0
Nota Eduardo Mussa
Omar Chomar Assuate
Santos Manuel Nacoherane
The Natural Approach
Instituto Superior de Recursos Naturais e Ambiente
Universidade Rovuma
Montepuez - 2025
1
Nota Eduardo Mussa
Omar Chomar Assuate
Santos Manuel Nacoherane
The Natural Approach
Presented to department of letters and
social sciences of Didactics of English
III requirements
dr. Ligune Chuluma
Instituto Superior de Recursos Naturais e Ambiente
Universidade Rovuma
Montepuez - 2025
2
Content Page
Introduction.........................................................................................................3
1. The Natural Approach......................................................................................4
2. Hypothesis of the Natural Approach.....................................................................4
2.1. Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis.....................................................................4
2.2. The Monitor Hypothesis................................................................................5
2.3. Input Hypothesis.........................................................................................5
2.4. Affective Filter Hypothesis.............................................................................5
2.5. Natural Order Hypothesis..............................................................................6
3. Principals of the Natural Approach......................................................................6
3.1. Meaning Rather than Form.............................................................................6
3.2. Silent Period / Delayed Speech........................................................................6
3.3. Use of Visuals and Contextual Clues.................................................................7
3.4. Stage-based Progression................................................................................7
4. Design (Objective of the Natural Approach)...........................................................7
5. Students' role in the Natural Approach..................................................................8
6. Teacher’s Role in the Natural Approach................................................................8
7. Procedures of the Natural Approach.....................................................................9
Conclusion........................................................................................................10
References........................................................................................................11
3
Introduction
The Natural Approach, developed by Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell in the early 1980s, is a
language teaching method grounded in the principles of natural language acquisition. It
emphasizes the importance of meaningful communication, comprehensible input, and a low
anxiety learning environment. Unlike traditional grammar-based methods, the Natural Approach
encourages learners to acquire language in stages, much like children learn their first language.
Hence, this assignment explores the main topic: “The Natural approach”, highlighting its
hypothesis, principals, main objective, and procedures. The main objective is to understand the
broadest meaning and purpose of Natural Approach, and the subordinary objectives are to
identify its features, principals and procedures.
4
1. The Natural Approach
Krashen and Terell (1983, p.7) identified the Natural Approach in relation to “traditional”
approaches or to language teaching. Traditional approaches are described as being " based on the
use of language in communicative situations without resorting to the native language”.
The Natural Approach, developed by Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell, is a language teaching
method grounded in the belief that language acquisition occurs most effectively when it mirrors
the process of first language acquisition. First introduced in their book The Natural Approach:
Language Acquisition in the Classroom (Krashen & Terrell, 1983), this method emphasizes
communication, meaningful input, and a low-anxiety environment for learners.
2. Hypothesis of the Natural Approach
The Natural Approach is primarily based on Krashen’s theory of second language acquisition,
which comprises five main hypotheses:
2.1. Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis
According to Richard and Rodgers (1986, p. 131), “The Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis claims
that there are two distinctive ways of developing competence in a second or foreign language:
acquisition and learning”.
Acquisition is the “natural” way, paralleling first language development in children. Acquisition
refers to an unconscious process that involves the naturalistic development of language
proficiency through understanding language and through using language for meaningful
communication. Learning, by contrast, refers to a process in which conscious rules about a
language are developed. It results in explicit knowledge about the forms of a language and the
ability to verbalize this knowledge. Formal teaching is necessary for “learning” to occur, and
correction of errors helps with the development of learned rules.
5
2.2. The Monitor Hypothesis
While conscious knowledge (learning) can help with editing language use, it plays a limited role
in communication. Overuse of monitoring can hinder fluency and natural speech (Krashen,
1982).
According to Richard & Rodgers (1986, p.132), the monitor hypothesis claims that we may call
upon learned knowledge to correct ourselves when we communicate, but that conscious learning
has only this function”.
2.3. Input Hypothesis
Krashen (1985, p. 19) states that “we acquire language in only one way: by understanding
messages or by receiving comprehensible input”.
Learners acquire language when they are exposed to input that is slightly above their current
level (i+1). This input must be understandable but still challenging enough to promote
acquisition. This means that learners develop language skills when they are exposed to language
that they can understand but which also stretches their current abilities. The concept of "i+1"
suggests that the input should be just above their existing level of proficiency, allowing them to
grasp new concepts without feeling overwhelmed.
2.4. Affective Filter Hypothesis
As Krashen & Terril (1982, p.19) pointed out, “A low affective filter facilitates acquisition, while
a high filter prevents input from being used for acquisition.”
Learners acquire language more successfully when they are motivated, self-confident, and
anxiety-free. A high affective filter (caused by stress or fear) can block language acquisition. A
low affective filter is characterized by motivation, self-confidence, and minimal anxiety that
facilitate successful language learning. When learners feel relaxed and encouraged, they are
more receptive to language input. On the other hand, a high affective filter, resulting from stress
or fear, can hinder the learning process by creating barriers that prevent effective absorption and
use of the language.
6
2.5. Natural Order Hypothesis
Krashen (1982, p. 12) asserts that “the acquisition of grammatical structure proceeds in a
predictable order and is not influenced by instruction”
According to Richard & Rodgers (1986 p. 132), “certain grammatical structures or morphemes
are acquired before others in the first language acquisition of English, and a similar natural order
is found in second language acquisition”.
Language structures are acquired in a predictable sequence, and this natural order is not
determined by the order in which the structures are taught. Language acquisition follows a
predictable sequence that is not influenced by teaching methods. This means that learners
naturally grasp certain grammatical structures in a specific order, regardless of the sequence in
which they are instructed. This perspective challenges traditional teaching practices, highlighting
that language learning is organic and occurs on its timeline.
3. Principals of the Natural Approach
3.1. Meaning Rather than Form
According to Krashen & Terrell (1983, p. 19), “The primary goal is communication not
grammatical perfection”.
The Natural Approach prioritizes communication and meaning over formal grammar instruction.
Grammar is not taught explicitly but acquired naturally through use. In the Natural Approach,
learners are encouraged to engage in conversations and express themselves without the stress of
speaking perfectly.
3.2. Silent Period / Delayed Speech
Krashen & Terrell (1983, p.20) claim that “early speech emerges from listening and
understanding, not from forced production”.
7
In the early stages, learners may go through a silent period where they are not expected to
produce language but are encouraged to listen and comprehend. Speaking will emerge naturally
when the learner is ready. Language acquisition follows a natural sequence that is unaffected by
instructional methods. Learners instinctively grasp grammatical structures at their own pace,
which challenges traditional teaching approaches. This suggests that effective language learning
should align with the natural order of acquisition rather than just a planned curriculum.
3.3. Use of Visuals and Contextual Clues
Krashen (1982, p. 75) argues that “teachers should use gestures, situations, and visual aids to
make input comprehensible”. In the Natural Approach, teachers are meant to support students’
understanding using visual aids, gestures, realia, and context rather than translation or rote
memorization.
3.4. Stage-based Progression
Krashen & Terrell, (1983, p. 20) highlight that “students go through stages of acquisition, from
silence to full communication”.
Language learning progresses through predictable stages:
Preproduction (silent period)
Early production
Speech emergence
Intermediate fluency
Language learning involves distinct stages, starting from a silent period where students may not
speak but absorb the language. These stages include Preproduction (silence), Early Production
(short responses), Speech Emergence (simple sentences), and Intermediate Fluency (more
complex communication). This progression reflects how learners develop their language skills
over time, moving from passive understanding to active use of the language.
8
4. Design (Objective of the Natural Approach)
According to Richard and Rodgers (1986, p 184), “the Natural Approach is for beginners and
is designed to help them become intermediates”.
The Natural Approach expects students to understand and communicate basic ideas in the
target language, even if their grammar or vocabulary isn’t perfect. The focus is on being
understood rather than being completely accurate. Since the method applies to many learning
situations, goals may vary depending on the learners’ needs and the specific language skills
being taught. Krashen and Terrell (1983, p.74) also stress the importance of clearly
explaining what learners should and shouldn’t expect from a course.
5. Students' role in the Natural Approach
According to Richard and Rodgers (1986, p.186), in the Natural Approach, learners have four
kinds of responsibilities in the classroom:
- Provide information about their specific goals so that acquisition activities can focus on
the topics and situations most relevant to their needs.
- Take an active role in ensuring comprehensible input. They should learn and use
conversational management techniques to regulate input.
- Decide when to start producing speeches and when to upgrade it,
- Where learning exercises are to be part of the program, decide with the teacher the
relative amount of time to be devoted to them and perhaps even complete and correct
them independently.
6. Teacher’s Role in the Natural Approach
According to Richard and Rodgers (1986, p.187-189), the Natural Approach teacher has
three central roles.
- First, the teacher is the primary source of comprehensible input in the target language,
and the teacher is the primary generator of that input. In this role, the teacher is
9
required to create a constant flow of language input while providing a multiplicity of
nonlinguistic clues to assist students in interpreting the input.
- Second, in the Natural Approach teacher creates a classroom atmosphere that is
interesting, friendly, and in which there is a low affective filter for learning. This is
achieved in part through such Natural Approach techniques as not demanding speech
from the students before they are ready for it, not correcting student errors, and
providing subject matter of high interest to students.
- Finally, the teacher must choose and orchestrate a rich mix of classroom activities
involving a variety of group sizes, content, and context. The teacher is seen as
responsible for collecting materials and designing their use. These materials,
according to Krashen and Terrell, are based not just on teacher perceptions but on
elicited student needs and interests.
7. Procedures of the Natural Approach
Krashen and Terrell (1983, p. 75–77)
- Use of TPR (Total Physical Response): Lessons begin with physical commands
involving body movement (e.g., stand up, turn around) to teach vocabulary and sentence
structures in a comprehensible way.
- Use of Classroom Commands: Teachers incorporate real actions using classroom
objects and people to reinforce language through direct and meaningful interaction (e.g.,
"Pick up a pencil," "Give the book to...").
- Use of Physical Characteristics and Clothing: Teachers ask questions about students'
physical traits and clothing to personalize language input and reinforce vocabulary in
context (e.g., “What’s the name of the student with long brown hair?”).
- Use of Visuals and Pictures: Teachers use pictures or magazine images to elicit
language, focusing on a variety of items or names in a scene. Activities often involve
identifying people or objects within images.
- Use of Personalization: Lessons are made meaningful by incorporating students’ names,
characteristics, and real-life objects, enhancing comprehension and retention.
10
- Combine pictures with Total Physical Response (TPR): Students follow instructions
involving movement and objects in pictures.
- Use commands and conditionals with pictures: Students respond physically to
language cues (e.g., "If you see blue, touch your shoulder").
- Picture-based listening and comprehension: Students identify or point to pictures
based on detailed spoken descriptions.
Conclusion
The Natural Approach provides a learner-centered method that supports language development
naturally and progressively. Accordingly, its main components were examined, including the
core hypotheses, principles, objectives, and classroom procedures. Through this exploration, it
becomes clear that the Natural Approach was designed to create a supportive environment where
learners can acquire language through understanding and communication rather than through
pressure or memorization.
11
References
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Pergamon
Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. Longman.
Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1983). The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the
Classroom. Alemany Press.
Terrell, T. D. (1982). The Natural Approach to language teaching: An update. The Modern
Language Journal,
Richard, J. C & Rodgers, T. S. (1986) Approaches and Methods in Teaching. A description and
analysis. Cambridge University Express
