learning is necessary, especially for adults, who benefit from understanding grammar rules. Nevertheless, the emphasis on natural acquisition has led to more communicative approaches in language teaching.

The Monitor Hypothesis: The Monitor Hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning. It suggests that the knowledge gained through learning acts as a “monitor” that checks and corrects the language output acquired subconsciously. Some aspects of monitor theory: 

1. Self-correct or repair. 
2. Conscious knowledge of what is told and written. 

iii. Learning the required rules and proper application of these rules. 

For example: “I goed home” is a wrong sentence, but because of monitoring power, it will be rectified as “I went home.”

However, Krashen notes that the Monitor functions effectively only when three conditions are met: the speaker has enough time, focuses on form, and knows the rules.

The Natural Order Hypothesis: The natural order hypothesis is a hypothesis in language acquisition theory. It states that we acquire the rules of language in a predictable order, with some rules tending to come early and others late. For example, learners might master basic plural forms before more complex grammatical structures like third-person singular verbs. Although the natural order has been observed in studies, it is not absolute. Critics argue that individual differences, learning contexts, and instructional methods can influence the acquisition sequence.

The Input Hypothesis: The Input Hypothesis is central to Krashen’s model. It asserts that learners progress in their language ability when they are exposed to comprehensible input slightly above their current level. This concept is represented as i+1. Here, “I” stands for the current level, and “1” refers to the improvement of the level by gathering knowledge at least increasing a level continuously. This hypothesis has been widely accepted and has influenced communicative language teaching. However, critics argue that input alone is insufficient; interaction, feedback, and practice are also essential for language development. 

The Affective Filter Hypothesis: This hypothesis addresses the emotional factors that can impact language acquisition. According to Krashen, factors like anxiety, motivation, and self-confidence create an “affective filter” that can either facilitate or block language input from being processed. A high-affective filter (e.g., high anxiety) can prevent learners from acquiring language effectively, while a low-affective filter (e.g., low anxiety) allows for better input absorption. The Affective Filter Hypothesis has brought attention to the importance of a supportive learning environment.

In summary, Krashen’s Monitor Model offers valuable insights into how languages are acquired and learned. The five hypotheses contribute to a holistic understanding of SLA. Although these hypotheses have faced critiques, they have significantly shaped modern language teaching. They highlight the importance of natural acquisition, meaningful input, and a low-stress learning environment.