# data[].attributes.headline
Tracy Terrell, the Teacher Behind the Theory, and Support from Stephen Krashen, an Applied Linguist

# data[].attributes.subject
Tracy Terrell, the Teacher Behind the Theory, and Support from Stephen Krashen, an Applied Linguist

# data[].attributes.body
The Natural Approach was published by Terrell and Krashen in 1983 (Krashen et al., 1998). The intention of this theory is to encourage educators to focus on improving a student's ability to talk with others, and that this is the most important aspect of language learning. This approach is also primarily directed at beginning language learners, rather than intermediate or advanced language learners.

# data[].attributes.headline
Five Primary Hypotheses of the Natural Approach

# data[].attributes.subject
Five Primary Hypotheses of the Natural Approach

# data[].attributes.body
To support the author's claims, there are five main hypotheses that drive the Natural Approach:  Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis, Monitor Hypothesis, Natural Order Hypothesis, Input Hypothesis, and Affective Filter Hypothesis (Krashen, et. al. 1998)

# data[].attributes.body
Garcia, O., & Kleifgen, J. A. (2018). Educating emergent bilinguals : Policies, programs, and practices for english learners. Teachers College Press.
Krashen, S. and Terrelll, T. (1998). The Natural Approach. http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/the_natural_approach.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
This learning hypothesis mostly centers around some of the differences between adult and childhood second language learning, which is not all too different. For many who learn a second language as children, they can simply acquire language skill, it comes fairly easily to them. This may not be as simple for adults, who may need to focus more on learning the language. Through this theory, Terrell and Krashen are encouraging teachers to reframe how they may think of adult language learners, more so as people still capable of learning language by acquisition (Krashen et al., 1998).

# data[].attributes.body
This hypothesis shifts the intention of a learner from actual language comprehension to the need to understand the grammar of a sentence. For language learners to understand the correctness of a sentatnce, they need to understand the following things: understanding of grammar, concentration on correctness, and time (Krashen et al., 1998).

# data[].attributes.body
This hypothesis discusses the order in which people learn language, and what order is easiest for language learning. For many people, for example, it may be easiest to learn the present tense before learning the past tense. After significant research, there has been evidence to show that there may be a particular way that people learn English best, which is supporting the idea that there is a particular order for which language should be learned (Krashen et al., 1998).

# data[].attributes.body
The Input Hypothesis is a bit in contrast to the overarching theme of the Natural Approach because it focuses significantly less on speaking ability. The central theme of the Input hypothesis is for a learner to be able to understand things from their environment, in the form of listening or reading a page (Krashen et al. 1998). With this theory, actual speaking ability comes second to listening and reading comprehension.

# data[].attributes.body
Finally, the Affective Filter Hypothesis speaks on the importance of motivation and self worth to language learning achievement (Krashen et al., 1998). To put this into a better perspective, people who are motivated to learn language tend to learn language better than those who do not motivate as much.

# data[].attributes.body
The Natural Approach can be beneficial to ESOL students and students learning a different second language alike. The primary intention behind the Natural Approach is for students to get the most natural learning experience possible, similar to what a child would do growing up. Rather than focusing entirely on memorizing verb conjugations or vocabulary, students are encouraged to learn by doing.

The Natural Approach could also be extremely useful for schools with limited ESOL support. If there are no true ESOL supports in the school, the student learning English would likely just need to do their best in classrooms and learn through context clues or acquisition of language. This structure would likely be similar to the Structured English immersion García et al. discusses, where there is support given to students in the classroom, but they are also expected to speak just one language in the classroom (García et al, 2018). While this may not be the most ideal way for students to learn English, it may be the only option teachers have.