awej 5 no.4 full issue 2014

AWEJ Volume.5 Number.4, 2014The Effects of Form-Focused Instruction on the Learners‟ AccuracyZaheerDrid4.7 ProcedureLoewen (2005:367) suggests “with planned focus on form, it is possible to use a pre-test andpost-test to measure gains in learners‟ ability to use the targeted structure”. As shown in Table1Taking planned FonF approach the pre-test was the initial test administered to each group ofESOL learners and post-test were taken soon after each group received treatment. In appliedlinguistics most successful field of investigation has been L2 instructional effectiveness usingexperimental design (Dӧrnyei, 2007). Moreover, Ortega and Iberri-Shea (2005) suggest that, “theresearchers don‟t take advantage of time series designs that can enhance the effectiveness of suchstudies” (ibid). To strength the „time series design‟ and findings delayed post test wasadministered. In earlier studies there have been anecdotal opinions about the amount of time thatshould elapse between each test (i.e. from 1 month up to a year). So the researcher allowed adelayed period of 3 months (Long & Robinson, 1998) to gauge the effectiveness of FFI and thatone of the research questions could be properly investigated. The tests were marked and scoredaccording to the marking criteria of ESOL learners at entry level 2/3.5. Summary of the FindingsOne of the aims of this research was to elicit teachers‟ perspectives and their adherence to theintegration of FonF within communicatively oriented language teaching. Initially quantitativedata were collected from 55 ESOL teachers in form of questionnaires in order to get the holisticview.The results from the questionnaire showed that all ESOL teachers intervened and gave correctivefeedback in form of clarifications and recast dyad explicitly or implicitly and recognise itvaluable weightage for the acquisition L2 learners‟ language competence. This means theinteractional hypotheses proposed in SLA theories enhances language acquisition and validatesthat significance of negotiations with comprehensive input. A negotiation in this context meansreformulating of the information which took place when the learners had difficulty incomprehending the instructions for their written productions which is vital in the overall L2acquisition. Learners‟ IL behaviour does not suddenly change when corrected; this does notweaken the importance of correction. Hence, evidence suggests that correction of errors shouldbe only aimed at something which learners are actually capable of (Lightbrown, 2000). Variousquestions were raised in this study‟s questionnaires, to find out how teachers believe that formalinstructions helps learners‟ to produce written work in L2 acquisition. Acquisition in this studysense “increased control over use of linguistic form” (Ellis, 2008:842).As seen in Table 1, statistically high number of teachers‟ favoured FFI. This supports the SLAtheories/hypotheses of input and interaction put forward by linguistics Krashen and Long.Observations done on teachers proved evidence that explicit FFI help learners to stop makingerrors and even sustainable over long period of time (Lightbrown, 2000). 80% of teachersagreed, when teachers where asked if „some errors are susceptible to the teacher‟s intervention,while others just resolve themselves over time and through exposure and practice‟. This clarifiesLightbrown, (2000) argument that learners IL behavior does not suddenly change whencorrected, yet still facilitates them to notice the difference between their L1 and L2.The questionnaire had two sections: section one contains 8 questions and section two has 7questions. Table 1 illustrate the results of section one of the questionnaire for ESOL teachersanswering “Strongly agree”, “Agree”, “Not sure”, “Disagree” and “Strongly disagree”Arab World English JournalISSN: 2229-9327www.awej.org460