Krashen's theory (1983) still up to date or outdated?

[guiguixx1]

Thanks for all these answers! I'm actually working on motivation and task-based language teaching. I'm making a research on whether authentic (realistic) tasks raise pupils' motivation more than not-authentic tasks. The answer seems to be quite straightforward, and still, even if the two tasks I have designed and used share many things in common except the authentic parameters, these shared things raise motivation for both tasks and make the not-authentic, and thus not-realistic task, not as boring as might have been expected ^^' well, it's my conclusion up to now, but I'm barely at 18,000 words and have to reach between 30,000 and 40,000.

So in my work I want to talk about authentic tasks which don't require attention paid to grammar rules but rather the simple fact of using the language as a communication tool, which is why I got interested by Krashen's work

[Cainntear]

So in my work I want to talk about authentic tasks which don't require attention paid to grammar rules but rather the simple fact of using the language as a communication tool, which is why I got interested by Krashen's work

Then you're not really interested in Krashen. Krashen basically said "we learn languages when we understand messages". Communication is about exchanging messages to achieve something, so different. You're looking at communicative language teaching (CLT) a.k.a. the communicative approach, and I'm actually kind of surprised that you aren't aware of this already.

[leosmith]

I'm working on my MA dissertation concerning language learning and I found some research from Krashen back in 1983. He states that learning a language is much more a question of practising the language in real communicative situation than studying grammar.

I’m no expert, but here’s the opinion of this language learner on the 5 parts of his theory:
1) Acquisition-Learning hypothesis: other than Krashen, I don’t know of anyone who believes that what he calls “learning” activities don’t help one acquire a language. I’m not saying one should spend all their time learning grammar, but I think it’s extreme to dismiss learning activities to the extent this hypothesis does.
2) Monitor hypothesis & 3) Natural Order hypothesis: I haven’t found these to be helpful in any way, so I don’t use them and don’t know how valid they are.
4) Input hypothesis: To me the useful takeaway is that there is a sweet-spot in study material difficulty. I think studying things that aren’t too easy or too hard is more efficient, so I agree with it.
5) Affective Filter hypothesis: Do things like stress and low self-esteem hinder my progress? You bet. So I do things to reduce these factors, and find the hypothesis helpful.