Stephen Krashen’s 5 SLA hypotheses are in every SLA textbook. However, in a teacher prep course, we may only get a sum up of Krashen’s Monitor Model. We focus on the central concept-Comprehensible Input (CI)-and don’t have the time to go into details about much else. I want to revisit Dr. Krashen’s ideas regarding explicit grammar instruction, so I am re-reading the original text. 

Does explicit grammar instruction help? 

The short answer:

Explicit grammar instruction helps students do better on discrete-point grammar tests.

This answer is as straightforward as possible, but let me explain.

Two Grammars 

According to S. Krashen, there are two grammars: acquired and learned. 

Acquired Grammar: We pick up acquired grammar subconsciously and effortlessly during exposure to comprehensible input. In time, we develop our “feel” for grammaticality or internal grammar that does not require knowing the rules. When we say, “it doesn’t sound right” – we are referring to that feeling of grammaticality, the internal grammar. Grammar acquisition follows a certain natural order and cannot be controlled. In this aspect, language learning is completely different from learning anything else. You cannot practice it to perfection.

Learned Grammar: Learned grammar is the product of conscious learning (explicit instruction, understanding, and error correction). You learn the rule and apply it to the task at hand. Learned grammar CAN be controlled; you use logical processing rather than rely on an acquired subconscious intuitive feel for the language. So, you can learn grammar the same way you learn math – through understanding and practice. 

For example, 

Memorizing irregular verb forms is an example of learned grammar, 

• begin-began-begun
• become-became-become 
• swim-swam-swum

Or 

Analyzing verb tense usage logically is an example of carefully applying the grammar rule.  For example, “Use past perfect to describe an action that occurred before another action in the past.” 

In both cases, we access our learned grammar and approach the tasks as a logical puzzle with manageable pieces. 

The fundamental claim of Monitor Theory is that conscious learning is available to the performer only as a Monitor. 

Monitor Hypothesis 

The use of the Monitor describes our ability to use learned grammar. Turning on the Monitor is not easy! It does not kick in at all during spontaneous speaking or writing. It takes a very special kind of task to flip on the Monitor switch. 

These are the conditions for Monitor Use: 

• Focus on form (rather than on meaning)
• Knowing the rule 
• Time
• Type of Task (discrete-point test vs. composition) 

The most critical of these conditions is the last one- Type of Task.

S. Krashen states that if we are focused on the task of communication – we are less likely to turn on the Monitor. For this reason, a student who understands the rules and can complete multiple-choice grammar tests with ease might continue to make the same grammar errors in spontaneous speaking and composition-type writing tasks.

Composition Task 

Krashen observed that even with plenty of time and directions to check their writing for errors, students were unable to self-correct on the composition task. Here is why:

“In their self-corrections, the composition students were not focused on a particular item or on a specific rule, and their corrections were based on a desire to communicate,” so there was very little evidence of successful Monitor usage. 

Discrete-Point Task 

A discrete point task is a pure grammar task. It is a “fix this” type of task.

On that kind of grammar test, the students equipped with explicit grammar knowledge perform beautifully!  When the task is a discrete-point test, we are to focus on one particular element and we tend to bring out conscious learning and turn on the Monitor! 

Now think about these tests: 

• ESL language proficiency tests, such as ACCESS,  TELPAS 
• ELA assessments, such as STAAR 
• foreign language tests, such as TOEFL

The written portion of these tests typically contains both categories of tasks – a meaning-driven task such as composition and a discrete-point task, aka pure grammar task (fix the error). Knowing the rules and flipping on the Monitor increase students’ success on purely grammatical tasks because their natural feeling of grammaticality may still be under construction.  

Classroom implication

While children’s native tongue typically blooms into a fluent grammatical conversation by mid-threes, grammar acquisition in adult L2 learners takes much longer.

S. Krashen states the following: 

“Until the creative construction process has completed its mission in the adult second language performer, the use of monitoring in edited language can certainly be an aid. The world often demands accurate language, and even from second language users, in just those domains where Monitor use is the most possible – in the written language-and a clear idea of linguistic rule can be a real asset for the performer” (Krashen, p.14). 

Thank you, Dr. Krashen, for this beautiful and clear guideline! Grammar cannot lead the way! Most of my time and effort will still be centered on offering students compelling, comprehensible input and plenty of self-selected reading opportunities, but I will sprinkle a tiny dose of grammar (when my students are ready) to give them a slight edge on those discrete-point tasks.

Some more interesting concepts

Based on the response to explicit grammar learning, students may fall under one of these categories:

• monitor overusers (These students worry too much about errors and, as a result, may lack fluency and confidence in spontaneous speaking or writing.) 

• monitor underusers (These students do not tap into Monitor at all and do not monitor or self-correct on any task.)

• optimal monitor users (These students can turn on the monitor when needed for specific tasks but do not let it affect fluency in spontaneous speaking or writing.) 

Learned and Acquired Grammar: Implicit and Explicit Knowledge

Depending on what you believe about Acquired Grammar (implicit knowledge) and Learned Grammar (explicit knowledge) correlation, you belong to one of three camps: 

Strong Interface (Learned Grammar directly supports the development of Acquired Grammar) 

Weak Interface (Learned Grammar somewhat supports the development of Acquired Grammar)

No (zero) Interface (Learned Grammar and Acquired Grammar exist completely separately and independently.)

Researchers cannot agree on whether learned grammar helps with overall language acquisition. Does explicit knowledge support the implicit language system? This is a good topic for future reading!

Bibliography 

Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Pergamon Institute of English.