Scribd
Upload
71 views3 pages

Optimal Input Krashen 2020

(1) Recent studies support the hypothesis that language teaching methods providing "optimal input" result in more language acquisition and are more pleasant for students and teachers. (2) The optimal input hypothesis states that language is acquired through comprehensible input, not output. Getting optimal input leads to subconscious language acquisition. (3) Optimal input is comprehensible, compelling, rich in language, and abundant. The best forms are stories and self-selected reading of easy books. This guided self-selected reading can help students progress to reading authentic materials.

Uploaded by

Sofia Rilo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
71 views3 pages

Optimal Input Krashen 2020

(1) Recent studies support the hypothesis that language teaching methods providing "optimal input" result in more language acquisition and are more pleasant for students and teachers. (2) The optimal input hypothesis states that language is acquired through comprehensible input, not output. Getting optimal input leads to subconscious language acquisition. (3) Optimal input is comprehensible, compelling, rich in language, and abundant. The best forms are stories and self-selected reading of easy books. This guided self-selected reading can help students progress to reading authentic materials.

Uploaded by

Sofia Rilo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Krashen, S. 2020. Optimal Input. Language Magazine, 19(3):29-30.

(Part of “2020
Visions.”)

Recent studies support the hypothesis that methods of language teaching consistent with
what we are call “optimal input” result in more language acquisition and promise to be
more pleasant for students and teachers.

The “optimal input” hypothesis says that we acquire language and develop literacy from
input, from understanding what we hear and read, NOT from speaking or writing. Our
ability to speak and write fluently and accurately is the RESULT of acquiring language
from input. The evidence for this includes studies showing that (1) more output (speaking
and writing) does not result in more language development, (2) language acquisition can
occur without any output at all, (3) increasing input increases the quality of output, and (4)
forcing output is a cause of considerable anxiety.

I discussed optimal input years ago, and this concept has been deepened and improved on
by Beniko Mason. Optimal input has these four characteristics:

(1) It is comprehensible. This does not mean that every detail is comprehensible: Input
can be quite comprehensible even if there is some “noise” in the input, some
incomprehensible bits. This includes unknown vocabulary and grammar rules that
have not yet been acquired but are not important for comprehension. In other
words, language acquisition does not require that you understand every word and
every part of every word, but language acquirers should understand most of it.
(2) Optimal input is “compelling,” so interesting you temporarily forget that it is in
another language. If input is comprehensible and compelling, acquirers will often
not notice the noise in the input.
(3) Optimal input is rich in language that contributes to the message and flow of the
story or text. The language included in the input also gives the reader support in
understanding and therefore acquiring new aspects of language.
It is not necessary to make sure that certain grammar and vocabulary are used:
Rich input automatically includes new, unacquired language that acquirers are
ready for (i+1).
(4) It takes a great deal of comprehensible compelling rich input to achieve competence.
Optimal input is abundant, which will provide numerous opportunities for
acquisition of new language.

The result of getting optimal input is subconscious language acquisition: Language


acquirers will be focused on the story and on the message, and will not always be aware
that acquisition has happened. This knowledge will be represented subconsciously in their
minds.

We are currently examining these hypotheses:


Stories and self-selected reading: The best forms of optimal input we have found so far are
(1) listening to stories, stories that are made comprehensible in a variety of ways, including
drawings, occasional translation, and explanations. This kind of Story Listening, developed
by Beniko Mason, is a powerful and pleasant way to lead students to another form of
optimal input: (2) self-selected reading.
Prof. Mason recommends providing large amounts of easy written input: In her English
classes in Japan, she provides students with access to hundreds of books in easy English
(sometimes called “graded readers”) and helps students find books that are right for them.
Mason calls this “guided self-selected reading,” or GSSR. GSSR eventually gives students
the competence to read and understand authentic reading material,

We have ignored the importance of GSSR, and have underestimated how much of it is
necessary.

Immersion. Popular ways of acquiring second languages only work if they contain a great
deal of optimal input. A good example is “immersion,” living in the country where the
language is spoken. Immersion may contain a great deal of optimal input (interesting
conversations and reading), or it may contain mostly non-optimal input (e.g. short
superficial conversations).

When acquirers obtain optimal input, individual differences in rate of acquisition are
diminished and may disappear. In other words, given the right conditions we are all
“gifted” language acquirers.

I conclude with a case history that is consistent with our current hypotheses. Prof. Nooshan
Ashtari told me about Mahmoud Hessabi, a world-famous physicist from Iran who passed
away in 1992, at the age of 90. Prof. Hessabi spoke several languages, and he had lived in
the countries where the languages were spoken. But he was also highly competent in
German, despite not having had a German immersion experience. On a trip to Germany,
he wanted to speak to a store employee about an item in the store, but could not. He
decided right then to acquire German. He was 60 years old at the time. He made it a
regular practice to “study” German for 30 minutes every evening for the next 30 years.

“Study” included a great deal of reading. He began by reading “short and simple” books
used for teaching German to language students, and after a few years was reading
complicated German books on philosophy. He eventually wrote letters in German to a
colleague who was a native speaker of German. She wrote to him saying, “If someone
didn’t know you personally, they would think that your mother tongue is German.”

Note that Prof. Hessabi’s approach included a version of Guided Self-Selected Reading
developed by Beniko Mason, described above. The short and simple books provided the
linguistic competence that made reading authentic books possible.

This case is not the only one showing impressive progress in a second language through
reading. What is clear is that the path from “simple and short” reading to authentic
reading deserves more attention.

You might also like