krashen 5 hypothesis examples

• Beelinguapp

Stephen Krashen’s Five Hypotheses of Second Language Acquisition

Unsplash Monica Melton

Interested in learning more about linguistics and linguists ? Read this way.

What is linguistics? Linguistics is the scientific study of language that involves the analysis of language rules, language meaning, and language context. In other words, linguistics is the study of how a language is formed and how it works.

A person who studies linguistics is called a linguist . A linguist doesn't necessarily have to learn different languages because they’re more interested in learning the structures of languages. Noam Chomsky and Dr. Stephen Krashen are two of the world’s most famous linguists.

Dr. Stephen D. Krashen facilitated research in second-language acquisition , bilingual education, and in reading. He believes that language acquisition requires “meaningful interaction with the target language.”

Dr. Krashen also theorized that there are 5 hypotheses to second language acquisition , which have been very influential in the field of second language research and teaching

Let’s take a look at these hypotheses. Who knows, maybe you’ve applied one or all of them in your language learning journey!

1. Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis states that there is a distinction between language acquisition and language learning. In language acquisition, the student acquires language unconsciously . This is similar to when a child picks up their first language. On the other hand, language learning happens when the student is consciously discovering and learning the rules and grammatical structures of the language.

2. Monitor Hypothesis

Monitor Hypothesis states that the learner is consciously learning the grammar rules and functions of a language rather than its meaning. This theory focuses more on the correctness of the language . To use the Monitor Hypothesis properly, three standards must be met:

• The acquirer must know the rules of the language.
• The acquirer must concentrate on the exact form of the language.
• The acquirer must set aside some time to review and apply the language rules in a conversation. Although this is a tricky one, because in regular conversations there’s hardly enough time to ensure correctness of the language.

3. Natural Order Hypothesis

Natural Order Hypothesis is based on the finding that language learners learn grammatical structures in a fixed and universal way . There is a sense of predictability to this kind of learning, which is similar to how a speaker learns their first language.

4. Input Hypothesis

Input Hypothesis places more emphasis on the acquisition of the second language. This theory is more concerned about how the language is acquired rather than learned.

Moreover, the Input Hypothesis states that the learner naturally develops language as soon as the student receives interesting and fun information .

5. Affective Filter Hypothesis

In Affective Filter, language acquisition can be affected by emotional factors. If the affective filter is higher, then the student is less likely to learn the language. Therefore, the learning environment for the student must be positive and stress-free so that the student is open for input.

Language acquisition is a subconscious process. Usually, language acquirers are aware that they’re using the language for communication but are unaware that they are acquiring the language.

Language acquirers also are unaware of the rules of the language they are acquiring. Instead, language acquirers feel a sense of correctness, when the sentence sounds and feels right. Strange right? But it is also quite fascinating.

Acquiring a language is a tedious process. It can seem more like a chore, a game of should I learn today or should I just do something else? Sigh

But Dr. Krashen’s language acquisition theories might be onto something, don’t you think? Learning a language should be fun and in some way it should happen naturally. Try to engage in meaningful interactions like reading exciting stories and relevant news articles, even talking with friends and family in a different language. Indulge in interesting and easy to understand language activities, and by then you might already have slowly started acquiring your target language!

Related Posts

How to pronounce “hermès” & more fashion brands, rap your way to french fluency with french hip hop, dork and other cool 80s sayings with stranger things, subscribe to our newsletter.

The 5 Hypotheses of Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition B.Ed Notes

Back to: Pedagogy of English – Unit 3

Stephen Krashen is an expert in the linguistic field. He specializes in the theories of language acquisition and development. He has published more than 100 articles since 1980 and has delivered over 300 lectures across many renowned Universities in USA and Canada. According to Krashen, language acquisition requires “meaningful interaction with the target language. ” Dr. Krashen theorized that there are 5 hypotheses for second language acquisition. All of these 5 hypotheses have been highly influential in the field of second language research and teaching.

The Life and Work of Stephen Krashen

Stephen Krashen is an American linguist who was born in 1941. He received a Ph.D. in Linguistics in 1972 and has spent his career working as a linguistics professor at the University of Southern California. Krashen’s work has earned him a number of awards and accolades. He has received the Mildenberger Award and the Pimsleur Award for his writing and the Dorothy C. McKenzie Award for Distinguished Contribution to the Field of Children’s Literature. Krashen’s theories have been widely received with positive critical acclaim and have in many cases become the educational standard for second language learning in North America.

Krashen’s work has primarily focused on his theory of second language acquisition, or the process through which individuals learn a language besides their native language. While most of his work has focused on second language acquisition among children, his research is often applicable to older language learners as well. Some of his notable books include The Power of Reading, Explorations in Language Acquisition and Use and Foreign Language Education The Easy Way, all of which are about the role of education in second language acquisition.

Second Language Acquisition and Theories of Stephen Krashen

Second language acquisition is a major area of discussion in the field of linguistics. There are many benefits to learning a second language and many parents in America want their children to learn a second language in school. In Krashen’s work, he makes an important distinction between language learning and language acquisition. In Krashen’s view, learning must be a deliberate process of building language skills through structured activities. Most people who have studied a second language will be familiar with this approach. Krashen distinguishes learning from acquisition on the basis that acquisition is an organic process that comes about through an immersion environment. Understanding this distinction is critical for understanding Krashen’s work, which can be divided into five hypotheses.

What are the 5 Hypothesis of Krashen?

Krashen’s five hypotheses are the acquisition-learning hypothesis, the monitor hypothesis, the input hypothesis, the affective filter hypothesis, and the natural order hypothesis. All five come together to form Krashen’s theory of second language acquisition.

The five hypotheses formulated by Krashen in his theory of language acquisition are as follows.

Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

This hypothesis states that there is a difference between language learning and language acquisition. The learner acquired language unconsciously in language acquisition whereas, in language learning, the learner picks up the language through conscious discovery and by learning the grammatical rules and structures of the language.

The acquisition-learning hypothesis elaborates on the difference between language acquisition and language learning. Acquisition is unconscious while learning is deliberate. Acquisition is much closer to the way that humans learn their native languages as children: deliberate work is not typically required. Krashen’s hypothesis states that learning ought to be secondary to acquisition for second language learners. While he does not discount the importance of structured learning entirely, he strongly emphasizes the importance of immersion environments for long-term, comprehensive acquisition. Krashen describes acquisition as a student-centered approach to education, while learning is more teacher-centered. Foregrounding learning may be easier for teachers, but Krashen argues that it is less effective in the long term.

Monitor Hypothesis

According to monitor hypotheses, the learner learns the grammar rules and functions of the language consciously rather than its meaning. It lays more emphasis on the correctness of the language. There are three standards required to use this hypothesis properly.

The monitor hypothesis comes into play as an addition to the acquisition-learning hypothesis. In Krashen’s view, ”monitoring” is a skill that people acquire when they focus on learning grammar. They can monitor their own speech to edit it and correct errors. Language acquisition can be a more chaotic system that does not focus as heavily on rules, so grammar-based monitoring can help make speech more comprehensible and aligned with learning objectives. Monitoring, Krashen points out, only comes into play when learners are aware of a grammar rule, focus on that rule, and have enough time to correct speech errors. Some people seem to rely too much on their monitoring, while other speakers under-rely on it and make more mistakes as a result. In order to make the most of the monitor system, speakers need to have reasonable confidence in their speaking abilities.

• The acquired must know the language rules.
• The acquirer must emphasize the exact form of the language.
• The acquirer must review the language and apply its rules in a conversation.

Natural Order Hypothesis

This hypothesis believes that language learners learn grammatical structures universally and fixedly. This kind of learning has a sense of predictability which is akin to learning the first language. Natural Order Hypothesis is based on the finding that language learners learn grammatical structures in a fixed and universal way. There is a sense of predictability to this kind of learning, which is similar to how a speaker learns their first language.

Input Hypothesis

This hypothesis focuses more on the acquisition of the second language. It is concerned more with how the language is acquired instead of how it is learned. It believes that the learner develops the language naturally as they receive fun and interesting information. The input hypothesis attempts to explain how organic acquisition takes place. This is a major question in linguistics. Krashen proposes a simple formula: ”i + 1.” In this formula, ”i” represents the current input stage that a learner can understand. There is nothing new at this level and everything has already been internalized. The ”+ 1” indicates one level of challenge where there is a small amount of new input at each level. Once learners have mastered the new material, the input can become more complex yet again. In this way, those acquiring a second language are constantly improving and constantly challenged. It can, of course, be challenging for teachers to always observe this formula; it is intended as an ideal and a guideline more than anything else and it seeks to explain the actual process of acquisition on a practical level

Affective Filter Hypothesis

In this hypothesis, emotional factors can affect language acquisition. The learner is less likely to learn the language if the affective filter is higher. Hence, the learning environment must be stress-free and positive so that the learner can learn properly.

In Affective Filter, language acquisition can be affected by emotional factors. If the affective filter is higher, then the student is less likely to learn the language. Therefore, the learning environment for the student must be positive and stress-free so that the student is open for input.

Language acquisition is a subconscious process. Usually, language acquirers are aware that they’re using the language for communication but are unaware that they are acquiring the language.

Language acquirers also are unaware of the rules of the language they are acquiring. Instead, language acquirers feel a sense of correctness, when the sentence sounds and feels right. Strange right? But it is also quite fascinating.

Stephen Krashen states

“Language acquisition does not require extensive use of conscious grammatical rules, and does not require tedious drill. Acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language – natural communication – in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and understanding.”

He further added,

“In the real world, conversations with sympathetic native speakers who are willing to help the acquirer understand are very helpful.”

Real Life Language

Studying Krashen: Benny Lewis and the 5 Theories

April 20, 2020 April 23, 2020

Dr. Stephen Krashen has done so much for the teaching and learning of languages through the research and publication of his five theories of language acquisition.

Studying Krashen’s 5 Theories

Krashen’s theory of second language acquisition consists of five main hypotheses:

• the Acquisition-Learning hypothesis;
• the Monitor hypothesis;
• the Natural Order hypothesis;
• the Input hypothesis;
• and the Affective Filter hypothesis.

Here’s my cheat sheet of Krashen’s theories:

Acquisition-Learning

Acquisition is natural. Learning is intentional and more artificial. Think about the way you learned your own language as a child. You were immersed in messages. You were read to. You watched television. You listened to songs. You read. 

With learning, think about some of the formal instruction you had in school. For example, what a noun is or what an adverb is. Instruction on parts of speech and grammar exercises are examples of formal language instruction that many of us have experienced.

Monitor 

This is the practical result of the language learned. It discusses how learners monitor what they have learned and acquired in the new language.

For example, some over-monitor and as a result, are overly measured in their language use, ultimately at the expense of communication. Some under-monitor, at the expense of accuracy. Optimal learners remain aware enough to monitor their use enough to allow for continued progress yet don’t let mistakes halt their progress.

Natural Order

As Krashen says, “For a given language, some grammatical structures tend to be acquired early, while others late.”

I like to use the example of children again. Think about some of the simple things they say when they’re first learning to speak. They’re choppy and rough. Think about by the time someone graduates from college how sophisticated and polished their language is relative to a small child, and the ease of expression they have. While this natural order seems to be similar among languages and learner profiles, grammar does not need to be learned in a specific sequence.

In order to keep your skills growing in a language, you need comprehensible input. This is language that you can understand, with some new things in there that let you problem solve, think and acquire new structures. They allow you to work on language that is slightly more difficult-just slightly above your level of language- into what you already know.

Affective Filter

This can have a huge impact on how quickly you learn languages. Learning languages can be pretty scary.

Do you have an outgoing personality? Are you an extrovert? Are you willing to put yourself out there, or are you a perfectionist, measured with your communication? 

In order to really bring these theories to life, I’d like to share with you the story of Benny Lewis from Fluent in 3 Months. Benny’s better known as the Irish Polyglot. 

Benny’s a smart guy. He studied engineering at university. He really wanted to learn new languages. But despite his intellect and his strong work ethic, he wasn’t successful in traditional classes. Fast forward about 15 years, and Benny is fluent in more and more languages all the time.  Without having any background in languages, he perfectly executed Krashen’s five hypotheses. Visit his website, Fluent in 3 Months , as well as his YouTube channel, where he’s documented his journey of language learning missions over the years.

Listen to the episode to hear my study of Benny and Krashen’s 5 Theories.

Krashen, Stephen. “Stephen Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition.” Stephen Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition , Stephen Krashen, 3 July 2019, www.sk.com.br/sk-krash-english.html.

Looking to set goals and measure your progress? Check out the course here: https://real-life-language.teachable.com/p/measure-your-progress-and-fluency-in-any-language

Looking to get started in a new language? Check out the mini-courses here and start making your own playlists: http://reallifelanguage.com/reallifelanguageblog/category/podcasts/

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• ELT Concourse home
• A-Z site index
• Teacher training index
• Teacher development
• For teachers
• For trainers
• For managers
• For learners
• About language
• Language questions
• Other areas
• Academic English
• Business English
• Entering ELT
• Courses index
• Basic ELT course
• Language analysis
• Training to train
• Transcription

Krashen and the Natural Approach

The guide to the history and development of English Language Teaching covers: grammar translation, audio-lingualism (including structural linguistics and behaviourist theories of learning) and the rise of communicative language teaching. The separate guide to Communicative Language Teaching takes it on from there. You should go to those guides (which open in new tabs) for more on the background and the story so far.

We have a whole guide on the Natural Approach, not because it is hugely influential in itself, but because the theories (or, better, hypotheses) which underlie it have been demonstrably influential in themselves. The approach takes its name from the book by Krashen and Terrell (1983) which outlined an approach to language teaching based on a set of fundamental hypotheses.  It is these we need to focus on before we can discuss methodology arising from them.

In 1982, Krashen published Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning in which he set out five hypotheses.  What follows here is a very brief summary. The full text is, fortunately, now available at http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/sl_acquisition_and_learning.pdf.  Please look there for the background, evidence and more detail.

the classroom can be of value, and in fact generally is of value, in language acquisition as well as in language learning Krashen, 2002:48 (emphasis in the original)

Naturally, such a broad and significant range of hypotheses has not been without its critics.  However, whether one accepts the truth of all the hypotheses or not, there are clearly classroom implications to consider.  Consider how you would fill in the right-hand column in this table and then click on it for some comments.

To give you a flavour of how teaching and learning are carried out following the Natural Approach, here are some statements from a handbook of the approach (Krashen and Terrell, 1983).

• Your teacher will speak French exclusively.  You may answer in either English or French.  You are free to use English until you yourself feel ready to try speaking French.  You should not try to use French until you are comfortable doing so.
• When you do try to speak in the new language, the teacher is interested in what you have to say – not whether you have said it perfectly.  Neither you nor the teacher will be overly concerned with grammar errors in your speech while you are a beginner.
• You do not have to use full sentences.  You may talk in short phrases or even use just one word when that is appropriate.
• Remember that as long as you understand what the teacher is saying you are acquiring French.  This means that you should focus on what is being said, the message, rather than how it is being said.

The first of these is known as delayed oral practice and has received quite a lot of attention.  In the past, the assumption has been that intensive oral practice from the outset of the learning process will be effective.  This is now not taken for granted and some evidence shows that learners, especially beginners, need a period of time to assimilate what they hear before being asked to produce the target language.  In other words, to build competence before performance.

Many have noted that this kind of approach is not very far removed from an 'ordinary' communicative-approach classroom.

There's a short, easy test on this .

References: Krashen, S, 2002, Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning , First internet edition, retrieved from http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/sl_acquisition_and_learning.pdf Krashen, SD & Terrell, TD, 1983,  The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom , London: Prentice Hall Europe Widdowson, H, 1990, Aspects of Language Teaching , Oxford: Oxford University Press

Contact | FAQs | Copyright notice | ELT Concourse charter | Disclaimer and Privacy statement | Search ELT Concourse

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Krashen's Language Acquisition Hypotheses: A Critical Review

Related Papers

International Journal of Social Research

Mzamani Maluleke

The monitor model, being one of its kind postulating the rigorous process taken by learners of second language, has since its inception in 1977, stirred sterile debates the globe over. Since then, Krashen has been rethinking and expanding his hypothetical acquisition notions, improve the applicability of his theory. The model has not been becoming, and it therefore faces disapproval on the basis of its failure to be tested empirically and, at some points, its contrast to Krashen’s earlier perceptions on both first and second language acquisition. In this paper, the writers deliberate upon Krashen’s monitor model, its tenets as well as the various ways in which it impacts, either negatively or positively upon educational teaching and learning.

Amalia Oyarzún

Aufani Yukzanali

Many theories on how language is acquired has been introduced since 19th century and still being introduced today by many great thinkers. Like any other theories which arose from variety of disciplines, language acquisition theories generally derived from linguistics and psychological thinking. This paper concluded that the most important implication of language acquisition theories is obviously the fact that applied linguists, methodologist and language teachers should view the acquisition of a language not only as a matter of nurture but also an instance of nature. In addition, only when we distinguish between a general theory of learning and language learning can we ameliorate the conditions L2 education. To do so, applied linguists must be aware of the nature of both L1 and L2 acquisition and must consider the distinction proposed in this study. Furthermore, no longer should mind and innateness be treated as dirty words. This will most probably lead to innovative proposals for syllabus development and the design of instructional systems, practices, techniques, procedures in the language classroom, and finally a sound theory of L2 teaching and learning.

Karunakaran Thirunavukkarasu

Luz Villarroel Cornejo

Evynurul Laily Zen

This paper aims at revealing the factors that contribute to children's language acquisition of either their first or second language. The affective filter hypothesis (Krashen, 2003) as the underlying framework of this paper is used to see how children's perception towards the language input take a role in the process of acquisition. 25 lecturers in the Faculty of Letters, State University of Malang who have sons or daughters under the age of 10 become the data source. The data are collected through survey method and analyzed qualitatively since this paper is attempting to give a thorough description of the reality in children's language acquisition. The results show that most children are exposed to the language while interacting with their family members, especially their mothers. Another factor is children's interactions with friends. The languages used by their friends are potential to be acquired by them. These two factors strongly confirm the core idea of the affective filter hypothesis that children will learn best when they feel comfortable and are positive about the input they are absorbing. Furthermore, reading is also one of other minor contributing factors discovering the fact that the books the children like helps them construct positive perception which then encourage them import more inputs. 1. Rationale This paper is an attempt to disseminate the result of the survey-based research conducted to have a closer look at the mapping of bilingual language situation seen in certain linguistic situation in Malang. The survey that was conducted to bilingual parents is basically about to satisfy a personal yet scientific curiosity of the researchers as both parents to bilingual children and language teachers. Nothing seems really unique from the fact that children in Indonesia are born to be bilingual because, by nature, they are raised by bilingual parents in bi(multi)lingual situation. On the other hand, there have been an increasing number of studies that explore the nature of bilingual language acquisition. Some have seen negative impact of exposing second language to children (at various angles by which these previous studies have been carried out, the socio-psycholinguistic environment of bilingual children in Malang is obviously worth-researching. One of the focuses of the survey is looking thoroughly at the contributing factors of both the first and second language development of bilinguals that mainly becomes the concern of this paper. Something really significant to start with is the result of the survey seen from Figure 1 below that not only 16% of the children of the respondents are raised monolingual, but also 28% of them are trilingual.

Lazaros Kikidis

For Didactics and Applied Linguistics MA students

Andreas Gozali

Language and Education

Nicole Ziegler

RELATED PAPERS

yenny ortega

HortTechnology

Elizabeth Chang

Tiede & edistys

Janne Säynäjäkangas

The Journal of Chemical Physics

βίκτωρ τσιλώνης

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Yifeng Jiang

Melissa Farmer

Hapax-Inspiratio

Rafael Hurtado

Interface - Comunicação, Saúde, Educação

Hari Madeira

Cláudio Luchesa

barry kambey

Gilbert Le Goff

Anais do XVIII Simpósio Brasileiro de Computação Musical (SBCM 2021)

Michael Lopes Bastos

Desalination and Water Treatment

Gabriele Comodi

Diseño y Sociedad

María Eugenia Castro Ramírez

Eric Justes

Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications

Takeshi Fukao

Jorge Cordero

Gheorghița Plămădeală

Calcified tissue international

David Findlay

Selekcija i Semenarstvo

Milan Jockovic

Td. Temas y debates

Hugo Quiroga

Elliott Horowitz ז”ל

Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation

Mads Terkelsen

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Search Our Store:

The natural order of acquisition (krashen’s hypotheses series, #4 of 9).

(Previous post: Acquisition/Learning)

The next post in this series (#5/9),  The Input Hypothesis , is found here .

N: The Natural Order of Acquisition Hypothesis

“students acquire elements of grammar in a predictable order that is unaffected by teaching.”.

Stephen Krashen and other researchers contend that the order of acquisition is a natural feature of the human brain. It cannot be altered or rushed. The ability to recognize and produce certain aspects of grammar, and much of the accompanying vocabulary, unfolds as students are exposed to comprehensible input.

The natural order of acquisition is not the teaching order. It is useful as a guide in setting expectations, but it is not a blueprint for teaching.

Every student is at a different stage of acquisition, so attempting to structure a grammatical syllabus based on the natural order of acquisition is frustrating and nearly futile.

APPLYING THE NATURAL ORDER OF ACQUISITION HYPOTHESIS IN THE CLASSROOM :

* Differentiate your instruction. Every class is a multi-level class. Realize that students are acquiring language at different rates. They do not all progress in lock step with one another. They acquire pieces here and there as they are ready. The order is somewhat predictable but the timing is not.

* Limit error correction. Error correction does not work. Recognize that error correction is mostly futile . Time is better spent giving more comprehensible input. https://www.brycehedstrom.com/2017/the-futility-of-error-correction-2

* Vary the input. Keep the natural order of acquisition in mind but do not attempt to precisely mimic it in your syllabus. Instead, vary the input so that those that are ready can catch what they need and progress in the language at their own rate.

* Focus on high frequency vocabulary . The most commonly used words will be the most useful. 65% of all communication in most languages is accomplished with the 100 most common words. There are frequency lists for every language. https://www.brycehedstrom.com/wp-content/uploads/High-Frequency-Verbs.pdf

* Provide opportunities for students to progress at their own pace.

Free Voluntary Reading  (FVR) is an effective way to accomplish this. https://www.amazon.com/Free-Voluntary-Reading-Stephen-Krashen/dp/1598848445/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

* Keep the input interesting and comprehensible so that student acquisition can unfold as each student is ready to acquire it. If we can keep their attention and keep them involved students will acquire what they can when they are ready.

* Spiral the curriculum.  We must go back and revisit certain aspects of language again and again as we progress. Students are not at the same point in their acquisition. Everyone has gaps in what they know and can do. No one gets all of the grammar and vocabulary the first time through, or even after several times through. This is natural in language acquisition. Think of the native English speakers you know that cannot use “eaten” or “written” correctly, or those that confuse “its” and “it’s”.

* Allow the Natural Order of Acquisition to Guide Your Expectations. Many of the of the standard curricula for beginning language classes are actually late acquired when it comes to spontaneous, unrehearsed speaking. Some mind-bending, counter-intuitive examples in Spanish:

–Applying the difference between  ser  and  estar  is late acquired. The difference seems easy to explain, but the nuances can be subtle.

–Using definite articles ( el, la, los & las  = the) correctly is one of the last items to be acquired, even though they are high frequency and seemingly simple to understand grammatically. Both  el  and  la  are listed as the most frequently used word(s) in the Spanish language in Mark Davies A Frequency Dictionary of Spanish  (available in many other languages, including French, and Chinese) .  Students see and hear these words all the time and they understand what they mean. Plus, the explanation seems simple:  el  is singular masculine, la is singular feminine,  los  is plural masculine, and  las  is plural feminine. Got it kids? OK, test tomorrow!

NO! It isn’t that easy in the human brain.

Share This Article:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.