Keywords
form-focused instruction
isolated FFI
integrated FFI
passive voice
How to Cite
Number of views: 813
Number of downloads: 921
Abstract
This study investigates how different form-focused instruction (FFI) timing impacts English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ grammar development. A total of 169 Chinese middle school learners were assigned to four conditions randomly: control, before-isolated FFI, integrated FFI, and after-isolated FFI. The three experimental groups received treatments which combined form and meaning with the English passive voice as the teaching target, but learners’ attention was drawn to the passive voice with different timing. The before-isolated and after-isolated groups received the treatment before and after communicative activities, respectively. For the integrated FFI group, intervention occurred during communicative activities. A picture writing test and a written error correction test were employed to measure students’ performance. The results indicated that the three experimental groups manifested significant improvement. Before-isolated FFI produced the best immediate and delayed effects, and integrated FFI produced better immediate effect than after-isolated FFI, while after-isolated FFI produced better delayed effect than integrated FFI. The findings indicated that pedagogical sequences in FFI are important, and teachers might need to guide adolescent learners to focus on form explicitly before communicative activities.
Funding
This work was supported by MOE (Ministry of Education in China) Project of Humanities and Social Sciences under Grant Number 21YJC740025.
References
Bielak, J., Pawlak, M., & Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A. (2013). Teaching the English active and passive voice with the help of cognitive grammar: An empirical study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 3(4), 581-619. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2013.3.4.7
Broszkiewicz, A. (2011). The effect of focused communication tasks on instructed acquisition of English past counterfactual conditionals. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(3), 335-363. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2011.1.3.3
Carless, D. (2012). TBLT in EFL settings – looking back and moving forward. In A. Shehadeh & C. A. Coombe (Eds.), Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and implementation (pp. 345-358). John Benjamins.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education. Routledge.
Danks, J. H., & Gans, D. L. (1975). Acquisition and utilization of a rule structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1(2), 201-208. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.1.2.201
DeKeyser, R. M. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 42-63). Cambridge University Press.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 499-533. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004022
DeKeyser, R. M. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313-348). Blackwell.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2007). Skill acquisition theory. In B. Van Patten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 97-113). Lawrence Erlbaum.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2017). Knowledge and skill in SLA. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 15-32). Routledge.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197-262). Cambridge University Press.
Elgün-Gündüz, Z., Akcan, S., & Bayyurt, Y. (2012). Isolated form-focused instruction and integrated form-focused instruction in primary school English classroom in Turkey. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 25(2), 157-171. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2012.683008
Ellis, R. (2009). Implicit and explicit learning, knowledge and instruction. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 3-25). Multilingual Matters.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281-318. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00156
File, K. A., & Adams, R. (2010). Should vocabulary instruction be integrated or isolated? TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 222-249. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.219943
Frederick, P. J. (1986). The lively lecture – 8 variations. College Teaching, 34, 43-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.1986.9926766
Hartshorne, J. K., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Pinker, S. (2018). A critical period for second language acquisition: Evidence from 2/3 million English speakers. Cognition, 177, 263-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.007
Horgan, I. (2003). Lecturing for learning. In H. Fry, S. Ketteridge, & S. Marshall (Eds.), A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education (pp. 75-90). Routledge.
Kachinske, I., Osthus, P., Solovyeva, K., & Long, M. (2015). Implicit learning of a L2 morphosyntactic rule, and its relevance for language teaching. In P. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 387-415). John Benjamins Publishing.
Kang, E. Y., Sok, S., & Han, Z. H. (2019). Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23(4), 428-453. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818776671
Kim, J., & Nam, H. (2017). Measures of implicit knowledge revisited: Processing modes, time pressure, and modality. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39, 431-457. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000510
Lee, S. -K. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive form. Language Learning, 57, 87-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00400.x
Li, S. (2020). What is the ideal time to provide corrective feedback? Replication of Li, Zhu & Ellis (2016) and Arroyo & Yilmaz (2018). Language Teaching, 53(1), 96-108. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144481800040X
Li, S., Ellis, R., & Zhu, Y. (2016a). Task-based versus task-supported language instruction: An experimental study. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 205-229. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190515000069
Li, S., Zhu, Y., & Ellis, R. (2016b). The effects of the timing of corrective feed-back on the acquisition of a new linguistic structure. Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 276-295. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12315
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned. Oxford University Press.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Cur-rent Directions in Psychological Science, 15(5), 265-268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00449.x
Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). John Benjamins.
Lynch, T. (2007). Learning from the transcripts of an oral communication task. ELT Journal, 61, 311-320. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm050
Mathews, R. C., Buss, R. R., Stanley, W. B., Blanchard-fields, F., Cho, J. R., & Druhan, B. (1989). Role of implicit and explicit processes in learning from examples: A synergistic effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(6), 1083-1100. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.15.6.1083
Murray, D. E., & Christison, M. A. (2011). What English language teachers need to know Volume. II: Facilitating learning. Routledge.
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research syn-thesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136
Pawlak, M. (2006). The place of form-focused instruction in the foreign language classroom. Adam Mickiewicz University Press.
Pawlak, M. (2019). Tapping the distinction between explicit and implicit knowledge: Methodological issues. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Ed.), Contacts & contrasts in educational contexts and translation (pp.45-60). Springer Nature.
Pawlak, M. (2021). Teaching foreign language grammar: New solutions, old problems. Foreign Language Annals, 54(4), 881-896. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12563
Qin, J. (2008). The effect of processing instruction and dictogloss tasks on acquisition of the English passive voice. Language Teaching Research, 12, 61-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807084494
Reber, A. S., Kassin, S. M., Lewis, S., & Cantor, G. (1980). On the relationship between implicit and explicit modes in the learning of a complex rule structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(5), 492-502. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.6.5.492
Shintani, N. (2017). The effects of the timing of isolated FFI on the explicit knowledge and writing accuracy of learners with different prior knowledge of the linguistic target. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(1), 129-166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000127
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30(2), 73-87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800012799
Spada, N. (2011). Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflections on past, present and future research. Language Teaching, 44(2), 225-236. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444810000224
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42(2), 181-207. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00115.x
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 1-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00562.x
Spada, N., Jessop, L., Tomita, Y., Suzuki, W., & Valeo, A. (2014). Isolated and integrated form-focused instruction: Effects on different types of L2 knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 18(4), 453-473. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813519883
Stillwell, C., Curabba, B., Alexander, K., Kidd, A., Kim, E., Stone, P., & Wyle, C. (2010). Students transcribing tasks: Noticing fluency, accuracy, and complexity. ELT Journal, 64, 445-455. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp081
Vafaee, P., Suzuki, Y., & Kachisnke, I. (2017). Validating grammaticality judgment tests: Evidence from two psycholinguistic measures. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39, 59-95. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000455
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(3), 287-301. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009177
Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Longman.
Williams, J., & Evans, J. (1998). What kind of focus and on which forms? In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 139-155). Cambridge University Press.
Xu, J. F., & Li, C. Y. (2021). The effects of the timing of form-focused instruction on EFL learners’ learning of difficult and easy grammatical features: A comparative study. System, 101, 102612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102612
Zhou, Y. P. (1991). The effect of explicit instruction on the acquisition of English grammatical structures by Chinese learners. In C. James & P. Garret (Eds.), Language awareness in the classroom (pp. 254-277). Longman.
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.