ELT News Think Tank

The "Think Tank Live" Panel

Stephen Krashen	Michael McCarthy	Susan Barduhn	Peter Viney	Marc Helgesen
(Susan Barduhn was the moderator for this event, held at the JALT National Conference in Nara, November 2004)

Panelists: Stephen | Michael | Marc | Peter
Date: November 2004
Discuss this topic on our Message Board.

Topic: "What are 5 things you wish you'd known when you started teaching?"

Stephen Krashen

1. Pronunciation
I suspect that accent in a second language is acquired very rapidly; we do not actually use our best pronunciation, however, because we would feel uncomfortable doing so, or even silly. Adults have, in other words, an "output filter."

There are several reasons to hypothesize that we don't use our full competence in pronunciation because it makes us feel self-conscious: We can imitate second language speakers speaking our native language, and we can imitate different dialects of our native language. But we don't, because it would feel uncomfortable. Guiora et. al. have shown that a modest amount of alcohol can result in a better accent; alcohol apparently lowers the output filter. Also, our accents are variable: Sometimes we do better than other times, depending on how comfortable we feel.

Our accent marks us as a member of a certain group; we will perform our best when our output filter is lowest, when we feel like a member of the group that speaks that language.

References:
Guiora, A. Z., Beit-Hallahmi, B., Brannon, R. C. L., Dull, C. Y., & Scovel, T. 1972. The Effects of Experimentally Induced Changes in Ego States on Pronunciation Ability in a Second Language: An Exploratory Study. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 13(5): 421-428.
Krashen, S.. 1997. A conjecture. In A. Lengyel, J. Navracsics, and O. Simon (Eds.) Applied Linguistic Studies in Central Europe. Veszprem, Hungary: Faculty of Foreign Languages, University of Veszprem. pp. 42-45. Available at http://www.sdkrashen.com.

2. Polyglots: How did they do it?
Do some people have a "gift" for languages? Are their brains somehow different? So far, there is no reason to think so: The accomplishments of the great polyglots can be explained on the basis of current language acquisition theory.

Lomb Kato was born and raised in Budapest and did not get interested in other languages until she was a young adult. A professional interpreter, she acquired high levels of proficiency in 17 languages, without extended stays in the country where the languages were spoken. I interviewed Dr. Lomb (her PhD was in Chemistry) in depth ten years ago in Budapest. She attributed her success to massive amounts of comprehensible input, mostly through recreational reading. She was personally very interested in grammar and linguistics, but felt it played a small role in language acquisition, loved dictionaries but looked up words when she read only if the word re-appeared several times and she still did not understand it, and hated to be corrected: "Error correction makes you sick to your stomach."

References:
Krashen, S. and Kiss, N. 1996. Notes on a polyglot. System 24: 207-210.
Krashen, S. 2003. Explorations in Language Acquisition and Use: The Taipei Lectures. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Publishing Company.

3. The Impact of English Fever: Will we all be speaking only English some day?

English is the new international language and continues to spread; for example, 95% of all articles cited in 1997, according to the Science Citation Index, were in English, up from 83% in 1987, and English is clearly the language of international business. There is therefore a great deal of pressure from middle class parents to provide more English in school. Devoting large amounts of time to English in school could eventually impact advanced development of the primary language. Scholars living in their home countries report that they find it more comfortable to read and write in English, rather than their primary language. The effects on first languages, even those that are spoken by millions of people and have large literatures, is beginning to be felt.

4. English Fever: How to balance parents' theories of language acquisition with what the experts think
Much of what we think is true about language acquisition is in conflict with what parents and our older students believe. In fact, our positions appear to run counter to "common sense."

Parents are convinced that younger is faster: Professionals know that older is faster in beginning stages, but that those who start as children eventually do better than those who start as adults.

Parents are convinced that language acquisition requires the hard work of intensive grammar study and correction. Professionals (I hope) understand that we acquire language when we understand messages, which can be very pleasant.

Parents think that more time devoted to English means more English development. Professionals know that the first language can be used in ways that accelerate second language acquisition.

Unfortunately, parents' views are usually shared by policy-makers, who often have no background in language education. Individual conferences with parents and presenting language acquisition theory in classes, while sometimes helpful, is not the total answer, as long as language education professionals' views are so different from accepted wisdom. The only solution is to change what is considered to be "common sense."

References:
Krashen, S. 2003. Dealing with English fever. In Selected Papers from the Twelfth International Symposium on English Teaching. English Teachers' Association/ROC, Taipei. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company. pp. 100-108. Available at http://www.sdkrashen.com.

5. Language Policy in the US
Language policy in the US has suddenly become controlled by the federal government, an odd occurrence because education has traditionally been a responsibility of the individual states. Nearly all public school (K-12) education has been dominated by NCLB, or No Child Left Behind, a federal initiative that has two major components: One component is "high stakes" standardized testing of all children in reading and math, with punishments for districts whose test scores do not improve according to standards set up by the government. Those who criticize this movement are accused of being soft, and being opposed to accountability. Critics, however, are not opposed to assessment: They are opposed to what they consider to be inappropriate and excessive testing.

Another component is an approach to reading instruction that features "intensive, systematic" phonics, teaching all major rules of phonics in a strict sequence. Those who criticize intensive phonics are accused of having a no-phonics position and of forcing students to struggle with incomprehensible texts. Critics, however, are in favor of including basic phonics, recognize the limits of phonics teaching, and understand that most "skills" emerge as a result of reading. The teacher's task is to provide interesting texts and help make those texts comprehensible.

Critics have no seat at the table in the US: To be eligible for federal grants, school districts must submit proposals that are consistent with the policies of NCLB.

References:
Allington,R. 2002. Big Brother and the National Reading Curriculum : How Ideology Trumped Evidence. Portsmouth: Heinemann Publishing Company.

Panelists: Stephen | Michael | Marc | Peter

Discuss this topic on our Message Board

Stephen Krashen, Emeritus Professor of Education at the University of Southern California

<<Back Number | Top | Recent Issue>>