Critical Evaluation of Krashen’s Monitor Model is the second assignment under the unit Language Acquisition and Learning.
The Assignment – Critical Evaluation of Krashen’s Monitor Model
| Critical Evaluation of Krashen’s Monitor Model |
|---|
| Assignment Description: Critically evaluate Krashen’s Monitor Model and its implications for second language teaching. Discuss both the strengths and limitations of the theory and how it might influence lesson design and learner engagement. Assignment Objective: To foster critical thinking about prominent SLA theories and their classroom applications, particularly in relation to input, monitoring, and affective variables. Key Areas Addressed: Krashen’s Monitor Model (all 5 hypotheses) Criticisms of the model Affective filter and comprehensible input Implications for L2 instruction Assignment Requirements: 1,800–2,200 words Provide a summary of each hypothesis Include at least two scholarly criticisms of the model Offer at least one classroom example or lesson plan segment applying Krashen’s ideas Minimum of 6 academic references |
Some students may find writing academic assignments extremely difficult and even feel completely clueless about where to begin or how to structure their work. If that sounds familiar, you’re not alone—and you’re not without help. I’m here to guide you through the entire process, step by step, without skipping anything. Each stage will build logically on the last, so the development of your ideas makes sense, and the path forward remains clear and manageable from start to finish.
If you are not familiar with Krashen’s Monitor Model, you may need my comprehensive lesson titled Krashen’s Monitor Model and its Critics before attempting this assignment.
Step-By-Step Assignment Help
Step 1: Understanding the Assignment
1. Break Down The Task
| Type of Essay: Critical Analysis |
| Key Questions to Asnswer: What are the 5 hypotheses of Krashen’s Monitor Model? (Define and give examples.) What are the strengths of this model in SLA teaching? (E.g., focus on input, affective factors.) What are the major criticisms? (Lack of empirical evidence? Ignores output?) How can teachers apply this theory in a real classroom? (Provide a practical example.) What are the implications for TEFL instruction? (What should teachers adopt or adapt?) |
| Requirements: 1,800–2,200 words At least 2 scholarly critiques (e.g., Gregg, Swain) 1 lesson plan segment or classroom example applying Krashen’s ideas 6+ academic sources (APA format) |
2. Thesis Statement Development
| Your thesis should reflect a balanced critical evaluation: “While Krashen’s Monitor Model provides valuable insights into comprehensible input and affective factors, its lack of empirical support and neglect of learner output limit its effectiveness in contemporary TEFL classrooms.” |
3. Gather sources and organize them thematically
| 1. Primary Source (Krashen’s Original Work) Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Focus on: Definitions of the 5 hypotheses, examples of “i+1.” 2. Supportive Sources (Strengths) Lightbown & Spada (2013): How input-based methods align with Krashen. Example: “Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) draws from Krashen’s emphasis on meaningful input.” 3. Critical Sources (Weaknesses) Gregg (1984): Challenges the untestability of the model. Swain (1985): Argues for the necessity of output (“Output Hypothesis”). Ellis (2015): Discusses oversimplification of affective factors. 4. Classroom Application Sources Scrivener (2011): Practical ways to use “comprehensible input.” Example: *”Using graded readers to provide i+1 input.”* |
Step 2: Structuring the Essay
Suggested Outline (1,800–2,200 Words)
| Section | Word Count | Key Content |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Introduction | 200–250 words | Hook: Brief background: Thesis statement |
| 2. Summary of the 5 Hypotheses | 300–350 words | Present each hypothesis with a clear example |
| 3. Strengths of the Model | 250–300 words | Practical Impact Theoretical Contributions |
| 4. Criticisms of the Model | 400–450 words | Lack of Empirical Evidence Neglects Output Oversimplifies Affective Factors |
| 5. Classroom Application | 250–350 words | Example Lesson Segment |
| 6. Teaching Implications | 250–300 words | Do, Avoid, Adapt |
| 7. Conclusion | 150–200 words | Strengths and weaknesses+ final thoughts |
Step 3: Writing the Essay
1. Introduction (200–250 words)
| Hook: “Krashen’s Monitor Model is widely taught in TEFL—but does it hold up under scrutiny?” |
| Brief Background: Krashen’s influence on communicative teaching. |
| Thesis Statement: “While Krashen’s Monitor Model provides valuable insights into comprehensible input and affective factors, its lack of empirical support and neglect of learner output limit its effectiveness in contemporary TEFL classrooms.” |
2. Summary of the 5 Hypotheses (300–350 words)
| Present each hypothesis with a clear example: Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis Example: A child “acquires” English naturally vs. an adult “learns” grammar rules. Monitor Hypothesis Example: A student pauses to correct “she go” → “she goes.” Input Hypothesis (i+1) Example: Teaching “used to” after students master simple past. Natural Order Hypothesis Example: Learners master “-ing” before third-person “-s.” Affective Filter Hypothesis Example: An anxious student struggles to absorb input. |
3. Strengths of the Model (250–300 words)
| Practical Impact: Shift from grammar-translation to input-focused methods (e.g., TPR, immersion). Theoretical Contributions: Highlights unconscious acquisition and affective factors. |
4. Criticisms of the Model (400–450 words)
| Lack of Empirical Evidence (Gregg, 1984) “i+1” is not measurable; acquisition vs. learning is untestable. |
| Neglects Output (Swain, 1985) Example: Students understand stories (input) but can’t retell them (output). |
| Oversimplifies Affective Factors (Ellis, 2015) Ignores motivation, identity, and social context. |
5. Classroom Application (250–350 words)
| Example Lesson Segment: Teaching Past Tense (A2 Level) Step 1: Comprehensible Input (i+1) Show a short video of a vacation with clear past-tense narration. Step 2: Lower Affective Filter Discuss the video in pairs (no grammar corrections). Step 3: Limited Monitoring Students write 3 sentences; optional self-editing. Critique: Needs more output practice (e.g., role-plays). |
6. Implications for TEFL (250–300 words)
| Do: Use input-rich materials (e.g., podcasts, graded readers). |
| Avoid: Over-reliance on grammar correction (monitoring). |
| Adapt: Combine with task-based learning (Swain’s output focus). |
7. Conclusion (150–200 words)
| Recap strengths (input focus) and weaknesses (output neglect). |
| Final thought: “Krashen’s model is a starting point, not a complete framework.” |
Step 4: Referencing & Editing
APA References (5+ Sources)
| 1. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon. 2. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and output. SSLA, 7(1). 3. Gregg, K. (1984). Krashen’s monitor and Occam’s razor. Applied Linguistics, 5(2). 4. Ellis, R. (2015). Understanding second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford. 5. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford. 6. Scrivener, J. (2011). Learning teaching (3rd ed.). Macmillan. |
Editing Checklist
| I have met the expected word count (1,800–2,200) I have summarized all 5 hypotheses with examples I have integrated 2+ scholarly criticisms I have included a Lesson plan segment I have included 6+ APA references I have maintained a balanced argument (strengths vs. weaknesses) |
Congratulations, and that’s it! Now you have a clear understanding of how your assignment should be developed, and you’re equipped with every detail you need to move forward confidently.