Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Focus on Form
  • Cited by 9
Publisher:
Cambridge University Press
Online publication date:
April 2021
Print publication year:
2021
Online ISBN:
9781108762656
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108762656
Series:
Elements in Second Language Acquisition
Subjects:
Applied Linguistics, Language and Linguistics
Information

Book description

This Cambridge Element examines the role and nature of focus on form in second language acquisition. An overall assessment of the role of instruction and the nature of language is provided. Instruction might have a facilitative role in the rate of acquisition. The Element briefly reviews empirical research examining the relative effects of different types of focus on form and presents some of the key implications for second language learning and teaching. An effective focus on form type is one that is input and meaning oriented. Manipulating input to facilitate language processing and form-meaning connections might enhance second language acquisition.

References

Bibliography

On the Nature of Language

DeKeyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition, 2nd ed. (94–112). New York: Routledge.
Housen, A., Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language acquisition. Special issue. Applied Linguistics, 30 (4).
Keating, G. (2018). Second language acquisition: The basics. New York: Routledge.
VanPatten, B. (2010). Two faces of SLA: Mental representation and skill. Journal of English Studies, 10, 1–18.
VanPatten, B. (2016). Why explicit knowledge cannot turn into implicit knowledge. Foreign Language Annals, 49, 650–7.
VanPatten, B., Benati, A. (2010). Key terms in second language acquisition. London: Bloomsbury
VanPatten, B., Rothman, J. (2014). Against rules. In Benati, A., Laval, C. & Arche, M. (eds.), The grammar dimension in instructed second language learning (15–35). London: Bloomsbury.

On the Role of Instruction

Benati, A. (2020). Key questions in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. London: Pergamon.
Ellis, N. C. (2012). Frequency-based accounts of SLA. In Gass, S. M. and Mackey, A. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (93–210). New York: Routledge.
Goo, J., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., Novella, M. (2015). Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris and Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. In Rebuschat, P. (ed.) Implicit and explicit learning of languages (443–482). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kang, E., Sok, S., Han, ZhaoHong (2019). Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23, 428–53.
Long, M. (1983). Does second language instruction make a difference? TESOL Quarterly, 17, 359–82.
Norris, J., Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of second language instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistics theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Pienemann, M., Lenzing, A. (2015). Processability theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition, 2nd ed. (159–79). New York: Routledge.
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on attention andawareness in learning. In Schmidt, R. (ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (1–63). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Schwieter, J., Benati, A. (2019). The Cambridge handbook of language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Spada, N., Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308.
VanPatten, B., Smith, M., Benati, A., (2019). Key questions in second language acquisition: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wong, W., Simard, D. (2018). Focusing on form in language instruction. New York: Routledge.

On the Nature of Focus on Form

Benati, A. (2013). Key issues in second language teaching. London: Equinox.
Benati, A., Schwieter, J. (2019). Pedagogical interventions to L2 grammar instruction. In Schwieter, J. & Benati, A. (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of language learning (475–99). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty, C., Williams, J. (eds.). (1998). Focus-on-form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (2016). Focus on form: A critical review. Language Teaching Research, 20, 405–28.
Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In de Bot, K., Ginsberg, R. & Kramsch, C. (eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Long, M. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
Long, M. (2017). Instructed second language acquisition (ISLA): Geopolitics, methodological issues, and some major research questions. Instructed Second Language Acquisition 1, 7–44.
Long, M., Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (15–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nassaji, H., Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms. New York: Routledge.
Ranta, L., Lyster, R. (2017). Form-focused instruction. In Garrett, P. & Cots, J. (ed.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness (40–56). New York: Routledge.

On the Effects of Focus on Form

Input Enhancement

Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In Schmidt, R. (ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (259–302). Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Alsadoon, R. (2015). Textual input enhancement for vowel blindness: A study with Arabic ESL learners. The Modern Language Journal, 99, 57–79.
Boers, F., Demecheleer, M., He, L., Deconinck, J., Stengers, H., Eyckmans, J. (2017). Typographic enhancement of multiword units in second language text. Language Learning, 27, 448–69.
Choi, S. (2016). Processing and learning of enhanced English collocations: An eye movement study. Language Teaching Research, 21, 403–26.
Cintrón-Valentín, M., Ellis, N. (2015). Exploring the interface: Explicit focus-on-form instruction and learned attentional biases in L2 Latin. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 197–235.
Doughty, C. (1991). Second language acquisition does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study of SL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 431–69.
Hernàndez, T. (2011). Reexamining the role of explicit instruction and input flood on the acquisition of Spanish discourse markers. Language Teaching Research, 15, 159–82.
Indrarathne, B., Kormos, J. (2016). The role of working memory in processing input: Insights from eye-tracking. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21, 355–74.
Issa, B., Morgan-Short, K., Villegas, B., Raney, G. (2015). An eye-tracking study on the role of attention and its relationship with motivation. EUROSLA Yearbook, 15, 114–42.
Izumi, S. (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study on ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 541–77.
Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think aloud protocol analysis. In Schmidt, R. (ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (183–216). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
LaBrozzi, R. (2014). The effects of textual enhancement type on L2 form recognition and reading comprehension in Spanish. Language Teaching Research, 20, 75–91.
Lee, M., Révész, A. (2020). Promoting grammatical development through captions and textual enhancement in multimodal input-based tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 625–51.
Lee, S-K. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive. Language Learning, 57, 87–118.
Lee, S.-K., Huang, H. (2008). Visual input enhancement and grammar learning: A meta-analytic review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 307–31.
Leow, R. (1997). The effects of input enhancement and text length on adult L2 readers’ comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Language Learning, 8, 151–182.
Leow, R. (2001). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2? An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84, 496–509.
Leow, R., Egi, T., Nuevo, A., Tsai, Y. (2003). The roles of textual enhancement and type of linguistic item in adult L2 learners’ comprehension and intake. Applied Language Learning, 13, 1–16.
Meguro, Y. (2017). Textual enhancement, grammar learning, reading comprehension, and tag questions. Language Teaching Research, 23, 58–77.
Overstreet, M. (1998). Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 2, 229–58.
Rahimi, S., Ahmadian, M., Amerian, M., Dowlatabadi, H. R. (2020). Comparing accuracy and durability effects of jigsaw versus input flood tasks on the recognition of regular past tense /-ed/. Open Sage.
Reinders, H., Ellis, R. (2009). The effects of two types of input on intake and the acquisition of implicit and explicit knowledge. In Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, R. (eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (282–302). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165–79.
Shook, D. J. (1994). What foreign language reading recalls reveal about the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 10, 39–76.
Simard, D. (2009). Differential effects of textual enhancement formats on intake. System, 37, 124–35.
Simard, D., Fortier, V., Foucambert, D. (2013). Measuring metasyntactic ability among heritage language children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 19–31.
Szudarski, P., Carter, R. (2016). The role of input flood and input enhancement in EFL learners’ acquisition of collocations. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26, 245–65.
Toomer, M., Elgort, I. (2019). The development of implicit and explicit knowledge of collocations: A conceptual replication and extension of Sonbul and Schmitt (2013). Language Learning, 69, 405–39.
Trahey, M., White, L. (1993).Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181–204.
White, J. (1998). Getting the learners’ attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (85–113). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, J., & Evans, J. (1998). What kind of focus and on which forms? In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (139–55). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Winke, P. (2013). The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension. A modified replication of Lee (2007) with eye-movement data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 323–52.
Wong, W. (2002). Modality and attention to meaning and form in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 345–368.
Wong, W. (2005). Input enhancement: From theory and research to the classroom. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Zyzik, E., Marqués Pascual, L. (2012). Spanish differential object marking: An empirical study of implicit and explicit instruction. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 12, 387–422.

Processing instruction

Benati, a. (2004a). the effects of structured input and explicit information on the acquisition of italian future tense. In vanpatten, b. (ed.), processing instruction: theory, research, and commentary (207–55). mahwah, nj: erlbaum.
Benati, A. (2004b). The effects of processing instruction and its components on the acquisition of gender agreement in Italian. Language Awareness, 13, 67–80.
Benati, A. (2005). The effects of processing instruction, traditional instruction and meaning-output instruction on the acquisition of the English past simple tense. Language Teaching Research, 9, 87–113.
Benati, A. (2013a). The input processing theory. In Mayo, P. Garcia (ed.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (93–110). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Benati, A. (2013b). Age and the effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of EnglishPassive constructions among school children and adult native speakers of Turkish. In Lee, J. F. & Benati, A. (eds.), Individual differences and processing instruction (83–104). Sheffield, UK: Equinox.
Benati, A. (2019). Classroom-oriented research: Processing instruction. Language Teaching. 52,3, 343–59.
Benati, A. (2020). The effects of structured input and traditional instruction on the acquisition of the English causative passive forms: An eye-tracking study measuring accuracy in responses and processing patterns. (forthcoming in Language Teaching Research).
Benati, A. (forthcoming). Input processing and processing instruction: The acquisition of Italian and Modern Standard Arabic. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing.
Benati, A., Lee, J. (2008). Grammar acquisition and processing instruction. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Benati, A., Lee, J. (2010). Processing instruction and discourse. London: Bloomsbury.
Benati, A. G., Lee, J. F. (eds.). (2015). Processing instruction: New insights after twenty years of theory, research and application [Special issue]. IRAL, 53.
Benati, A., Batziou, M. (2017) The effects of structured-input and structured-output tasks on the acquisition of English causative. IRAL, 57, 265–288.
Benati, A., Batziou, M. (2019) Discourse and long-term effects of structured-input and structured-output tasks in combination and isolation on the acquisition of passive English causative forms. Accepted and forthcoming in Language Awareness, 28, 1–18.
Benati, A., Schwieter, J. (2017). Input processing and processing instruction: Pedagogical and cognitive considerations for L3 acquisition In Tanja, A. & Hahn, A. (eds.), L3 Syntactic Transfer: Models, New Developments and Implications (195–223). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chiucchiu, G., Benati, A. (2020). The effects of structured input and textual enhancement on the acquisition of Italian Subjunctive: A self-paced reading study. Forthcoming in Instructed Second Language Acquisition.
Farley, A. (2001a). The effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 5, 57–94.
Farley, A. (2001b). Authentic processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive. Hispania, 84, 289–99.
Farley, A. (2004). Processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive: Is explicit information needed? In VanPatten, B. (ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (227–39). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Henry, N. (2015). Morphosyntactic processing, cue interaction, and the effects of instruction: An investigation of processing instruction and the acquisition of case markings in L2 German (Unpublished doctoral dissertation)
Ito, K., Wong, W. (2019). Processing instruction and the effects of input modality and voice familiarity on the acquisition of the French causative construction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 443–68.
Lee, J. (2015). The milestones in twenty years of processing instruction research. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53, 111–26.
Lee, J., VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative teaching happen, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lee, J., Benati, A. (2007a). Delivering processing instruction in classrooms and virtual contexts. London: Equinox.
Lee, J., Benati, A. (2007b). Second language processing: An analysis of theory, problems and possible solutions. Continuum: London
Lee, J., Benati, A. (2009). Research and perspectives on processing instruction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lee, J., Doherty, S. (2018), Native and nonnative processing of active and passive sentence: The effects of processing instruction on the allocation of visual attention. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 1–27.
Morgan-Short, K., Bowden, H. (2006). Processing instruction and meaningful output-based instruction: Effects on second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 31–65.
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
VanPatten, B. (2015a). Input processing in adult SLA. In VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (113–35). New York: Routledge.
VanPatten, B. (2015b). Foundations of processing instruction. IRAL, 53, 91–109.
VanPatten, B., Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225–43.
VanPatten, B., Fernández, C. (2004) The long-term effects of processing instruction. In VanPatten, B. (ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (273–289). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
VanPatten, B., Oikkenon, S. (1996). Explanation vs. structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 495–510.
VanPatten, B., Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction and the French causative: Another replication. In VanPatten, B. (ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (97–118). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
VanPatten, B., Farmer., J., Clardy, C.. (2009). Processing instruction and meaning- based output instruction: A response to Keating and Farley (2008). Hispania, 92, 116–26.
Wong, W., Ito, K. (2018). The effects of processing instruction and traditional instruction on L2 online processing of the causative construction in French: An eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40, 241–68.

Interactional and corrective feedback

Ammar, A., Spada, N. (2006) One size fits all? Recasts, prompts and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543–574.
Carpenter, H., Jeon, K. S., MacGregor, D., Mackey, A. (2006). Learners’ interpretations of recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 209–236.
Doughty, C., Varela, E. (1998) Communicative focus on form. In Doughty, C. and Williams, J. (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. (114–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28, 339–69.
Egi, T. (2007). Recasts, learners’ perceptions, and L2 development. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (249–67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2012) Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Gass, S., Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (175–199). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Go, J., Mackey, A. (2013). The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquistion, 35, 127–65.
Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y. (2019). Corrective feedback and the role of implicit sequence-learning ability in L2 online performance. Language Learning, 69, 127–56.
Han, Z. H. (2002). A study of the impact of recasts on tense consistency in L2 output. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 543–72.
Lightbown, P., Spada, N. (1993). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lyster, R. (1998). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20, 51–81.
Lyster, R. (2004) Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399–432.
Lyster, R., Izquierdo, J. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning 59, 453–98.
Lyster, R., Ranta, L. (1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.
Lyster, R., Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32.2, 265–302.
Lyster, R., Saito, K., Sato, M. (2013) Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1–40.
Loewen, S., Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the Adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. Modern Language Journal, 90, 536–56.
Mackey, A., Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal 82, 338–356.
Nabei, T., Swain, M. (2002). Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction: A case study of an adult EFL student’s second language learning. Language Awareness 11, 43–63.
Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning 59, 411–52.
Nassaji, H. (2017). The effectiveness of extensive versus intensive recasts for learning L2 grammar. Modern Language Journal 101.2, 353–68.
Panova, I., Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly 36, 573–95.
Ranta, L., Lyster, R. (2007) A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral language abilities: The Awareness-Practice-Feedback sequence. In DeKeyser, R. (ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (141–60). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rassaei, E. (2020). The separate and combined effects of recasts and textual enhancement as two focus on form techniques on L2 development. System, 89, 1–14.
Sato, M. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. The Modern Language Journal 97, 611–33.
Saito, K., Lyster, R. (2012) Effects of form–focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /r/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62(2), 595–33.
Sheen, Y. (2007) The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies. (301–22). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Yang, Y., Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32, 235–63.

Output and collaborative focus on form tasks

Alegría de la Colina, A., García Mayo, M. P. (2007). Attention to form across collaborative tasks by low-proficiency learners in an EFL setting. In García Mayo, M. P. (ed.), Investigating Tasks in Formal Language Settings (91–116). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Basterrechea, M., García Mayo, M. P. (2013). Language-related episodes (LREs) during collaborative tasks: A comparison of CLIL and EFL learners. In McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (25–43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Basterrechea, M., García Mayo, M. P., Leeser, M. J. (2014). Pushed output and noticing in a dictogloss: task implementation in the CLIL classroom. Porta Linguarum, 22, 7–22.
Ellis, R. (1987). Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: Style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 1–19.
Fotos, S. (1994) Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use through grammar consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 323–51.
Fotos, S., Ellis, R. (1991) Communicating about grammar: A task-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 605–28.
HoKang, D. (2009). The role of DG on both listening and grammar. English Education Journal, 5(2), 1–23.
Idek, S., Fong, L. L. (2015). The use of DG as an information gap task in exploiting dual application principle in learning irregular verbs. Journal of Management Research, 7(2), 481.
Kuiken, F., Vedder, I. (2002). The effect of interaction in acquiring the grammar of a second language. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3–4), 343–58.
Leeser, M. J. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55–81.
Leeser, M. (Forthcoming). A research synthesis and meta-analysis of processing instruction.
Lim, W. L., Jacobs, G. M. (2001). An analysis of students’ dyadic interaction on a dictogloss task. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 456 649.
García Mayo, M. P. (2002). The Activeness of Two Form-Focus Tasks in Advanced EFL Pedagogy. International Journal of Applied Linguistic, 12, 156–75.
Mehnert, U. (1998). The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 83–108.
Nabei, T. (1996). DG: Is it an effective language learning task? Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 12, 59–74.
Qin, J. (2008) The effect of processing instruction and dictogloss tasks on acquisition of the English passive. Language Teaching Research, 12, 61–82.
Rutherford, K. (2001). An investigation of the effects of planning on oral production in a second language. (Unpublished MA thesis.) University of Auckland.
Swain, M., Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P. & Swain, M. (eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks (56–89). London: Longman, Pearson Education.
Shintani, N. (2014) The effectiveness of Processing Instruction and production-based instruction on L2 grammar acquisition: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 36, 306–25.
Smart, J. (2014) The role of guided induction in paper-based data-driven learning. ReCALL, 26, 184–201.
Sugiharto, S. (2006). Grammar consciousness raising: Rresearch, theory and application. Indonesian JELT, 2, 16–23.
VanPatten, B., Inclezan, D., Salazar, H., Farley, A. (2009). Processing instruction and dictogloss: A study on object pronouns and word order in Spanish. Foreign Language Annals, 42, 557–75.
Wajnryb, R. (1990). Research books for teachers: Grammar dictation: Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Yeo, K. (2002). The effects of DG: A technique of focus on form. English Teaching, 57, 149–67.
Yip, V. (1994). Grammatical consciousness-raising and learnability. In Odlin, T. (ed.), Perspective on pedagogical grammar (123–39). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between #date#. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.