1. We get the language when we can understand the message
Students need to be exposed to what is called Krashen ‘Input that can be understood’ – that is, exposure to listening and reading of Pashto Language material that is interesting and understandable. In Krashen’s view, we gained language when we understood the message. He determined that the emphasis must be in meaningful interactions and not in the form. When parents talk to their children, for example, the emphasis is on the meaning of the use of the correct grammar. If the child says, ‘Fish Fish Water!’, Parents tend to answer, ‘Yes, you are right, there are fish in the river’, rather than by correcting the child’s grammar. The theory here is that exposure to the amount of input that is sufficient can always produce acquisition.
2. Getting the right level is very important
Krashen made an important point that an input that can be understood must be at the right level for students, which is only higher than students themselves. He called this theoretical level ‘I + 1’. A good practical example of this action is a multilevel reader. These are books specifically made for foreign language students at various levels, such as A2, B1, C2, etc., in the General European Framework (CEFR).
3. Silent period
Children do not immediately speak their mother tongue. Until they say their first words, they get language, even if they don’t use it. The first magic words and sentences that quickly followed were the result of this acquisition. Adult students, both inside and outside the classroom, also require this quiet period. The teacher should not be afraid when their students do not participate in debates in class – maybe they only get language. In addition, putting pressure on students to talk before they are ready will result in anxiety.
4. Anxiety is an enemy of student arches
This took me to one of the most famous insights in Krashen, the affective filter. This means that the acquisition rate decreases if we are under pressure, or if we experience anxiety. Fortunately, most children have a language learning environment that is almost free to stress at home with their mother and father. But for second language students, classrooms can be a cause of anxiety, greatly affect the way they receive and process input that can be understood.
Conversely, a house party with many international guests is the right place to practice language, because everyone is relaxed and fun. Such an environment offers language learners. Many inputs can be understood, but (hopefully) there is no anxiety. The lesson here for teachers is that they can create the same environment by turning the classroom into a kind of home party where people feel comfortable and relaxed.
5. Monitor hypothesis
According to Krashen, conscious language learning cannot be a source of spontaneous speech, he can only monitor output, namely, production in speech or writing. In other words, when students are free to formulate speech in the target language, they can only use the language repertoire obtained to check whether it is correct in terms of grammar. This reduces mistakes because students can apply the rules that are studied consciously to say before producing them, or after production through self -correction. Because many people place high value on accuracy, especially in formal situations, the existence of ‘monitor’ can be seen as an excuse to maintain the grammar focus in the lessons given.
6. Natural Sequence Hypothesis
Grammar and vocabulary a language is obtained in the same general order, regardless of who the students are, which language they get and the grammar syllabus sequence. You can teach students reported by speeches, as in the sentence, ‘He said that he was in the shop that morning’, but students will not get it unless they are ready. The elements of certain grammar are ‘Obtained late’, like a third person ‘-S’, and others ‘obtained earlier’. This explains why my little nephew continues to say things like ‘Father go to work every day’, even when he has mastered a more complex grammar structure such as conditional sentences like, ‘I will do it if I have time’. Evidence for ‘natural sequence’ of the acquisition of this language can be found in morpheme studies by Dulay and Burt. This makes doubts on the teaching of many grammar points too early, that is, before students are ready to get it, like a perfect future at the middle level.
The advantages of children -children compared to adult students
Before seeing the class implications of Krashen’s insight, we must remind ourselves about some of the benefits of children who learn their first language from Languages Tutor compared to adults who learn second language. One of the advantages of the principle is that children are exposed to the amount of input that can be understood at the right level, and there is no pressure on them to speak until they are ready to do it. Children can also take time and wait until they feel confident before trying to speak. In addition, they often have lower hopes for themselves and this helps ensure that their level of anxiety is low, which, in turn, increases their acquisition rate.
One of the most surprising things is that when children get language, the acquisition of language itself is not their goal. Conversely, this is a side product from the achievement of several other objectives, such as friends in a school playground. In addition, they take their first language elements in their natural sequence. They are not the grammar ‘forced’ too early before their language acquisition devices are ready for it. Instead, they get the language first and then consider the structure after the acquisition has occurred. Finally, they study the elements of language in the natural order.