Understanding and Utilizing Form
Understanding and Utilizing Form
Abstract
ESL/EFL teachers can face several challenges when it comes to a focus on language
forms in the classroom. How should teachers integrate the instruction of structural
language forms with meaning-based activities? How necessary is a focus on form for
student language learning? In what contexts is an explicit focus on form in the classroom
most appropriate? This article explores the answers to these questions and others. The
article begins by looking at some relevant background on the use of Form-Focused
Instruction (FFI) in the language classroom, and it considers FFI’s relevance for today’s
learners. The paper also provides pragmatic examples for how to make use of FFI in
practical and meaningful ways. In the end, the article argues that a theoretical and
pedagogical awareness of FFI should be part of a teacher’s repertoire of tools to
enhance student learning in certain classroom contexts.
Introduction
English language teachers working in both ESL and EFL contexts are often faced
with a pedagogical dilemma centered around the longstanding debate over how and when
to include focused grammatical instruction in the classroom. Should teachers explicitly
focus learners’ attention on grammatical forms? If so, how and when should such explicit
instruction occur? Alternatively, should teachers simply focus on creating classroom
contexts where grammatical forms can be practiced in meaningful and authentic ways?
Does a focus on authentic communicative language in the classroom necessarily preclude
direct grammatical instruction?
These questions are not new to the field, nor have definitive answers been
established. Decisions about the extent to which teachers ought to focus clearly on
grammatical instruction in the classroom are largely contextual and vary from one class
27 ORTESOL Journal, Volume 35, 2018
type to another. This paper argues that teachers have a responsibility to understand and
engage with the debate around Form-Focused Instruction (FFI), and to develop their
pedagogic skill set to include ways to translate FFI theory into classroom teaching
practice.
This paper will provide a working definition of FFI and a general overview of the
various theoretical positions surrounding form-focused grammatical instruction. It will
also consider the different contexts in which FFI might or might not be appropriate in the
classroom, and present practical classroom applications of FFI as examples.
Effectiveness of FFI
One of the pervasive findings from numerous studies is that the explicit use of FFI
can promote language learning (DeKeyser, 1998, 2003; Ellis, 2001; Norris & Ortega,
2001; Spada & Lightbown, 2008). In Norris and Ortega’s (2001) meta-analysis, effect
sizes were calculated based on a review of 49 research studies looking at explicit and
implicit instruction of language forms. The effect size of explicit instruction (both focus-
on-forms and focus-on-form) was shown to be significantly larger than that of implicit
instruction (both focus-on-forms and focus-on-form). In addition, Norris and Ortega
illustrate that the difference of the effect size between explicit focus-on-forms and
explicit focus-on-form instruction is small, which might suggest that any type of explicit
Conclusion
FFI comes in a range of styles and approaches, and teachers should be aware of how
different types of FFI can be integrated into their teaching practice to best meet the needs
of their learners. As with most aspects of English language teaching, FFI does not present
a one-size-fits-all approach for teachers. Instead, decisions about how and when to
incorporate FFI into the classroom experience are context-based and impacted by a wide
range of factors including the students age and language proficiency level, the teacher’s
comfort level with instruction in specific forms, the lesson content, and the background
knowledge and experience of the students.
As was highlighted by the two examples given here, FFI’s advantages in the
classroom can be numerous. In a well-balanced pedagogical approach, students can be
encouraged to focus on both form and meaning in a given activity, and the form-focused
instruction can be customized to student needs and may only take a limited amount of
class time. Another advantage is that, in many EFL contexts in particular, there often
exists a tension between focus on meaning and focus on form. Many countries now have
a nationalized English language curricula that encourages communicative language
learning and an emphasis on meaning; however, these same countries continue to assess
students’ language proficiency based primarily on knowledge of the form and structure of
References
Collins, L. (2012). Form-focused instruction. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics.
New York: Blackwell Publishing.
DeKeyser, R. (1995). Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a
miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 379-410.
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 (Cambridge Applied Linguistics
Series, pp. 42-63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long
(Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313-340). Malden, MA:
Blackwell Pub.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2007). Skill acquisition theory. In B. Van Patten & J. Williams (Eds.),
Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 97-113). New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998b). Issues and terminology. In C. Doughty& J.
Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 1-12).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, N. (1994b). Vocabulary acquisition: The implicit ins and outs of explicit cognitive
mediation. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 211-
282). London: Academic Press.
Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating form-focused instruction. Language
Learning, 51 (Supplement 1), 1-46.
Ellis, R. (2016). Focus on form: A critical review. Language Teaching Research, 20(3),
405-428.
Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., & Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual
enhancement promote noticing? A think-aloud protocol analysis. In R. Schmidt (Ed.),
Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 183-216). Honolulu:
University of Hawai'i Press.
Long, M. (1988). Instructed interlanguage development. In L. Beede (Ed.). Issues in
Second Language Acquisition: Multiple perspectives. New York: Newbury House.
Kunie Kellem is a graduate student at the University of Oregon. After working for senior
high schools in Japan as an English teacher for fourteen years, she came to UO to study
at the LTS (Language Teaching Studies) program. The focus of her study is to integrate
PBL and FonF under the constraints of MEXT-prescribed textbook.
Dr. Andy Halvorsen is currently a Senior Faculty member in the American English
Institute at the University of Oregon where he primarily trains language teachers in
both face-to-face and online contexts. He has a Ph.D. in Education from the University
of Illinois, with a focus on bilingualism and biliteracy development.