The College at Brockport: State University of New York

Digital Commons @Brockport

Education and Human Development Master's
Education and Human Development
Theses

Spring 5-2019

Implementing Comprehensible Input in the World

Language Classroom
Anna DiSabatino
apell3@[Link]

Follow this and additional works at: [Link]

Part of the Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons, and the Educational
Methods Commons

To learn more about our programs visit: [Link]

Repository Citation
DiSabatino, Anna, "Implementing Comprehensible Input in the World Language Classroom" (2019). Education and Human
Development Master's Theses. 1132.
[Link]

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Education and Human Development at Digital Commons @Brockport. It has been
accepted for inclusion in Education and Human Development Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @Brockport. For
more information, please contact kmyers@[Link].
Running Head: [Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Implementing Comprehensible Input Strategies in the World Language Classroom

By: Anna DiSabatino

The College at Brockport
Degree to be awarded May 2019

A capstone project submitted to the

Department of Education and Human Development of the

State University of New York College at Brockport

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science in Education

Running Head: [Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Table of Contents

Abstract….………………………………………………………………………………...2

Chapter One: Introduction…….………………………….……………………………….3-8

Problem Statement………………………………………………………………...3-4

Significance of the Problem…………………...…………………………..………4-6

Purpose……………………………………………………….……………………6-7

Summary……………………………………………………..………………….....7

Definition of Terms……………………………………….………………………...7-8

Chapter Two: Literature Review ………………………………………………….……….8-16

Chapter Three: Application………………………………………………………………..17-23

Chapter Four: Conclusions …………………………………………………………….….24-27

Final Thoughts……………………………………………………………………..27

References……………………………………………………………………………...….28-29

Appendix A: Teacher Survey…………………………………………………………...…30-31

1
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Abstract

Using Comprehensible Input (CI) strategies to accomplish Second Language Acquisition

(SLA) as defined by Krashen (1982) is gaining traction throughout World Language classrooms.

By providing input to students that is comprehensible, yet slightly challenging, they can be

introduced to new grammar and linguistic concepts that will enhance the acquisition process.

However, teachers must use a variety of CI strategies in the classroom in order to be most

successful. The CI strategies must also be tailored to the level that is taught; CI strategies should

look different in a classroom of students at the novice level than they do in a classroom of

students at the intermediate levels. The researcher conducted a survey in the World Language

Department of Spencerport Central School District in Spencerport, New York in order to

discover how CI strategies are being used in the classroom and how much knowledge the

teachers have about Second Language Acquisition. The surveys revealed that teachers need more

training in the research surrounding SLA and CI. In order to train World Language teachers on

the key components of Second Language Acquisition and using CI to accomplish it, the

researcher has put together a manual and Professional Development component that guides

teachers through the process of selecting input that is comprehensible and using strategies in the

World Language classroom regardless of the level that is taught.

Keywords: Second Language Acquisition, Comprehensible Input, target language

2
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Implementing Comprehensible Input Strategies in the World Language Classroom

Chapter 1

Problem Statement

There is currently much debate over how best to help students acquire a new language.

Using Comprehensible Input (CI) strategies is quickly becoming a very important tool in second

language acquisition throughout World Language (WL) classrooms. By implementing CI

strategies, students have the opportunity to interact with a new language in ways that are slightly

above their level, causing their interaction with the language to be slightly more challenging, but

still comprehensible. By using vocabulary and grammar that they already know, students can

understand new linguistic concepts. The problem lies with finding the most appropriate CI

strategies that are most beneficial for all different levels of students. Strategies used in a Level 5

WL classroom may not necessarily be the best fit for students in a Level 1 classroom. There also

needs to be a variety of strategies that are implemented within the classroom in order for

language learning to be most effective. Too often, teachers rely on the same types of CI activities

that may not give students a well-rounded learning experience and may not be most beneficial

for language acquisition. For example, relying solely on specialized readings with

comprehension questions does not allow students to interact with a new language in a variety of

ways. Rather than repeating this same activity over and over, students should have varied input

such as authentic songs, movie talks, commercials, embedded readings, picture talks, etc.

Another problem regarding CI comes with finding the best practices for each level of

language learning – specifically at the novice and intermediate levels. If WL teachers rely too

heavily on using only a small scope of CI strategies and activities, and do not tailor each strategy

3
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

and activity to the level of students that they teach, then students will not reach success in

language acquisition and they will not be prepared for assessments. An inappropriate use of CI

strategies becomes a problem for students not only because they will have less success in

language acquisition, but also because passing the final assessment is the way that WL students

in Levels 1-3 receive their World Language high school credit in New York State. WL teachers

must be sure to use varied instruction to teach students a new language in order to foster true

acquisition and to help them succeed in their final assessments.

Significance of the Problem

The researcher currently teaches in the Spencerport Central School District located in the

suburbs of Rochester in New York State. This suburban district is a medium-sized school district

that averages around 300 students at each grade level. According to the NYS Department of

Education ([Link]), the majority of students come from middle class families with 33%

of students categorized as being economically disadvantaged. The district is categorized as being

82% white, 6% Hispanic or Latino, 5% Black or African American, and 4% multiracial. This

research focuses on students who are native speakers of English and are taking Spanish and

French language courses beginning in Grade 7 for Level 1 and through Level 5 in Grade 12.

The researcher conducted a survey that included 11 questions about the use of CI in the

World Language classroom (see Appendix A). The survey was given to all nine WL teachers in

the Spencerport School District who teach Spanish and French, ranging from Level 1 to Level 5.

Four respondents teach only Level 1 to native English speakers at the Middle School and five

respondents teach Levels 2-5 to native English speakers at the High School. The teachers

responded to questions regarding whether they feel knowledgeable in the importance of and use

of CI in a WL classroom, which strategies they currently implement in their classroom, if they

4
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

feel the use of CI hinders student performance, and if they would like to know more about the

use of CI in their classroom.

Question 1 of the survey asked the respondents to identify if they have a thorough

understanding of CI. Of the nine respondents, two believe they do not have a thorough

understanding on CI, four believe they somewhat have an understanding but would like to learn

more, and three respondents believe they do have a thorough understanding of CI. Although

there were only two respondents that indicated they do not have a thorough understanding, all

nine of the respondents indicated that they would like to learn more about CI. Question 10 of the

survey stated that they would like to learn more about different CI strategies and their use in the

classroom, and all nine of the respondents circled “strongly agree.”

Questions 2 and 3 of the survey asked the respondents to discuss their use of CI strategies

in the classroom. Of the nine respondents, seven indicated that they do currently use some CI

strategies. Four respondents indicated that they have used movie talks in their classroom; seven

respondents indicated that they use varied input; six respondents indicated that they use authentic

songs; four respondents indicated that they use adapted speech; and seven respondents indicated

that they use interactive readings. Although many respondents checked off many of the CI

strategies on the list provided on the survey, only two respondents checked the box labeled

“other” and listed more strategies that they use. This shows the researcher that although most of

the respondents have a general idea of how to use CI strategies in the classroom, most need more

information and guidance on different strategies that can be implemented. There are many more

CI strategies that could have been provided on the survey, but only two respondents recognized

that they currently implement more varieties of CI strategies in their classrooms that were not

mentioned in the survey.

5
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Question 4 stated that the respondents believe the CI strategies they are currently using

facilitates language acquisition for their students. Of the nine respondents, seven agreed with the

statement, but none circled “strongly agree.” Although there is some belief that the CI strategies

used are beneficial for their students, there is still some question about their usefulness. The

following question addresses the issue of whether or not focusing on CI strategies may impede

students’ performance on assessments. The overwhelming answer from all nine respondents was

“don’t know.” It seems that they are not sure if focusing solely on CI strategies may hinder

students’ performance.

Purpose

Teaching methods and strategies that are used in the classroom are an integral component

of student learning. The ways that students receive new information can either benefit them

tremendously or they can cause confusion and frustration. In the end, it is a teacher’s duty to

research and decide the most appropriate evidence-based practices and strategies that will

facilitate student learning. Comprehensible Input is the new “trending” strategy that teachers of

World Language (especially in the Spencerport Central School District) have been implementing

throughout all levels of the World Language classroom. Teachers of WL need to be certain that

the strategies they are implementing are actually evidence-based practices that will help the

students in achieving language acquisition and that will ensure that students have the best

success on assessments.

The purpose of this research is first to discover how CI can help language acquisition.

Second, after looking at the research surrounding CI and language acquisition, to research more

evidence-based CI strategies that can be implemented throughout all levels of the World

Language classroom. CI strategies may look different in a Level 1 classroom with novice

6
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

learners as opposed to a Level 5 classroom with intermediate and advanced learners. The

researcher will present multiple strategies that can be used throughout all levels of language

learning.

Summary

As indicated by the surveys given to teachers of World Language, teachers are in need of

more knowledge surrounding the definition, uses, and implementation of CI in the classroom.

Although there is much research that supports the value of CI for language acquisition, teachers

need further training on its implementation in the classroom. Many different CI strategies that

are not being used can have tremendous effect on students learning and achievement. It is the

purpose of this research to discover the best CI strategies to facilitate student performance and

learning.

Definition of Terms

Second Language Acquisition: the process of learning a second language after the first language

is already established

Comprehensible input: language input that can be understood by language learners despite not

having an understanding of all language and structures within it

Target language: new language that is studied by the learner

Acquirer: the person acquiring a new language

Teacher talk: verbal input delivered by a language teacher that is comprehensible for their

students

7
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Total Physical Response (TPR): a method of using physical movement as a reaction to input in

the second language.

Chapter 2

Teachers of World Languages at the secondary level face many opposing views on the

most beneficial teaching strategies that allow students to acquire a new language. Teachers must

discover the best teaching practices that assist the process of second language acquisition and

ensure their students’ success. Comprehensible Input (CI) has recently become a buzzword for

teachers of World Languages, but it can largely be misused and misunderstood. When diving

into the world of CI, we must first understand the concept of Second Language Acquisition

(SLA). Krashen (1982) extensively explores the Theory of SLA by outlining and explaining five

hypotheses for SLA. Krashen’s first hypothesis notes the difference between acquiring a

language and learning a language – it is called the “Acquisition-Learning Distinction” (Krashen,

1982, p.10). Language acquisition is similar to the way a child begins to learn their first language

– they are not even aware that they are learning a language because it is a subconscious process.

“We are generally not consciously aware of the rules of the languages we have acquired. Instead,

we have a ‘feel’ for correctness. Grammatical sentences ‘sound’ right, or ‘feel’ right, and errors

feel wrong, even if we do not consciously know what rule was violated” (Krashen, 1982, p. 10).

Language acquisition is a form of natural learning – the learners pick up the language because of

the way it sounds rather than learning the rules that surround the grammatical structures of the

language. Language learning, however, is a conscious knowledge of a language. Learners know

the rules, can point them out, and can explain and talk about them. Krashen (1982) points out

that the main difference between language acquisition and language learning is that with

8
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

acquisition the learner picks up the language, whereas, with language learning the learner simply

learns about the language.

It is important to understand that Krashen (1982) makes note of the fact that both

language acquisition and language learning can and should happen together for SLA to occur

successfully. When you think about how a small child learns their first language, they first

acquire the language by listening, reading, and hearing, but later when they go to school, they

expand on their first language by learning about the grammatical rules and procedures. Teachers

of World Languages must also make note of this – for students to successfully acquire a

language, learning about the language and its grammatical structures should play a role as well,

although it should not be the focus.

Krashen’s (1982) second hypothesis is the “Natural Order Hypothesis” which states the

belief that the acquisition of grammatical structures occurs in a predictable order. Krashen cited a

study conducted by Brown (1973) which found that children acquiring English as a first

language tended to acquire similar morphemes first. For example, the plural marker /s/ (two cats)

was acquired much sooner than the possessive marker /s/ (Peter’s hat). However, that is not to

say that certain grammatical markers should be taught before others when teaching second

language learners, rather it simply informs the fact that some morphemes may take longer than

others for the acquirer to catch on to.

Krashen’s (1982) third hypothesis is called the “Monitor Hypothesis.” The researcher has

already mentioned that language acquisition and language learning should both occur in order for

the acquirer to successfully acquire a new language. The Monitor Hypothesis simply states that

Language Learning should be used as a ‘monitor’ for Language Acquisition. This hypothesis is

best explained by Krashen himself: “Normally, acquisition ‘initiates’ our utterances in a second

9
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

language and is responsible for our fluency. Learning has only one function, and that is as a

Monitor, or editor. Learning comes into play only to make changes in the form of our utterance,

after is has been ‘produced’ by the acquired system. This can happen before we speak or write,

or after (self-correction)” (Krashen, 1982, p.15). Conscious learning, or learning the formal rules,

should only play a limited role in SLA. When grammatical rules and language learning become

the focus, language learners are constantly checking their performance and output with their

conscious knowledge of the language. Focusing on the conscious knowledge of the language

results in hesitancy while speaking, constant self-correction that inhibits the listeners ability to

understand, and does not typically result in true fluency. The goal when teaching language

acquisition and learning is to produce users of language that use language learning of

grammatical structures only when it does not interfere with their communication. Learned

competence of a language should be used as a supplement to acquired competence so as not to

interfere too much with communication and fluency. Language acquirers should not get stuck on

the rules of the language that they have learned so that it interferes and they cannot produce the

acquired language.

Krashen’s fourth hypothesis is called “The Input Hypothesis” which focuses on the

questions ‘how do we acquire language?’ and ‘how do we move the acquirer from one stage to

another?’ Krashen asks the question, “How do we move from stage i, where i represents current

competence, to i + 1, the next level?” (Krashen, 1982, p. 20). Originally, our assumption has

been that we first learn grammatical structures and then put it in to practice with communication,

but the Input Hypothesis says the opposite – first we acquire meaning and then it develops into

knowledge of structure. There are three parts of the Input Hypothesis: first, we are focused on

acquiring a language rather than learning it. Second, we acquire the new language by being

10
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

exposed to the language that is one level beyond our current competence level (i + 1). Lastly,

production of the language being acquired emerges over time, it cannot be taught directly. As the

acquirer hears and understands more input, their ability to produce the new language will emerge

over time and will not be grammatically accurate right away.

The fifth and final hypothesis that Krashen discusses is called “The Affective Filter

Hypothesis” (Krashen, 1982, p. 30). This hypothesis explains that there are many other variables,

which can influence success in language acquisition. Three variables that Krashen mentions

directly are motivation, self-confidence, and anxiety. Acquirers with high motivation, good self-

confidence and self-image, and low anxiety tend to do the best with language acquisition. When

we look at Figure 1, we can see why an acquirer may take in a lot of input, but fail to truly

acquire the language. The input is being filtered through some variable that causes them not to be

able to produce or acquire the language being learned. This figure shows that our goals as

teachers of world languages should not only be in providing comprehensible input, but also in

providing low filters that can help acquirers succeed. Providing a low-anxiety setting and input

that is compelling and motivating are two ways that teachers can ensure they are keeping these

filters low and help promote language acquisition.

11
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Now that we have a firm grasp on SLA and Krashen’s five hypotheses, it is important to

dive into how to properly teach using CI. First and foremost, Teachers of World Languages must

realize that the goal should be language acquisition rather than language learning. It is also

important to note, however, that language learning should still play a role in instruction.

Although we focus on comprehensibility rather than grammatical structures when using CI,

explicitly teaching grammatical structures should still be implemented in the World Language

classroom. The question is not “should we teach grammar?” rather it should be “When do we

teach grammar?” The answer to this question relies heavily on the level of the students that are

being taught. Students at a beginning or novice level will need more explicit instruction and

language learning since they need a good baseline of the new language to start with. Once

students advance into an intermediate level, however, there should be more input and less

explicit grammar teaching. Grammar teaching eventually becomes supplemental.

The most important characteristic of CI is that the input must be comprehensible. If the

acquirer cannot understand the message, then there will not be any acquisition. Incomprehensible

input becomes “noise” and distracts the acquirer from true language acquisition. This is where

classroom teaching becomes key. A teacher can tailor the input to the level of the students

following the i + 1 rule – giving students input that is just slightly above their level of

comprehensibility (Krashen, 1982). The issue for most teachers comes with how to make the

input comprehensible. Hatch (1979) offers some strategies to help aid teachers in making input

comprehensible for their students. He suggests that teachers use clear articulation and speak at a

slower rate, use high-frequency vocabulary with less slang and idioms, and to speak in shorter

sentences with more syntax simplification. When a teacher is trying to make themselves

12
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

understood, they tend to make these types of adjustments automatically in the moment, but it is

helpful to be consciously aware of them.

Another facet of using CI in the WL classroom is to choose input that is relevant and

interesting to the students. It is very easy to think of many input examples that are

comprehensible, but are also completely uninteresting and irrelevant which will hinder the SLA

process (Krashen, 1982). Using input that is interesting and relevant to the students is important

because motivation is directly related to SLA. Carrió-Pastor and Mestre (2013) conducted a

study to establish exactly how motivation can directly affect SLA. The study used two groups of

students in different classrooms – one classroom was student-based and fostered a collaborative

environment with compelling input, whereas the other group was placed in an environment with

a textbook and not much interaction with others in the target language. The result of the study

showed that motivation played a key role in SLA – the students who were collaborating and

interacting with the target language in compelling ways showed much more willingness to

further their language acquisition. This is an important facet for teachers of World Languages to

remember. If teachers choose input that is irrelevant and uninteresting, they will lose their

students’ interest and be less successful with helping their students achieve acquisition of the

language. Gardner (1985) outlines three elements of motivation that teachers need to take into

account: the effort of the learner, the desire that the learner has to learn the language, and the

affect – the emotional response toward learning the language. All three of these factors play a

part in motivating a students to acquire a language, and by choosing input that is interesting and

relevant, teachers can help motivate students to become successful.

The quantity of CI that the students receive will also directly impact language acquisition.

Using only five minutes of teacher talk or one paragraph of reading is not a sufficient amount of

13
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

input that will foster language acquisition. However, exactly how much CI is still to be

discovered. Much of it depends on a student’s motivation and readiness to learn, but it also

depends on the quality of the CI (Krashen, 1982). Loschky (1994) mentions that even though an

acquirer may receive large doses of the input, if they are unable to comprehend it then it will do

nothing to further language acquisition. He mentions a study involving Dutch children whose

only exposure to German as their second language (L2) was through television. Although they

were exposed to a large quantity of the L2, most of what they heard was useless and they were

unable to acquire the language (Loschky, 1994). Loschky’s study demonstrates that although the

children had a large quantity of input, it was largely incomprehensible and did not lead to any

acquisition. Although the quantity of input matters, the quality of the input is more important to

consider.

Another facet of CI that should be mentioned is the students’ readiness to produce the

language. In order to keep the affective filter “low” as was already mentioned in Krashen’s fifth

hypothesis, teachers must not insist on students to produce the language too early. Krashen

argues that forcing a student to produce the language before they are ready and have enough

confidence through comprehensible input they have received can result in high anxiety. Rather

than forcing students to produce the language, it is important to let them produce it when they are

ready to do so.

So how do we know that students can understand the CI they are being given if they are

not yet producing the language? Krashen and Terrell (1983) advocate for the Total Physical

Response (TPR) approach. This approach allows students to complete a physical action as a

response to what they hear rather than reply verbally in the target language. For example, the

teacher can ask questions such as “Who is wearing the white shirt?” “Who is wearing black

14
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

pants?” and “Who has long, brown hair?” To answer all of these questions, all the students need

to do is simply point at another student or say their name. There is no production of the language

required, yet the teacher knows that the students comprehend what they hear. This can also be

done with pictures. A teacher can hand out a series of pictures and ask students to point to the

picture that is being described, saying, “Show me the picture of the blue boat under the moon.” If

the student points or holds up the correct picture, then the teacher knows the student

comprehended what they heard in the target language. The whole point is that it is relatively easy

to check for understanding without production of the target language while using CI.

Conversely, Swain (1985, 1995) makes the claim that CI alone is not sufficient for language

acquisition, and that comprehensible output is a necessary component. The output allows

students to receive feedback from others – whether by the teacher or by other students.

Feedback and error correction are a contentious part of CI. First, it is necessary to realize

that errors are an inevitable part of SLA and they will be made often – especially in the

beginning stages of language acquisition. Krashen (1982) believes that error correction should be

minimal, if used at all. His reasoning is that error correction immediately puts students on the

defensive, causing high anxiety, and forces them to focus on form rather than meaning. It causes

students to try to avoid mistakes, and in turn, causes them to take fewer risks. In contrast,

Nowbakht and Shahnazari (2015) argue that error correction and feedback is a necessary part of

language acquisition and results in improving SLA. Nowbakht et al. conducted a study of two

groups of Persians learning English as a foreign language. The control group learned only by

comprehensible input, without producing any output or receiving any feedback. The

experimental group also received comprehensible input, but also had to produce the language

and receive corrective feedback on what was produced. The results of the study showed that the

15
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

experimental group outperformed the control group on a final assessment that they were given.

Nowbakht et al. concluded that the students who received corrective feedback were more

successful in SLA, but acknowledged that more research is still needed. In the end, it is up to the

teacher to decide the right way to move forward with corrective feedback; they must know their

students and decide what is best for them.

The final conclusion of this research is that SLA takes time. True language acquisition

needs more than five hours per week for ten months to occur, so teachers of world languages

simply must make the most of the classroom time that they have. Mastery of SLA only occurs

when the acquirer is unaware that they are using the language correctly. Although it is satisfying

to be able to know and explain grammatical structures, if they cannot be used properly, then

language acquisition has not occurred. Educators should be encouraged that their students can be

successful in SLA given the appropriate motivation, input, and instruction (Dixon, Zhao, Shin,

Shuang, Jung-Hsuan, Burgess-Brigham, Unal Gezer, & Snow, 2012). By continuing to study the

ways in which students acquire a new language, teachers can continue to glean new insights on

ways to better serve them.

In order to ensure that teachers of WL are equipped with the CI strategies needed for

successful SLA, teachers must be trained in how to implement a variety of CI strategies that are

tailored to the level of their students. The research presented in this chapter highlights the

definition of SLA and good CI, and the researcher will create a manual and Professional

Development session to instruct teachers on how to implement these strategies. In order to best

serve the teachers, the researcher will give tips and strategies on how to tailor CI to every

students’ level depending on their grade level and number of years learning the language.

16
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Chapter 3

Teachers of WL need to be equipped with a variety of teaching strategies that will ensure

their students have an optimal learning experience and come away prepared for the future. The

theory of Comprehensible Input has become a trending teaching style that teachers of WL have

implemented in their classrooms, but the researcher has found that teachers need more

knowledge about the theory of SLA and how CI can help achieve it. The surveys that were given

to the World Language Department at Spencerport School District revealed that teachers in this

district specifically needed more information regarding the use of CI in the classroom. In order to

correct the problem, the researcher has created a product that will be used in a Professional

Development setting that will be open to all Teachers of WL at the Spencerport School District.

The Professional Development session will be offered as a two-hour seminar that has two parts –

first, a teaching on SLA, CI, and CI strategies that can be implemented in the WL classroom at

each level. This teaching will last approximately one hour. Second, teachers will have time to

create their own lesson using CI based on what they have learned – teachers will have the second

hour to brainstorm and collaborate with each other.

There are two learning targets for the Professional Development session. First, teachers

will be able to describe the theory of SLA and CI. Second, teachers will be able to incorporate at

least one new CI strategy in their World Language classroom. There are four parts to the

teaching portion of the session – an explanation of SLA and CI, CI for the novice learner, CI for

the intermediate learner, and putting CI in the students’ hands. There will also be a manual

provided that teachers can use to follow along with during the Professional Development session,

and that they will be able to take with them and refer back to in the future to inform their

teaching. The manual is a product that was created based on the need for more information on

17
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

SLA and CI informed by the surveys given to the World Language Department at Spencerport

School District, and was created using the research presented by the researcher.

The manual starts off with a brief explanation of SLA involves Krashen’s five hypotheses

already mentioned in Chapter 2 of this research. Teachers will be taught the difference between

language acquisition (acquiring the language) and language learning (learning about the

language). The goal for teachers of WL should be acquisition, and language learning should

simply be a tool used to help the students get there. The manual continues to explain that

teachers should no longer first teach grammar, then practice; rather students should acquire the

meaning of the input, then learn the grammar (Krashen, 1982).

The manual then goes on to explain what CI truly is. Input is what students receive

(audio, text, video), and comprehensible means it should only be one level above the student’s

current level. It should not be too easy, nor should it be too challenging. Students can acquire

more language when they are exposed to it through comprehensible input rather than simply

learning about it because true language acquisition is a subconscious process. Language learning

on the other hand, is a conscious process. With language acquisition, students do not have to

think about how they are using the language; it simply comes out. Krashen explains this

phenomenon in the Monitor Hypothesis mentioned in Chapter 2. “The Monitor hypothesis

implies that formal rules, or conscious learning, play only a limited role in second language

performance” (Krashen, 1982, p. 16). The manual continues to discuss what CI is and what CI is

not. CI is relevant and interesting, at a level just above the learners’ current level, used often, and

filled with high-frequency vocabulary. CI is not irrelevant or uninteresting, too challenging for

the learners, used occasionally, or filled with slang and idioms. The manual continues with the

dos and don’ts of CI. Teachers should choose cultural and compelling topics, use gestures and

18
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

visuals to increase comprehensibility, and make directions comprehensible in the target

language. Teachers should not translate all of the directions, simply talk at the students (students

should do something with the input), and should not say “this is important so I’ll say it in

English.” Using this phrase communicates to students that what is said in the target language is

not important.

Next, the manual discusses the differences and similarities of using CI in novice-level

classrooms and in intermediate-level classrooms. First, the novice level is defined as Levels 1-2

(Grades 7-9 at the Spencerport School District). Students at the novice level have limited

vocabulary and may not yet be past the “silent period” – the period of time where students are

unable or not ready to produce much of the target language. Due to the silent period experienced

by the students, the teacher needs to be a bit more creative with the students’ output. A great way

to check for understanding is to use the TPR approach – Total Physical Response. Rather than

having students respond by production of the target language, students will respond with some

sort of action. If they complete the action correctly, then the teacher knows they understood the

input. This action could be anything from pointing to a picture, standing up or sitting down,

holding up a prop, or moving to another part of the room. The options with TPR are endless.

A learner at the intermediate level is defined as a student in Levels 3-5 (Grades 10-12 at

Spencerport School District). A learner at the intermediate level has a much more expansive

vocabulary base, although still very limited. By this level, the learner should be past the “silent

period” and be able to produce some target language. The challenge, however, is that all students

will still be at varying levels of output production. Some students may be able to produce full

sentences and ask questions in the target language, but others may only be able to answer in

words and short phrases. Since students will be at different levels of output production, the

19
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

teacher must differentiate and decide what is an appropriate way for each student to respond

without raising the anxiety variable.

The biggest difference in using CI with both the novice and intermediate levels is the

level of input they receive and the output that should be expected. The manual mentions the

anxiety variable mentioned by Krashen. If we expect too much too soon from the students, then

we can be sure that they will shut down and lose the motivation to acquire the language

(Krashen, 1982). No matter what level the students are in, CI should always be presented just

above the current level of the students according to the i + 1 theory mentioned by Krashen

(1982) and discussed in Chapter 2 of this research. For novice learners, this may mean very basic

subject + verb sentences with some adjectives or miscellaneous vocabulary thrown in. For the

intermediate levels, the input should include a variety of grammar and vocabulary. The types of

CI strategies used can be similar in both levels, but the levels and expected output should be

adjusted accordingly.

The next part of the manual brings in different types of CI strategies that can be used

within both levels of students. First, the manual starts with TPRS: Teaching Proficiency through

Reading and Storytelling. The idea behind TPRS is to give students the opportunity to interact

with the target language through a story using a variety of interactive activities. These stories can

be done in one class period or they can last an entire unit. One TPRS strategy mentioned in the

manual is ‘Circling’ – asking the same question in different ways. The idea behind this strategy

is to repeat high-frequency vocabulary over and over through a series of questions. These

questions could be yes/no or true/false questions for novice learners, or they could require longer

answers for intermediate learners. Another strategy mentioned in the manual is PQA –

Personalized Question-Answer. There is a short video that will be played during the Professional

20
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Development session that shows this strategy in action. PQA is a questioning strategy that turns a

theme or action from the story into a personal question. For example, perhaps the main character

of the story is going to go shopping at the grocery store. You can then ask a student personally,

“Do YOU like to go shopping at the grocery store?” They simply need to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ at

the novice level, or you can follow up with another question for a student that is at the

intermediate level. It is important not to put a student on the spot if they are confused with what

you are asking. Switch to another student and then come back, giving them time to think of the

question’s meaning and their own answer.

There are many other interactive activities that can be used during TPRS. During the

Professional Development session, the teachers will be given sticky notes to write one activity

they have used or think they could use when teaching from a story. During this part, the

presenter will point out certain strategies and ask other teachers if they have heard of them or if

they currently use them in their classrooms. This will start a dialogue that will get everyone

thinking about the many possibilities with TPRS.

The next CI strategy presented in the manual is using Embedded Reading. The idea

behind an Embedded Reading activity is that the students are exposed to multiple versions of the

same short story over and over. With each new version, the story gets progressively harder to

understand and more details of the story are added. The first version should be very easy for the

students to understand. The second version should add some details that may be more

challenging to interpret, and it should continue to increase in rigor as the versions continue.

Embedded Readings should also be interactive – students should be required to produce some

sort of output as they are reading each version – act it out, drawing pictures to depict scenes,

21
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

ordering the details, etc. The manual includes an example that was created by Sara Moyer, a

fellow colleague who also teaches in Spencerport.

The manual continues with other multiple CI strategies that can be implemented, and the

presenter will give tips on how teachers can tailor them for novice and intermediate levels.

Movie talks are easy strategies to implement in any level. The teacher simply shows a short

video clip, commercial, music video, etc. and questions students about what they see and hear as

it goes on. It is important to know that any kind of video can really work for this – it does not

even have to have any words! The point is to simply question students about what they see (or

hear) in the target language. For the novice learner, it is acceptable for students to respond to

questions in English, but the target language should be encouraged. For the intermediate learner,

the teacher can try to have the student to continue or elaborate on what they are saying. Picture

talks are done the same way, but the teacher can ask more questions about feelings and

likes/dislikes. At the novice level, the teacher can ask students to point to which person has

brown hair or which person is wearing an orange shirt. At the intermediate level, the teacher can

ask “why” questions – ‘why is there a candle in this picture?’ or ‘what does this object

represent?’ The questions should all be in the target language and students should have a chance

to answer and engage with each one.

The last part of the manual introduces the idea of putting CI in the students’ hands.

Rather than the teacher giving students the input, the students can give it to each other. There are

many ways to do this – the manual mentions three strategies. First, you can give students a list of

things to do – one student reads the list, and the other does what it says, then they switch roles.

Second, students receive a list of sentences/paragraphs and fill in a graphic organizer based on

what they read. Lastly, the presenter will explain the idea of “running dictations.” Students will

22
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

have to memorize a short sentence in the Target Language and repeat what they memorized to

their peers. By the end, they will have a full paragraph and must then read it and have some form

of output to produce. The point behind a running dictation is to have students memorize sentence

structures, recognize grammar, and create meaning together as a group. During the Professional

Development session, the session will be opened up for a discussion with the teachers about

more ideas that may allow students to take more control of the input at both levels.

The last part of the manual includes advice given to the teachers. There are many

websites and blogs that teachers can visit that are filled with more CI strategies that they can use

in their own classrooms. During the Professional Development session, the presenter will advise

the teachers to follow other teachers on social media, use Pinterest and blogs, and to collaborate

with their colleagues. There is no need to reinvent the wheel – rather, it is important to discuss

strategies that work, did not work, and talk about how they could be improved in the future.

The second hour of the Professional Development session will be given to the teachers to

create something after learning about many CI strategies. They can use a strategy that was

presented to them, or they can search online using the websites and blogs provided to them as

resources. The teachers will be broken up into smaller groups based on the level they teach and

they will be able to brainstorm and collaborate with each other in order to create a CI activity for

their classroom. The hope is that they will try something new and continue to add more strategies

that will benefit their students.

23
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Chapter 4

The researcher sought to discover the most appropriate Comprehensible Input strategies

that can be implemented in the World Language classroom. Based on a survey administered to

the World Language Department at Spencerport School District, the researcher found that

teachers needed more training on the basics of Second Language Acquisition and how to use CI

to accomplish it. Too often, teachers are relying on the same CI strategies over and over rather

than using a variety to help students achieve language acquisition. The researcher sought to

create a Professional Development session and a manual that teachers can use to inform their

teaching by using different strategies within their own classrooms.

The researcher also noticed a need for teachers to understand that CI should look

different depending on the level of the students. Spencerport School District offers two levels of

students specifically – novice and intermediate. Although many of the CI strategies can be used

in both levels, the way they are implemented should look different. The researcher used many

different sources and studies in order to find current research on the topic and to correct the

problem by training teachers on how CI should look in each level.

There are multiple goals of this research. One goal is to correctly define the theories of

SLA and CI. Another goal is to describe what CI should look like and how it should be

implemented – what makes input comprehensible and why this approach is so beneficial for

language acquisition. A third goal is to then develop strategies for teachers of World Languages

to implement into their classrooms regardless of the level they teach. It is important for teachers

to understand that CI can be implemented at all levels, but it may look different depending on the

level of the students being taught.

24
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

The research makes multiple conclusions regarding SLA and CI. First, success in a

language should be measured in language acquisition rather than language learning. Language

learning simply shows what a student knows about the language – they can describe grammatical

rules and recite some vocabulary translations. However, acquisition shows that the student is

able to make meaning of the language in all its structures. Acquisition takes a lot of time – more

time that a one-hour class period allows, so it is important that teachers make the most of the

time they have by offering input that is comprehensible for the student in order to achieve

acquisition.

In order to facilitate the process of language acquisition, comprehensible input must be

supplied to the students. For input to be comprehensible, it should not be too easy not should it

be too hard. The input should just be one level about the level of the students. The students

should be able to understand the majority of what they hear or read, but it should also be slightly

challenging. Input should be given in large quantity, but it should be high quality. It is not

enough to simply speak in the target language or to play music or a video in the target language,

rather it should be tailored to the level of the student so that they are able to decode what it is

they are hearing.

Another conclusion made by the research is that CI must be interesting and it must be

relevant. Students should be interested in what they are hearing and it should be relevant to their

lives or to the world around them. By making the input interesting and relevant, it increases the

motivation variable. Motivation plays a pivotal role in language acquisition. When a student

wants to understand and learn, then it is easier for that learning and understanding to occur.

A final conclusion of the research is that output will look different depending on the level

of the learner. Just because a learner is at the novice level, does not mean they cannot do

25
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

something with the input that they are receiving. There are many strategies that teachers can use

that allow them to be sure that their students are able to understand the input they have been

given without any language production. At the intermediate level, more output can be expected;

students should be able to respond with some of the target language. The key here is to keep the

anxiety variable low. When students are unable to produce what they are being asked to produce,

the anxiety levels rise and they can shut down. It is up to the teacher to gauge where the students

are in production and differentiate the output expected based on each student.

Students will benefit tremendously if teachers take what they have learned from the

Professional Development session and bring it into their classrooms. Not only will they receive

multiple new strategies that will make input more engaging and exciting, but they will also have

more opportunity to interact with the target language. More interaction with the target language

will result in better language acquisition and ultimately, the students will perform better in their

language class. By making CI relevant and interesting to the students, their motivation will

increase and they may not even realize that they are learning the language at all – it will just

occur! This is the goal of language acquisition – that language acquisition becomes a

subconscious process.

Not only will the students benefit from this research, but the researcher herself will also

benefit. When the problem of implementing CI in the World Language classroom was

discovered, the researcher realized that she also had many deficits when it came to knowledge of

SLA and CI. By conducting the research and creating the product to be used in a Professional

Development session, the researcher has expanded her knowledge and resources of SLA and CI.

She is not able to bring many other strategies into her own classroom and can use what she has

learned to benefit other teachers of World Languages in the surrounding area.

26
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Final Thoughts

To close out this chapter and this research, it is important to understand that this research

is ongoing. There is not a “one size fits all” with language acquisition and language learning.

Upon more research and more studies, one may find that certain strategies and techniques do not

work well with other populations or groups of people. It is important to understand that language

acquisition is a never-ending process. Although a student may reach the fluency level, language

learning does not end. It is the job of teachers of World Languages to make language acquisition

compelling and exciting to their students in order that they may want to continue the process of

SLA in the future after they leave the classroom.

27
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

References

Carrió-Pastor M. L., & Mestre, E. M. (2013). Motivation in second language acquisition.

Procedia, social and behavioral sciences, 116, 240-244.

Dixon, L. Q., Zhao, J., Shin, J., Shuang W., Jung-Hsuan S., Burgess-Brigham, R., Unal Gezer

M., & Snow, C. (2012). What we know about second language acquisition: A synthesis

from four perspectives. Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 5-60.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes

and motivation. London, UK: Edward Arnold.

Hatch, E. (1979) Apply with caution. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2, 123-143.

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Retrieved

from [Link]

Krashen S.D. & Terrell, T.D. (1983). The natural approach. Language acquisition in the

classroom. Retrieved from [Link]

Reading_Krashen_.pdf.

Loschky, L. (1994). Comprehensible input and second language acquisition: what is the

relationship? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(3), pp. 303-323.

Nowbakht M. & Shahnazari, M. (2015). The comparative effects of comprehensible input,

output and corrective feedback on the receptive acquisition of L2 vocabulary items.

Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(4), 103-114.

28
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Rodrigoa, V., Krashen, S., & Gibbons, B. (2004). The effectiveness of two comprehensible-input

approaches to foreign language instruction at the intermediate level. System, 32(1), 53-60.

Payne, M. (2011). Exploring Stephen Krashen's ‘i + 1’ acquisition model in the classroom.

Linguistics and Education, 22 (4), 419-429.

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some rules of comprehensible input and

comprehensible output in its environment. Input in second language acquisition, 235-

253.

Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. Principle and practice

in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of William E. Rutherford, 125-144.

29
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

Appendix A

Comprehensible Input Survey

For the World Language Department at Spencerport Central School District

Please answer the questions to the best of your ability based on your personal experience with

studying and implementing Comprehensible Input strategies for your classroom.

1. I believe that I have a thorough understanding of Comprehensible Input (CI).

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

2. I am currently implementing multiple CI strategies in my World Language classroom.

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

3. Please check off each of the strategies that you are currently using:

___ Movie talks

___ Varied Input
___ Authentic Songs
___ Books/Specialized readings
___ Adapted Speech
___ Interactive Reading
___ Other (Please list: _________________________________)

4. I believe that the CI strategies I am using in the classroom are helping my students
engage with the language in a way that facilitates their language acquisition.

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

5. I think that focusing solely on CI strategies have hindered/impeded students’

performance on assessments.

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

30
[Comprehensible Input Strategies]

6. I think CI should look differently in the advanced language classroom as opposed to a

level 1 or 2 language classroom.

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

7. I am very knowledgeable on how CI can facilitate Language Acquisition.

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

8. I know multiple CI strategies that I can implement in my classroom.

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

9. I believe we can implement CI strategies while still successfully preparing students for
their final assessments.

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

10. I would like to know more about different CI strategies and their use in my classroom.

strongly agree agree don’t know disagree strongly disagree

11. How would like to learn more about CI strategies? Check all that apply.

___ Video tutorials

___ Professional Development

___ Powerpoint Presentation

___ Learning Walks (observing other teachers)

___ other

31