Krashen (2006) outlines three important hypotheses in the field of applied linguistics:

1. The Natural Order Hypothesis
2. The Comprehensible Input Hypothesis
3.  The Monitor Hypothesis

The Natural Order Hypothesis posits that we acquire (as opposed to learn) language items in a restricted order, so that items of grammar, say, taught or studied out of order may be learned (i.e., memorized) for probably short-term use in form-focused environments such as tests, but normal language production will not reflect such learning.

The Comprehensible Input Hypothesis posits that we acquire language by observing it, so that speaking and writing practice do not serve acquisition (though they assist learning), but rather serve to demonstrate level of acquisition.

The Monitor Hypothesis posits that items of grammar learned but not acquired will not be tended to unless spontaneous speech is reviewed and revised by an "editor" before being uttered. Where speakers or writers are focused on meaning rather than form, many errors of form will occur. Where speakers or writers are focused on form, meaning may be hindered.

Based on these three hypotheses, I've come up with a couple of guidelines for writing ESL materials (and conducting ESL classes):

1. Natural Order Comprehensible Input
2. Acquired Language Output

The material presented, whether written or spoken, should contain a wealth of items within the learner's current "acquisition range". If the learner is at the stage to acquire the ing form, the material should be saturated with ing-form vocabulary. More advanced forms will by necessity also occur, but they should not be emphasized in either number or prominence.

Language produced by the learner should be assessed based on his or her acquired level. If the learner has recently acquired or is in the process of acquiring the ing form, only errors within range of the ing form should be corrected by the instructor. S form errors should be ignored, since correcting them will not assist acquisition at the ing form stage, and such unhelpful correction may activate the learner's Affective Filter.

Krashen, S.D. 2006. English Fever. The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. Taipei, Taiwan. 13-18.

Stephen D. Krashen, a bigwig in the study of language acquisition and an ardent proponent of so-called "comprehensible input", maintains that language competence is most efficiently acquired subconsciously through reading in one topic, by one author, or in one series. It stands to reason, I suppose, then, that reading a series of pieces by one author on one topic would really do the job.

I've long considered a foray into ESL/EFL/ELT writing. Some of the graded readers I've used with students have been half decent. I bet I could write better ones, though. Most of the readers I've experienced have a dessicated quality, whether adaptations or originals. They feel like they've been written for a level rather than at a level. I'm going to take a crack at writing, within vocabulary limits, stories that feel alive, that feel as if they were written at the right level.