Jump to content
Chinese-Forums
  • Sign Up

Krashen: The Compelling (not just interesting) Input Hypothesis


Rufus

Recommended Posts

I am sure many are aware of Krashen's famous "Input Hypothesis" for language learning and there has been much debate about it. In a recent article, he mentions learning Chinese and wanted to share. (Link to article)

 

The Compelling (not just interesting) Input Hypothesis

Stephen Krashen

 

It is by now well-established that input must be comprehensible to have an effect on language acquisition and literacy development. To make sure that language acquirers pay attention to the input, it should be interesting. But interest may be not enough for optimal language acquisition. It may be the case that input needs to be not just interesting but compelling.

 

Compelling means that the input is so interesting you forget that it is in another language. It means you are in a state of "flow" (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). In flow, the concerns of everyday life and even the sense of self disappear - our sense of time is altered and nothing but the activity itself seems to matter. Flow occurs during reading when readers are "lost in the book" (Nell, 1988) or in the "Reading Zone" (Atwell, 2007).

Compelling input appears to eliminate the need for motivation, a conscious desire to improve. When you get compelling input, you acquire whether you are interested in improving or not.

 

The evidence for the Compelling Input Hypothesis includes improvement as an unexpected result, the many cases of those who had no conscious intention of improving in another language or increasing their literacy, but simply got very interested in reading. In fact, they were sometimes surprised that they had improved.

I included several cases like this in The Power of Reading (Krashen, 2004, pp. 22-24): Both students and teachers were surprised by the students' startling improvement in English after they became avid readers in English.

 

More recently, Lao (Lao and Krashen, 2009) described the case of Daniel, a 12-year-old boy who came to the US at age eight from China. Daniel's Mandarin proficiency was clearly declining, despite his parents' efforts:

 

They sent Daniel to a Chinese heritage language school but it was clear that Daniel was not interested in Mandarin. He was also not an enthusiastic participant in a summer heritage language program supervised by Dr. Lao, even though it included free reading.

 

Then Dr. Lao gave Daniel a few books written in Chinese to take home. One was an illustrated chapter book, "The Stories of A Fan Ti." Daniel loved it.

 

The book was a bit beyond his level, but thanks to the illustrations and his ability to understand some of the text, Daniel was very interested in the story, and begged his mother to read it to him. When Dr. Lao learned of this, she loaned Daniel more books from the "A Fan Ti" series, in comic book format. Daniel begged his mother to read more, from two to five stories everyday. Daniel liked the books so much that he would do the dishes while his mother read to him. Both Daniel and his mother were quite happy with this arrangement. Daniel's Mandarin was clearly improving, but he wasn't aware of it, nor was he particularly interested. He was only interested in the stories.

 

The Compelling Input Hypothesis also explains why self-selected reading is typically more effective than assigned reading (e.g. S.Y. Lee, 2007). An important conjecture is that listening to or reading compelling stories, watching compelling movies and having conversations with truly fascinating people is not simply another route, another option. It is possible that compelling input is not just optimal: It may be only way we truly acquire language.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is very interesting (compelling in fact) theory. Makes sense, learning by absorption rather than ramming it in. Very much like learning your mother tongue.

 

This is were choosing something to read that is both compelling AND at a level that allows you to forget you are reading in a new language and not having to reach for the dictionary (paper or other) to get the meaning.

 

I think this will be a perennial problem that is going to be very difficult to solve.

 

So any aspiring authors out there take heed, your compelling stories in various degrees of difficulty are needed :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long ago in Taiwan I saw a book that taught English through, to put it delicately, erotic fiction. Glancing through the book out of professional interest, I noticed that some of it was quite compelling indeed. A lot of the glossed vocabulary was rather focussed in one particular area, but it was vocabulary that probably wasn't covered in a lot of other textbooks and that many students would find useful to at least recognise, if not produce.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've found that to be true in my case.

That's one of the reasons why my main method of vocabulary review is listening to Chinese music.

 

It makes sense, too, that something that is interesting will activate more parts of your brain, increasing both retention and ability to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is possible that compelling input is not just optimal: It may be only way we truly acquire language.

Seems like a rather sensationalist way to conclude the article. I guess I learn nothing from my weekly Chinese lessons then, as they're merely interesting rather than compelling. What the heck does "truly acquire" mean, anyway? What does "true acquisition" have that mere "acquisition" doesn't?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's selling something (at the very least, his reputation), so feel free to disregard exaggerated claims.

 

Is the kernel of the idea compelling or not?  To me, yes.

So how can I use it? By spending more time in language practice that I enjoy.  If I'm not enjoying a book or article, put it down and grab another one.  I'll get more out of an exciting spy novel below my level than I will a boring philosophy text at my level.  Or I'll get more out of an funny TV show above my level than I will a pedantic propaganda piece at my level.  So I should seek out books and television shows that are in the genre I enjoy most.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this truly gets to the heart of why "compelling" is effective.  My belief is that emotional content is the key.  I believe the human brain interprets threatening or exciting content as more important and encodes it more heavily.  

 

Raw learning without emotional content is not very sticky.  Repetition may make it sticky (perhaps through emotions such as annoyance at continually getting this thing wrong).   But I've learned many words and ideas very quickly if there is an emotional context, without much repetition at all.

 

Having a flirtatious discussion, or being yelled at, or yelling, or having a friend correct you is very emotionally strong and can result in a lot of learning.

This is why having spontaneous discussions with native speakers can be highly effective - the stakes can be quite high, this is a person you are talking to and saying the wrong thing (often enough) will end the discussion (or the negotiation, or the flirtation, etc).  

 

So compelling stories are stories that create an emotional interest - i need to see what's happening next!  I am interested!  I love this story!  I love this character!  What an interesting thing to say!  Of course I think if you have a passion for academia you can be just as interested in an article about science or economics as you would a chapter of erotica.   Having an argument about such a topic might be even more compelling...  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think tysond's hit the nail on the head there. Having said that, I don't think the emotional charge of language input is an absolute necessity for acquisition (or "true acquisition") to take place, just a big bonus.

 

If we could distil language acquisition (vocabulary, grammar, collocation, improving understanding of what has already been learnt etc.) and emotional charge to simple numbers, it might look something like this:

 

A typical 10-minute conversation about gardening with Lauren is worth 3.5 units of language acquisition to someone at my level. However, if I'm fascinated by gardening and what Lauren has to say about it, I get a 2x interest bonus for a total of 7 units. If I'm intensely infatuated with Lauren, I get a 3x infatuation bonus for 10.5 units. If I detest Lauren and find her views about gardening to be reprihensible, I get a 4x loathing bonus for a total of 14 units.

 

On the other hand, if I have no strong feelings about either gardening or Lauren, I'll still get those base 3.5 units.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why having spontaneous discussions with native speakers can be highly effective - the stakes can be quite high, this is a person you are talking to and saying the wrong thing (often enough) will end the discussion (or the negotiation, or the flirtation, etc).

 

Agree. I find this to be true over and over and over. When there's a lot riding on understanding correctly and responding appropriately, I'm more likely to get it right. Compelling input makes me stretch and learn faster, instead of just loafing along like I might in class.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Demonic Duck is right (with a nice story to boot). Compelling input is great & useful, but not the only way to language acquisition.

Having a flirtatious discussion, or being yelled at, or yelling, or having a friend correct you is very emotionally strong and can result in a lot of learning.

Another thought: While it's worthwhile, but not easy, to find something to read/watch/hear, at an appropriate level, that you're really interested in, that's not the only way something can be compelling. Negative emotion is just as strong (or even stronger) in remembering things, and a lot easier to achieve. If a teacher (love interest, gardening mate) humiliates you for getting something wrong, that experience will stick with your for a very long time indeed and you will never make that same mistake again (assuming that you now know the correct way to say/write/understand it). From that, one can conclude that a school with good teachers who treat you absolutely horribly might be very effective, at least as a crash course.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't object that an emotional interaction is a great way to engage your brain and improve your Chinese ability in listening and speaking.

 

However, I do think that you can't depend on emotions (flirting, arguing, or being humiliated by a correction) to help boost your retention.  Those things do happen, yes, but they aren't really predictable.

Plus, you don't really want to slow down the flirtation to write down notes, and you pretty much can't in an argument...

 

Moreover, it seems the emotional interaction with another person would be almost completely aural.

 

 

Now, I also agree with Demonic Duck regarding the original article/argument about "true" acquisition.  Acquisition is acquisition. Trying to restrict language acquisition to one specific way as the only "true" acquisition is just silly.

 

Still, I think the less-exaggerated version of the point of this article is accurate and worth considering and perhaps even adjusting your study method to address:

You will learn more in less study time if the topic/circumstance is something that engages your imagination, something that activates your whole brain, and not just your conscious memorization process.

 

That's all I took from this.  Krashen isn't wrong, but he certainly doesn't fully explain or master all the reasons that can boost language retention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 2nd language acquisition professor says Krashen's theories are not as in favor as they were in the 80s, but so much of the current more popular theory is built on his hypotheses. Have lots of respect for this fellow language learner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

My belief is that emotional content is the key.

 

I would argue that "emotional connection" is one aspect that can make something compelling to you. Something can be compelling for a number of reasons and the emotional aspect is just one aspect, albeit a likely large aspect. For people who are by nature less passionate or emotional, other elements are likely more compelling such as intellectual stimulation. 

 

In that light, I think that Compelling Content is the true key, it's just that there are a number of reasons one could find it compelling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is more or less just a byproduct of the way that memory works. We tend to remember things that are compelling to a greater degree than things that we view to be tedious. Hence all those men out there that can tell you the specs for every muscle car ever built, but fail miserably to list the cast on Sex and the City, it's not of interest to them, so they don't remember it.

 

But, the other bit there is that if you're using language for a compelling activity, you're more likely to forget that you're "studying" and more likely to focus on the activity, which itself has a tendency to lead to longer periods of motivation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc&feature=player_embedded

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Click here to reply. Select text to quote.

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...