This study examined how key factors of FFI (degree of explicitness, L1 similarity, proficiency level, and grammar type) influence the accuracy of production. A total of 22 experimental studies, all of which had Korean participants and productive assessments of speech or writing, were selected for analysis. Results revealed that explicit grammar emphasis was more effective for morphology that had a small, binary scope (present or absent). Results further revealed that explicit emphasis of grammatical features dissimilar from the L1 significantly increased accuracy of learner speech and writing. In contrast, implicit emphasis was effective with grammatical features that had a larger scope (e.g., many lexical forms or syntactic arrangements), as well as with grammatical features that were similar to the L1. Findings suggest that explicit emphasis of a smaller scope and implicit emphasis of a larger scope are both useful, since they do not cognitively overload the learner during communication.

The present study compared the effects of isolated and integrated form-focused instruction (FFI) on the learning of vocabulary in reading passages. Their effects were also compared to those of incidental exposure on vocabulary learning. It further investigated whether such effects would differ depending on the types of vocabulary assessments. To this end, 80 college students in reading-oriented classes received either isolated or integrated FFI treatments over four 50-minute sessions. They also took the pretest and posttest designed to measure their vocabulary learning. The vocabulary tests consisted of two assessment types: one without contexts and the other provided with contexts. The results showed that the learners remembered the words instructed through isolated or integrated FFI better than those through incidental exposure while reading. However, no significant differences were observed between the two different types of FFI in learning target vocabulary. Some advantages were found for isolated FFI on the vocabulary test provided without contexts and for integrated FFI on the vocabulary test provided with context. Directions for further studies and pedagogical implications will be discussed.

This study investigates differential effects of form-focused instruction (FFI) on the development of explicit knowledge versus implicit knowledge of a second language (L2) when the FFI is offered within the context of meaning-focused instruction (MFI). Forty-two adult learners of English participated in the study and were randomly assigned to a group who received FFI before MFI (FM), a group who received FFI after MFI (MF), a group who received MFI only (M), or a control group. Learning was measured by an untimed grammaticality judgment task (UGJT), a primary measure for explicit knowledge, and an elicited oral imitation task (EOIT), a primary measure for implicit knowledge. The results illustrate that, despite both FM and MF groups’ improved performance on the UGJT, only the FM group showed a positive developmental trend on the EOIT. No clear learning effect was observed among the M group learners or the controls. Therefore, the findings suggest that FFI prior to MFI supports the development of implicit knowledge more efficiently than FFI delayed until after MFI has begun.

This study investigates differential effects of form-focused instruction (FFI) to a simple versus complex L2 targets when the FFI is offered within a context of primarily meaning-focused instruction (MFI). Forty-seven Korean-speaking adult learners of English participated in the study and were randomly assigned to one of the two experimental groups or one control group. The experimental participants were instructed in one simple and one complex targets through MFI plus FFI or MFI only. No instruction was provided for the controls. Learning was measured by a grammaticality judgment task, and knowledge types were examined by subjective measures of awareness. The results indicate that the combination of FFI and MFI results in more robust learning effects than the exclusive use of MFI particularly for both simple and complex targets. As for the types of knowledge, the analyses found that FFI positively influences development of implicit and explicit knowledge.