Focus on Form

The importance of input has been a broadly documented concept in the field of second or foreign language acquisition. However, kinds of input and ways of its presentation are among the controversial issues in L2 classroom research. Therefore, this study was designed to compare the effects of three kinds of input-based instruction on intake and acquisition of the English causative structures by Iranian EFL learners. A total of 105 university students in four intact classes were randomly assigned to four different conditions: processing instruction (PI), textual input enhancement (TE), consciousness-raising (C-R), and control (CO). A pretest/posttest (immediate and delayed) design was used, where participants’ ability to interpret and produce the target structure was assessed through administering a multiple choice interpretation test and a sentence-level production test. Moreover, a grammaticality judgment test was run to assess the amount of intake. Results revealed that learners in the PI group significantly outperformed learners in the other groups on both immediate/delayed production posttests. The findings also indicated that, C-R group could not retain the significant effect of instruction on delayed production posttest and TE tasks were not effective in improving the learners’ production of the target structure. Moreover, the PI group outperformed the other groups on grammaticality judgment test too. Based on these findings, we can conclude that PI which encompasses the most outstanding features of both focus on form and meaning instruction might be a more effective approach in helping EFL learners to acquire the target grammatical forms.

This study aims to compare the effects of four types of FFI on second language vocabulary learning. To do so, the study adopted a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design, including five groups, each receiving a distinct treatment. The participants were 80 fourth-grade male students ranging in age from 17 to 19. Before the treatment phase, the participants took a researcher-made test of vocabulary as a pretest which was meant to measure the participants’ prior knowledge about the target words. After the treatment phase, the participants took a researcher-made test of vocabulary as posttest to measure the students' achievement of the target words. Independent samples t-test and one-way ANOVA were run to analyze the scores from the pretest and the posttest. The results indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between proactive and reactive FonF in the comprehension mode in terms of promoting vocabulary learning. There was also no statistically significant difference between these two forms of FonF in the production mode in terms of promoting vocabulary learning. However, there was a statistically significant difference between the comprehension-based and production-based FonF in enhancing vocabulary learning. These results extend the positive effect of FFI to L2 vocabulary teaching/learning.

This quasi-experimental study investigated the effects of input-enhancement and production of sentences, containing the target structures, on learning grammar by Iranian Intermediate EFL learners. Sixty male students in three input, output, and control groups participated in the study. After checking the homogeneity of the participants with a proficiency test, the researchers administered a pretest. Input-based group received input enhancement within reading texts in which the target structures were highlighted with different techniques such as bolding and underlying. The output-based group were required to produce some sentences including target structures based on reading texts. The control group received traditional grammar instruction. The results of ANCOVA revealed that both experimental groups learned the target structures better than the control group; however, the input-based group outperformed output-based group in learning target grammatical structures. The findings of the study suggest the widespread use of input-enhancement, as one of the techniques of focus on form, plays a significant role in enhancing grammatical accuracy.

In the realm of second language acquisition (SLA), task-based language teaching (TBLT) and input enhancement (IE) have been the focus of a great number of studies. However, the idea of investigating the effects of focus on form instruction through input-enhanced tasks along with pre-task planning time as one of the features of task-based language teaching has been rarely explored in the field of SLA. Therefore, the current research set out to examine the impacts of focus on form instruction via textually-enhanced reading tasks along with strategic pre-task planning on L2 learners’ grammatical development in terms of learning English passive voice. For the purpose of the study, 60 intermediate learners of English were selected and divided into two groups of thirty namely as enhanced and unenhanced. Then, each group was divided into two sub-groups of fifteen as +planning and -planning. The participants were provided with a pretest prior to the treatment, then, they were instructed via the materials chosen for the purpose of the study for ten sessions and at the end they were provided with the posttest of the study. Their performance on the pretest and posttest were analyzed to find out the possible effects of the instruction provided throughout the treatment phase. The results revealed that learners who were exposed to enhanced reading tasks along with strategic pre-task planning time outperformed the other learners. The findings of the present study can be of use for language teachers, syllabus designers, and task designers.

The current study was an attempt to investigate the effect of performing Focus on Form (FoF), Focus on Meaning (FoM), and Focus on Forms (FoFs) instructions on the development of collocational knowledge among Iranian intermediate EFL learners, and to explore any significant difference on the achievement of the participants' collocational knowledge among three groups. In so doing, 107 female intermediate EFL learners were selected for this research. They all took the Nelson proficiency test and 90 students who had gotten the higher scores were randomly divided into three groups of FoF, FoM, and FoFs. Before the treatment they were pretested and the results of the three groups did not have any significant difference, thus all of the learners were at the same level of knowledge. After the treatment, they were posttested and their scores in FoM group were considerably higher than the learner' scores in FoF and FoFs groups but the learners' scores in FoF and FoFs groups did not have any significant difference with each other. The findings of this study offer beneficial implications for EFL teachers, learners, and materials developers which are finally discussed.

Vocabulary and grammar are two significant components of English which learners often find challenging in their process of learning English as a foreign language (EFL). Therefore, finding the best way to teach grammar and vocabulary has always been a controversial issue among English teachers and researchers. The present study is an attempt to investigate the effect of dictogloss (DG) task, as one of the focus on form techniques, on EFL learners’ vocabulary versus grammar development. To this end, a quasi-experimental design was utilized to examine the effectiveness of the treatment. In this design, two classes were chosen, one as the experimental group (n=20) and the other as the control group (n=20). The participants were 40 female learners of English as a foreign language at intermediate level. In the experimental group the selected grammatical structures and vocabulary were taught using the DG technique, while in the control group the traditional method of teaching, present-practice-produce was used. The results gained from comparing pretest and posttest scores indicate that, although the experimental group outperformed the control group in learning vocabulary, there was no statistically significant difference between the experimental and control group regarding grammar scores. Therefore, it can be concluded that using DG task was more effective on vocabulary learning of learners than grammar development. The findings of this study will be of help for both English teachers and learners regarding finding the best method of teaching and learning English grammar and vocabulary.