With the dominance of English language as the language of technology, politics, and economy, there is always a strong desire for non-native English countries to learn it, either through the school curriculum or informal institutions offering English language courses.

The most conspicuous are Korea, China, Hong Kong, Japan and Indonesia. All these countries have been suffering what is dubbed "English fever".

In a country like ours, for instance, where English is taught as a mandatory school subject, the goal of teaching English is geared not to the acquisition, but to the learning of the language. That is, English is taught and learnt for the sake of preparing students to pass both school and the national exams.

But, what does it take to acquire English in particular and language in general? Learning grammatical rules? Memorizing vocabulary and idiomatic expressions? Learning how to spell words correctly?

Learning (through direct instruction), as Stephen Krashen has consistently argued, takes a conscious effort and is of limited use as it doesn't necessarily transfer into the acquisition of the language. Furthermore, language is too complex to be learnt and taught.

As a result of direct instruction, people do master language rules, understand vocabulary, and spell the words correctly.

Yet, its impact are not long-lasting as it is short-lived and often disappears with time. Because of their mastery of language elements, people may reasonably do the English exam well and pass it with flying colors, but over a period of time they forget what they have learnt and are unable to use it to communicate.

Given these limitations, the cure of English fever and the alternative to helping our students improve their English is certainly not through direct instruction. It is instead something good, something that offers tremendous pleasure to the students. It is called Free Voluntary Reading (FVR) - reading because you want to, with neither book reports nor an obligation to finish the book if the readers don't like it.

A missing ingredient in language education, FVR, as Krashen argues, is the most powerful tool for accelerating literacy development. He, however, cautions that "it will not, by itself, produce the highest level of competence; rather, it provides a foundation, so that a higher level of proficiency may be reached".

Despite this caveat, Krashen still contends that FVR is still the most potent means of acquiring language effectively. It is in accord with his other important hypotheses (i.e. the Affective Filter Hypothesis and the Pleasure Hypothesis). This led him to invent another hypothesis, the Reading Hypothesis - a specific form of his long-time controversial Input Hypothesis.

This hypothesis claims that we acquire language via one way - by understanding messages we read and hear. Our ability to speak and to write, for instance, is the result of our exposure to language input.

Language acquisition, Krashen claims, "comes from input, not output, from comprehension, not production". Thus, FVR, whose medium can take the form of comic books, teen romances, and magazines, among others, can serve as an important comprehensible language input for acquisition to take place.

Despite criticisms leveled against the above hypothesis, which result in the creation of other rival hypothesis (most notably the Output Hypothesis), the Input Hypothesis survives of late as one of the most robust hypotheses in second language acquisition theory. The fact that lots of scholarly works attribute to the rigor of the Input Hypothesis, more precisely the Reading Hypothesis, attests to its influential role in the field.

This book digs deep into what research has revealed about the power of reading in enhancing literacy development. In its extreme, numerous research evidence reviewed in it has provided a strong verification that even without direct instruction, literacy skill - our ability to write with a good style, complex grammatical structures, correct spelling, and appropriate vocabulary - can develop. This is what Krashen calls his competence without instruction argument.

Drawing from findings of his own meticulous research and other numerous empirical studies from many different countries world-wide, Krashen has managed to strengthen and buttress his long-disputed hypothesis.

Probably no less a thorny issue, Krashen elevates in this book his strong claim that more writing doesn't mean better writing, and that writing quantity doesn't affect writing quality. In other words, writing activity is not the cause of our writing ability. The latter is the result of reading. The former however contributes to another virtue: it equips us with problem solving strategies and making us smart.

For language educators, linguistic researchers, parents, and other professionals, The Power of Reading is a must read. Written in lucid and simple language, it is accessible to a wider readership. Marginal notes given on every page help readers understand the key points the writer wish to emphasize. Most importantly, the insights generated from current research enhance our understanding of the real power of reading.

The writer is chief-editor of Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching. He teaches English composition at Atma Jaya Catholic University, Jakarta. He can be reached at setiono.sugiharto@atmajaya.ac.id.

The Power of Reading: Insights from the Research (Second Edition)

By Stephen D. Krashen

Heinemann Portsmouth

199 pages

2004

Popular

Trump’s decision to bomb Iran exposes fissures in US politics

Indonesia, Germany see new programs for migrant workers training

Israel says Iran violates ceasefire announced by Trump, orders new strikes