Stephen Krashen
Stephen D. Krashen is an American linguist known for developing the input hypothesis, a group of five hypotheses of second-language acquisition. He is a professor emeritus of education at the University of Southern California. He moved from the linguistics department to the faculty of the School of Education in 1994.
Work
Stephen Krashen received a Ph.D. in linguistics from the University of California, Los Angeles, in 1972.Krashen has among papers and books, more than 486 publications, contributing to the fields of second-language acquisition, bilingual education, and reading. He introduced various hypotheses related to second-language acquisition, including the acquisition-learning hypothesis, the input hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, the affective filter, and the natural order hypothesis. Most recently, Krashen promotes the use of free voluntary reading during second-language acquisition, which he says "is the most powerful tool we have in language education, first and second."
Awards
- 1985: co-winner of the Pimsleur Award, given by the American Council of Foreign Language Teachers for the best published article
- 1986: his paper "Lateralisation, language learning and the critical period" was selected as Citation Class by Current Contents
- 1993: the Distinguished Presentation related to School Library Media Centers, was awarded to by editors of the School Library Media Annual
- 1982: winner of the Mildenberger Award, given for his book, Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning
- 2005: Krashen was inducted into the International Reading Association's Reading Hall of Fame.
- 2005: elected at the National Association for Bilingual Education Executive Board.
Educational policy activism
Krashen has been an advocate for a more activist role by researchers in combating what he considers the public's misconceptions about bilingual education. Addressing the question of how to explain public opposition to bilingual education, Krashen queried, "Is it due to a stubborn disinformation campaign on the part of newspapers and other news media to deliberately destroy bilingual education? Or is it due to the failure of the profession to present its side of the story to reporters? There is a great deal of anecdotal evidence in support of the latter." Continuing, Krashen wrote, "Without a serious, dedicated and organized campaign to explain and defend bilingual education at the national level, in a very short time we will have nothing left to defend."