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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The effectiveness of focus on form differs according to the participation structure, with a stronger effect when the teacher participates in small group work than in whole-class interaction.
“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).”
From Focus on form: A critical review (2016) · cites this paper as Nassaji, 2013
In interactions involving the teacher, pre-emptive focus on form is more effective than reactive focus on form, especially if it is the learner who preempts.
“In interactions involving the teacher there is evidence that pre-emptive focus on form is more effective than reactive focus on form especially if it is the learner who preempts (Nassaji, 2013).”
From Focus on form: A critical review (2016) · cites this paper as Nassaji, 2013
Cites
The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning1
SCHMIDT, R. W. (1990) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/11.2.129 · Cited by 4,910 · see citing works
CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND LEARNER UPTAKE: Negotiation of Form in Communicative Classrooms
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263197001034 · Cited by 2,259 · see citing works
Long, M. (1991) · Studies in Bilingualism · doi:10.1075/sibil.2.07lon · Cited by 1,775 · see citing works
Schmidt, R. (2001) · Cognition and Second Language Instruction · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139524780.003 · Cited by 1,322 · see citing works
The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis
Li, S. (2010) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x · Cited by 941 · see citing works
ORAL FEEDBACK IN CLASSROOM SLA: A Meta-Analysis
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263109990520 · Cited by 838 · see citing works
Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00562.x · Cited by 746 · see citing works
"Information Gap" Tasks: Do They Facilitate Second Language Acquisition?
Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3586546 · Cited by 498 · see citing works
INCIDENTAL FOCUS ON FORM AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
Loewen, S. (2005) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263105050163 · Cited by 381 · see citing works
Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students’ language awareness<sup>1</sup>
Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1994) · Language Awareness · doi:10.1080/09658416.1994.9959845 · Cited by 332 · see citing works
Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning
Sheen, Y. (2008) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00480.x · Cited by 330 · see citing works
Classroom Learning, Teaching, and Research: A Task‐Based Perspective
PICA, T. (2005) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2005.00309.x · Cited by 179 · see citing works
Variation in the frequency and characteristics of incidental focus on form
Loewen, S. (2003) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1191/1362168803lr129oa · Cited by 76 · see citing works
The Occurrence and Effectiveness of Spontaneous Focus on Form in Adult ESL Classrooms
Nassaji, H. (2010) · The Canadian Modern Language Review · doi:10.3138/cmlr.66.6.907 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Focus on form: A critical review
Ellis, R. (2016) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168816628627 · Cited by 417 · see citing works
Interaction and instructed second language acquisition
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2018) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444818000125 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nassaji, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Victoria (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Nassaji, Hossein
- ORCID
- Nassaji, Hossein
- Venue
- Language Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-08-30
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 835-869
- ISSN
- 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9922
- OpenAlex
- W1923541208
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 23.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language Learning (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
- Keywords
- adult English as a second language, classroom discourse, small group instruction, one-on-one instruction, whole-class instruction, language proficiency levels, second language acquisition
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review