Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Article Critique
primarily with the classifications of input in the classroom and what type is most
helpful to an English language learner. The article then discusses the “optimal
input” defined by Krashen and how it is compared with first language acquisition.
In this paper I will first present a general summary of the article. I will then
analyze the article in relation to the quality and value of the information
presented. I will discuss whether I agree or disagree with the main points and
finish by presenting ways in which this article can be applied to the classroom.
The article begins by defining the features of input. The general term
article in particular narrows down the term to refer simply to general learning or
teaching style. This is particularly important to English learners in China, who are
Most of them are only exposed to English in the classroom, and therefore only
hear what is called “Teacher talk”. The article notes that the characteristics of this
include very short, simple, grammatically correct sentences and general, high
frequency vocabulary (p. 282). Teachers ask many unreal, irrelevant questions
that produce answers previously learned. The teachers do most of the talking,
learners have very little chance to experiment with the structures they have
learned and therefore their motivation for learning can be affected very negatively
(p. 282).
order to better help students learning English. She references Krashen, who
argues that if students are exposed to input with these features, they will be more
means that the material should be reasonably paced and not too demanding.
The input should be interesting, that is, the students should have material
available to them that is not strictly textbook. Most of the textbooks available to
Chinese students are designed to cater solely to the needs and taste of
examinations (p. 283). This is turn points to the need for sufficient quantity of
input. This is the main concern of Kashen’s optimal input hypothesis since the big
and in the target language environment lies in the amount of input available to
the learner (p. 283).If an English language learner is in their native country, they
may only have their textbook to rely on. It is important to provide students with
material they can derive meaning from rather than just grammatical concepts.
will not (p. 284). It is important for them to learn more than just “textbook
English”. She also points out that textbooks tend to simplify material both lexically
and syntactically, which causes the text to lose authenticity, which causes loss of
cultural meaning (p. 284). She states that, “in a word, simplification is often
There were not many statistics or specific research results given in this
article, so I cannot be certain of how completely valid the arguments are. They
seem both factual and logical. The writer, Xiaoru Wang, is a professor of Foreign
language learners. Because of this I believe her to be a valid source for this
comprehension in the classroom done by Snow in 1977 and Carroll in 1990 (p.
283) and uses it to support her conclusion. I do find the information presented in
Wang points out many problems in the classroom and ideas on how to amend
them; a teacher of any subject could take this information and apply it to their
instructional methods.
language instructor myself, I know what “teacher talk” is. It is very easy to get
caught up in strictly grammatical instruction without taking the time to make the
where Latin is spoken around them (cf. Chinese students learning English in
there will be few chances for my students to “obtain tangible proof of their
progress” (p. 282). Wang’s section on authenticity also stood out to me, as I
know from experience that teaching solely from a textbook can limit the
sentences in Latin which demonstrate grammatical concepts will not help them
Wang’s conclusion that employing the features of optimal input will result
in more effective teaching seems valid and I certainly agree with her proposed
For example, Wang stresses the need for “relevant topics within the classroom”
(p. 282). This can simply mean discussing in English the learners themselves-
their appearances, family life, likes and dislikes. It is also relevant to discuss their
language activities that will enable learners to “see clearly the relationships
between forms and meanings” (p. 283). This can include using hands-on
activities, or any type of activity that demands they use spoken or written forms of
the language in order to achieve a certain goal. Most importantly, teaching both
formal and informal English will help students truly grasp the language. I think a
good way to present this would be giving students a handout with a formal
dialogue printed on it and then bringing in another native English speaker and
“performing” the same dialogue informally. The teacher could then lead a
discussion with the students to point out the differences between the formal and
informal conversation. Speaking with the students out of the textbook context will
environment. Thus I believe that out of all the points made in this article, the need
for authenticity is the most important and most applicable in the classroom.
SOURCE
http://www.academypublisher.com/ojs/index.php/jltr/article/view/01032822
84/1813