ENGLISH LETTERS

NATURAL APPROACH

The Lecturer : Ahmad Subhan Roza, M.Pd.

Members of The Second Group :

1. AYU SILA HASRONI 1701070170
2. FINA AINUN NIKMAH 1701070095
3. IDRIS SATRIA 1701070104
4. NOVITA NINGTYAS 1701070034

Class : B

DEPARTMENT ENGLISH EDUCATION

EDUCATION AND TEACHER TRAINING FACULTY
INSTITUT OF ISLAMIC OF METRO
2019
 PREFACE

First of all, thanks to Allah SWT because of the help of Allah, writer
finished writing the paper entitled “Natural Approach” right in the calculated
time.

The purpose in writing this paper is to fulfill the assignment that given by
Ahmad Subhan Rozaas lecturer in TEFL.

in arranging this paper, the writer trully get lots challenges and obstructions
but with help of many indiviuals, those obstructions could passed. writer also
realized there are still many mistakes in process of writing this paper.

Because of that, the writer says thank you to all individuals who helps in the
process of writing this paper. hopefully allah replies all helps and bless you all.the
writer realized tha this paper still imperfect in arrangment and the content. then
the writer hope the criticism from the readers can help the writer in perfecting the
next paper.last but not the least Hopefully, this paper can helps the readers to gain
more knowledge about samantics major.

Metro, February 23rd 2019

WRITER

i
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Preface ............................................................................................................i
Table of Content.............................................................................................ii

Chapter I Introduction...................................................................................1
A. Background...........................................................................................1
B. Problem Statement................................................................................2
C. The Purpose of Writing........................................................................2

Chapter II Discussion ....................................................................................3

A. Definition of Natural Approach............................................................3

B. Theories of Natural Approach..............................................................3
C. Purpose of Natural Approach...............................................................7

Chapter III Closing ........................................................................................9

A. Conclusion............................................................................................9

Chapter IV Glossaries....................................................................................10

ii
iii
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

A. Background
Natural Approach or Natural Approach was pioneered by a Spanish
teacher in California named Tracy Terrel in 1977. But this approach is
famous with two names of experts, namely Terrel and Stephen Krashen. This
was due to Terrel's collaboration with Krashen in introducing and developing
the Natural Approach as was popularized through their book entitled "The
Natural Approach" published in 1983.

Natural Approach first appeared based on Terrel's teaching experience

in California regarding Spanish. Then, there is a view that says that mastery
of language is more centered on natural language acquisition, not on learning
that emphasizes the structure or rules of language that are learned one by one
consciously.

In introducing this method, Terrel and Krashen call it a traditional

method of language teaching. Traditional approaches are defined as the basis
for using language in communication without directly hearing the language
from native speakers, and also without reference to grammar analysis, or
certain theories about grammar.

Many experts say that the natural approach method is the same as the
direct method. However, Krashen and Terrel explained that the direct method
emphasizes the adjustment of the principles of naturalistic language learning
to young learners. Meanwhile, the natural approach itself emphasizes more on
adjusting naturalistic principles found in the acquisition of second languages.
Direct method also lacks emphasis on teacher monologues, direct repetition,
and formal questions and answers, and lacks focus on accurate production of
target language sentences. In the natural approach also optimizes emotional
readiness for learning; and a long time to pay attention to what language

1
 learners hear before they try to produce language; and the willingness to use
written language and other materials as input sources.

B. Problem Statement
1. What is the meaning of Natural Approach ?
2. What is the purpose of Natural Approach ?
3. What is the theories of Natural Approach ?

C. The Purpose of Writing

1. To know the meaning of Natural Approach.
2. To know the purpose of Natural Approach.
3. To know the theories of Natural Approach.

2
 CHAPTER 2
DISCUSSION

A. DEFINITION OF NATURAL APPROACH

The natural approach is a method of language teaching developed
by Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It
aims to foster naturalistic language acquisition in a classroom setting, and to
this end it emphasises communication, and places decreased importance on
conscious grammar study and explicit correction of student errors. Efforts
are also made to make the learning environment as stress-free as possible. In
the natural approach, language output is not forced, but allowed to emerge
spontaneously after students have attended to large amounts of
comprehensible language input.
The natural approach has become closely associated with
Krashen's monitor model, and it is often seen as an application of the theory
to language teaching. Despite this perception, there are some differences,
particularly Terrell's view that some degree of conscious grammar study can
be beneficial. The syllabus focuses on activities which Terrell sees as
promoting subconscious language acquisition. He divides these activities
into four main areas: content activities, such as learning a new subject in the
target language; activities which focus on personalizing language, such as
students sharing their favorite music; games; and problem-solving activities.

B. THEORIES OF LEARNING
Krashen and Terrell make continuing reference to the theoretical and
research base claimed to underlie the Natural Approach and to the fact that
the method is unique in having such a base. "It is based on an empirically
grounded theory of second language acquisition, which has been supported by
a large number of scientific studies in a wide variety of language acquisition
and learning contexts". The theory and research are grounded on Krashen's
views of language acquisition, which we will collectively refer to as
Krashen's language acquisition theory. Krashen's views have been presented

3
and discussed extensively elsewhere , so we will not try to present or critique
Krashen's arguments here. It is necessary, however, to present in outline form
the principal tenets of the theory, since it is on these that the design and
procedures in the Natural Approach are based.

1. THE ACQUISITION/LEARNING HYPOTHESIS

The Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis claims that there are two
distinctive ways of developing competence in a second or foreign
language. 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. Learning, according to the theory, cannot lead to acquisition.

2. THE MONITOR HYPOTHESIS

The acquired linguistic system is said to initiate utterances when
we communicate in a second or foreign language. Conscious learning can
function only as a monitor or editor that checks and repairs the output of
the acquired system. The Monitor Hypothesis claims that we may call
upon learned knowledge to correct ourselves when we communicate, hut
that conscious learning (i.e., the learned system) has only this function.
Three conditions limit the successful use of the monitor:
a. Time. There must be sufficient time for a learner to choose and apply
a learned rule.
b. Focus on form. The language user must be focused on correctness or
on the form of theoutput.
c. Knowledge of rules. The performer must know the rules. The
monitor does best with rules that are simple in two ways. They must

4
 be simple to describe and they must not require complex movements
and rearrangements.

3. THE NATURAL ORDER HYPOTHESIS

According to the Natural Order Hypothesis, the acquisition of
grammatical structures proceeds in a predictable order. Research is said
to have shown that certain grammatical structures or morphemes are ac-
quired before others in first language acquisition of English, and a similar
natural order is found in second language acquisition. Errors are signs of
naturalistic developmental processes, and during acquisition (but not
during learning), similar developmental errors occur in learners no matter
what their mother tongue is.

4. THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS

The Input Hypothesis claims to explain the relationship between
what the learner is exposed to of a language (the input) and language
acquisition. It involves four main issues.

First, the hypothesis relates to acquisition, and not to learning.

Second, people acquire language best by understanding input that is
slightly beyond their current level of competence:

An acquirer can "move" from a stage I (where I is the acquirer's level of

competence) to a stage I +1 (where I + 1 is the stage immediately
following I along some natural order) by understanding language
containing I + 1.

Clues based on the situation and the context, extra linguistic

information, and knowledge of the world make comprehension possible.
Third, the ability to speak fluently cannot be taught directly; rather, it
"emerges" independently in time, after the acquirer has built up linguistic
competence by understanding input.
Fourth, if there is a sufficient quantity of comprehensible input, I +
1 will usually be provided automatically. Comprehensible input refers to

5
 utterances that the learner understands based on the context in whichthey
are used as well as the language in which they are phrased. When a
speaker uses language so that the acquirer understands the message, the
speaker "casts a net" of structure around the acquirer's current level of
competence, and this will include many instances of I + 1. Thus, input
need not be finely tuned to a learner's current level of linguistic
competence, and in fact cannot be so finely tuned in a language class,
where learners will be at many different levels of competence.
Just as child acquirers of a first language are provided with samples
of "caretaker speech," rough-tuned to their present level of understand-
ing, so adult acquirers of a second language are provided with simple
codes that facilitate second language comprehension. One such code is
"foreigner talk," which refers to the speech native speakers use to sim-
plify communication with foreigners. Foreigner talk is characterized by a
slower rate of speech, repetition, restating, use of Yes/No instead of
Who- questions, and other changes that make messages more compre-
hensible to persons of limited language proficiency.

5. THE AFFECTIVE FILTER HYPOTHESIS

Krashen sees the learner's emotional state or attitudes as an
adjustable filter that freely passes, impedes, or blocks input necessary to
acquisition. A low affective filter is desirable, since it impedes or blocks
less of this necessary input. The hypothesis is built on research in second
language acquisition, which has identified three kinds of affective or
attitudinal variables related to second language acquisition.
a. Motivation. Learners with high motivation generally do better.
b. Self-confidence. Learners with self-confidence and a good self-image
tend to be more successful.
c. Anxiety. Low personal anxiety and low classroom anxiety are more
conducive to second language acquisition.
The Affective Filter Hypothesis states that acquirers with a low
affective filter seek and receive more input, interact with confidence, and
are more receptive to the input they receive. Anxious acquirers have a

6
 high affective filter, which prevents acquisition from taking place. It is
believed that the affective filterrises in early adolescence, and this may
account for children's apparent superiority to older acquirers of a second
language.
These five hypotheses have obvious implications for language
teaching. In sum, these are:
a. As much comprehensible input as possible must be presented.
b. Whatever helps comprehension is important. Visual aids are useful,
as is exposure to a wide range of vocabulary rather than study of
syntactic structure.
c. The focus in the classroom should be on listening and reading;
speaking should be allowed to "emerge."
d. In order to lower the affective filter, student work should center on
meaningful communication rather than on form; input should be
interesting and so contribute to a relaxed classroom atmosphere.

C. THE PURPOSE OF NATURAL NATURE

The aim of the natural approach is to develop communicative skills, and
it is primarily intended to be used with beginning learners. It is presented as a
set of principles that can apply to a wide range of learners and teaching
situations, and concrete objectives depend on the specific context in which it
is used. Terrell outlines three basic principles of the approach:
1. "Focus of instruction is on communication rather than its form."
2. "Speech production comes slowly and is never forced."
3. "Early speech goes through natural stages (yes or no response, one- word
answers, lists of words, short phrases, complete sentences.)"
These principles result in classrooms where the teacher emphasizes
interesting, comprehensible input and low-anxiety situations. Lessons in the
natural approach focus on understanding messages in the foreign language,
and place little or no importance on error correction, drilling or on conscious
learning of grammar rules. They also emphasize learning of a
wide vocabulary base over learning new grammatical structures. In addition,

7
teachers using the natural approach aim to create situations in the classroom
that are intrinsically motivating for students.
Terrell sees learners going through three stages in their acquisition of
speech: comprehension, early speech, and speech emergence.In the
comprehension stage Terrell focuses on students' vocabulary knowledge. His
aim is to make the vocabulary stick in students' long term memory, a process
which he calls binding.Terrell sees some techniques as more binding than
others; for example, the use of gestures or actions, such as in total physical
response, is seen to be more binding than the use of translation.
According to Terrell, students' speech will only emerge after enough
language has been bound through communicative input.When this occurs, the
learners enter the early speech stage. In this stage, students answer simple
questions, use single words and set phrases, and fill in simple charts in the
foreign language. In the speech emergence stage, students take part in
activities requiring more advanced language, such as role-plays and problem-
solving activities.

8
 CHAPTER III
CLOSING

A. CLOSING
1. The natural approach is a method of language teaching developed by
Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It
aims to foster naturalistic language acquisition in a classroom setting, and
to this end it emphasises communication, and places decreased
importance on conscious grammar study and explicit correction of
student errors. Efforts are also made to make the learning environment as
stress-free as possible. In the natural approach, language output is not
forced, but allowed to emerge spontaneously after students have attended
to large amounts of comprehensible language input.
2. The purpose of Natural Approach
a.The Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis
b.The Monitor Hypothesis
c.The Natural Order Hypothesis
d.The Input Hypothesis
e.The Affective Filter Hypothesis
3. The aim of the natural approach is to develop communicative skills, and
it is primarily intended to be used with beginning learners. It is presented
as a set of principles that can apply to a wide range of learners and
teaching situations, and concrete objectives depend on the specific
context in which it is used.

9
 CHAPTER IV
GLOSARIES

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_approach
http://www2.vobs.at/ludescher/Alternative%20methods/
natural_approach.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_approach

10