The Natural Approach

Historical Background

In 1977 Tracy Terrell, a Spanish teacher, published an article describing what he called "a natural approach to second language acquisition and learning." Terrell later collaborated with Stephen Krashen, an applied linguist at the University of Southern California, to write The Natural Approach, a book outlining the theoretical basis for the method as well as practical ideas for its implementation.

Krashen and Terrell view the Natural Approach as belonging to a centuries-old tradition of learning "based on the use of language in communicative situations usually without recourse to the native language" (1983, p. 10). As such, the method is partially a "rediscovery" of older methods such as the Direct Method of the early 20^th century. The difference between the Natural Approach and previous methods, according to Krashen and Terrell, is that the Natural Approach is "based on an empirically grounded theory of second language acquisition, which has been supported by a large number of scientific studies" (p. 1). The Natural Approach has received considerable attention in professional literature, and has been influential in the development of textbooks and teaching materials.

Theory of Language Learning

The Natural Approach is based on what Terrell calls "naturalistic" principles of language acquisition. Krashen has articulated these principles in his "Monitor Model," which consists of five hypotheses about language learning:

(1) The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis. Krashen postulates that adults have two distinct ways of developing competence in a second language: acquisition, whereby language is learned by simply using it for communication, much as children learn their native language; and learning, or conscious study of the language. Krashen maintains that learning cannot lead to acquisition, implying that language proficiency is a result of natural acquisition rather than conscious study of grammar and vocabulary.

(2) The Natural Order Hypothesis. This hypothesis maintains that grammatical structures, particularly morphemes, are acquired (not learned) in a predictable order.

(3) The Monitor Hypothesis. This hypothesis states that utterances in the second language are initiated by the acquired system, not by rules that are consciously studied. The only function of conscious learning is for speakers to monitor the accuracy of their performance, when they are focusing on correctness, and they know the rules involved and have time to think about them.

(4) The Input Hypothesis. This hypothesis claims that individuals acquire language by understanding input that is slightly beyond their current level of competence. This input is generally in the form of listening or reading. Krashen represents this hypothesis with the formula I + 1, where I represents the person's current level of language competence.

(5) The Affective Filter Hypothesis. This hypothesis affirms that learners' attitudes and emotions can facilitate or impede language acquisition. When students experience anxiety, their "affective filter" prevents them from receiving input that could further their acquisition of the language.

In accordance with these hypotheses, Krashen and Terrell (1983) describe four principles on which the Natural Approach is based. The first is that comprehension precedes production; that is, listening and reading precede speaking and writing. This implies that the instructor always uses the target language and strives to make his or her speech comprehensible through gestures, examples, pictures, and the like. The second principle is that production is allowed to emerge in stages, with students first responding nonverbally (the "silent stage"), and later with single words, combinations of words, and then sentences and paragraphs. Responses in the students' native language are also accepted in the early stages. The third principle is that the course syllabus consists of communicative goals and is organized by situations, functions, and topics rather than grammatical structures. The final principle is that classroom activities should foster a low affective filter by making input comprehensible to students, encouraging them to express their thoughts and feelings, and not correcting their errors.

Classroom Activities

Krashen and Terrell (1983) provide a list of suggested topics and situations for beginning classes, which include identifying and describing oneself; recreation and leisure activities; family, friends, and daily activities; plans, obligations, and careers; eating; travel and transportation; and shopping and buying. Classroom activities are centered around these topics.

One technique that Krashen and Terrell recommend for classes at the beginning level is Total Physical Response. Another technique they describe is the use of students' physical characteristics and clothing to teach vocabulary. The teacher might say:

What is your name? (selecting a student) Class, look at Barbara. She has long, brown hair. Her hair is long and brown. Her hair is not short, it is long. (Using mime, pointing and context to ensure comprehension.) What is the name of the student with long brown hair? . . . What is the name of the student sitting next to the man with short brown hair and glasses? (p. 76)The teacher can also use pictures cut out from magazines to help make the input comprehensible:

The instructor . . .may introduce one to five new words while talking about the picture. He then passes the picture to a particular student in the class. The student's task is to remember the name of the student with a particular picture. For example, Tom has the picture of the sailboat, Joan has the picture of the family watching television, and so forth. The instructor will ask questions like: Who has the picture with the sailboat? Does Susan or Tom have the picture of people on the beach? (pp. 76-77)At this stage, students may respond nonverbally or with one-word answers. To facilitate students' responses in the early stages, the teacher may provide charts or dialogues in which students need only fill in the blanks. Later activities that require more extensive language production may include open-ended dialogues, paired interviews, problem-solving activities, and games.Listening comprehension is developed partly by using television and radio as sources of input. Reading is also emphasized as a source of input, and teachers are encouraged to provide texts that aim at overall comprehensibility without emphasizing particular grammatical structures or vocabulary. Writing may be used (a) to record and review vocabulary in the pre-speaking stage, (b) as a part of oral classroom activities, (c) to "practice monitoring" or using grammar rules, or (d) to fulfill communicative functions. Krashen and Terrell seem to imply that writing for communication should be reserved for more advanced students.

Grammar-based activities have a place in the Natural Approach, but they "do not assume the dominant role which they have in other approaches" (Krashen & Terrell, 1983, p. 142). Any study of grammar is primarily done by students outside class so that classroom time may be reserved for communicative activities. If grammar is explained in class, the explanation is kept short and done in the target language, with the understanding that the language of the explanation itself can serve as input for acquisition.

Notes on the Video

The lesson in the video features a beginning German class taught by Dr. Randall Lund of Brigham Young University. The lesson is based on vocabulary related to fruits. The instructor helps make the input comprehensible by using pictures of the fruits, gestures, cognates, and much repetition. He then asks students to identify each fruit from its description. Next, students participate in a simple pair activity in which they tell their partner what fruits they like, followed by another activity in which they make lists of the five top fruits for use in juice, pies, and ice cream. Although the instructor uses a variety of adjectives to describe the fruits, the students are expected to produce only the names of the fruits themselves, illustrating the principle that speech is allowed to emerge slowly after exposure to much input.

References and Additional Resources

Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.

Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2^nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Terrell, T. D. (1977). A natural approach to second language acquisition and learning. Modern Language Journal, 61, 325-337.

Terrell, T. D. (1982). The natural approach to language teaching: An update. Modern Language Journal, 66, 121-131.