Participation Structure and Incidental Focus on Form in Adult ESL Classrooms

Abstract

This study examined the role of incidental focus on form (FonF) in adult English‐as‐a‐second‐language classrooms. Specifically, it explored the extent to which the amount, type, and effectiveness of FonF were related to differences in classroom participation structure, that is, the organization of classroom talk within which FonF may occur. The data consisted of 54 hours of audio‐ and video‐recorded classroom interaction collected over two 12‐week semesters from 35 lessons at three levels of language proficiency: beginner, intermediate, and advanced. The data were transcribed and coded in terms of types of FonF (reactive vs. preemptive, and student vs. teacher initiated) and types of participation structure (whole class, small group, and individual one on one). Individualized posttests were developed and administered to each student 1 week after each classroom observation to assess the effectiveness of FonF. The results revealed that incidental FonF occurred rather frequently in all classrooms but its occurrence varied depending on the type of participation structure. The results also demonstrated a relationship between participation structure and the effectiveness of FonF as well as an interaction between participation structure and class levels. These findings highlight the role of classroom participation structure as an important contextual factor that may impact the provision and success of incidental FonF.

Interaction and instructed second language acquisition

“…Example 4: Corrective feedback (indicated by SMALL CAPS) (Loewen 2005: 371) Will: when I was soldier I used to wear the balaclava Teacher: and why did you wear it Will, for protection from the cold or for another reason Will: just wind uh protection to wind and cold Teacher: PROTECTION FROM Will: uh from wind and cold Teacher: right, okay not for a disguise Ellis 2016; Nakatsukasa 2016), resulting in numerous research syntheses (e.g. Long 2007;Lyster, Saito & Sato 2013;Nassaji 2013;Ellis 2017a) and meta-analyses (e.g. Russell & Spada 2006;Li 2010;Lyster & Saito 2010;Brown 2014).…”

Focus on form: A critical review

“…10. The effectiveness of focus on form also differs according to the participation structure, with a stronger effect evident when the teacher participates in small group work than in whole-class interaction (Nassaji, 2013). 11.…”

Formal Instruction in Second Language Teaching

“…With respect to focus on form at the during-task stage, researchers are mainly concerned with the effect of the interaction process, such as the efficacy of negotiation of meaning (Mackey, 1999;Van den Branden, 1997), and of corrective feedback, such as recasts, explicit corrective feedback etc (Ammar & Spada, 2006;Doughty & Varela, 1998;Lyster, 2004;Shintani, 2015;Van de Guchte et al, 2015;Nassaji, 2013). The research on negotiation of meaning shows that it is beneficial for learners' comprehension of input and then for their language development.…”