Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics
[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 25, No. 0, pp.1561-1584
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Jan 2025
Received 05 Aug 2025 Revised 14 Nov 2025 Accepted 19 Nov 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.25..202511.1561

The Effects of Integrated and Isolated Focus-on-Form Instruction with Consciousness-Raising Tasks on University Students’ Writing Accuracy, Fluency, and Grammar Recognition

Hee Yeon Kang
Department of Education Hankuk University of Foreign Studies 107 Imun-ro, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Tel: 02-2173-2338 vaho@naver.com


© 2025 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This study examined the effects of integrated and isolated Focus on Form (FonF) instructional models on writing accuracy, fluency, and grammar recognition among Korean university students. Ninety participants were randomly assigned to three groups: Integrated FonF (IG), Sequential Isolated FonF (SIG), and Reverse Sequential Isolated FonF (RSIG). Over a 15-week semester, participants completed pre- and post-tests involving essay writing and grammar recognition tasks. Writing accuracy was measured by error rates, fluency by words produced per minute (WPM), and grammar recognition through a targeted test. Results showed significant improvements in all groups, with IG and SIG groups outperforming RSIG. IG demonstrated the greatest gains in accuracy and fluency, benefiting from simultaneous attention to grammar and meaning, supported by real-time feedback. SIG showed notable improvements attributed to form-focused instruction preceding writing. RSIG, where form-focused activities occurred after writing, showed relatively limited progress. Statistical analyses confirmed these differences, highlighting the critical role of timing and integration in FonF instruction. Findings emphasize that integrating form and meaning-focused activities, timed to match learner needs and task demands, maximizes L2 writing development. This study offers pedagogical insights for curriculum design, advocating for real-time, contextualized grammar instruction to enhance writing proficiency in higher education.

Keywords:

Focus on Form (FonF), integrated FonF, isolated FonF, writing accuracy, writing fluency, grammar recognition

References

  • Abay, M. 2021. The effects of consciousness raising grammar tasks on EFL students’ writing performance: University of Gondar in Focus. Ethiopian Renaissance Journal of Social Sciences and the Humanities 8(1), 44-58.
  • Amirian, S. M. R. and F. Sadeghi. 2012. The effect of grammar consciousness-raising tasks on EFL learners’ performance. International Journal of Linguistics 4(3), 708-720. [https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v4i3.2392]
  • Boulton, A. and T. Cobb. 2017. Corpus use in language learning: A meta‐analysis. Language learning 67(2), 348-393. [https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12224]
  • Cho, Y. 2019. A study on the preferences of high school students and college students towards integrated and isolated form-focused instruction. The Journal of Linguistic Science 90, 363-382. [https://doi.org/10.21296/jls.2019.9.90.363]
  • Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Doughty, C. and J. Williams. 1998. Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press.
  • Ellis, R. 2001. Introduction: Investigating form‐focused instruction. Language learning 51, 1-46. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.2001.tb00013.x]
  • Ellis, R. 2016. Focus on form: A critical review. Language Teaching Research 20(3), 405-428. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816628627]
  • ETS. 2019. TOEIC score interpretation guide. Educational Testing Service.
  • File, K. A. and R. Adams. 2010. Should vocabulary instruction be integrated or isolated? TESOL Quarterly 44(2), 222-249. [https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.219943]
  • Gui, J. and S. M. Ismail. 2024. The effect of planning time on vocabulary acquisition in a task-based environment: The mediating roles of working memory and field (in)dependence. BMC Psychology 12(1), 145-164. [https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01638-4]
  • Kang, D. 2018. Integrated and Isolated Form-focused Instruction from Korean EFL Learners’ Perspective. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association 18(5), 123-130.
  • Kang, H. Y. and C. H. Lee. 2020. Effects of focus on form instruction through listening in blended learning on the development of grammar and listening skills. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics 20, 662-691.
  • Kim, H. and H. S. Chung. 2016. A comparison of integrated FFI and isolated FFI in the development of explicit knowledge and implicit knowledge. Modern English Education 17(4), 71-94. [https://doi.org/10.18095/meeso.2016.17.4.04]
  • Kormos, J. and A. Sáfár. 2008. Phonological short-term memory, working memory and foreign language performance in intensive language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 11(2), 261-271. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728908003416]
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. 2006. The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics 27(4), 590-619. [https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml029]
  • Loewen, S. 2011. Focus on form. In E. Hinkel, ed., Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, 576-592. Routledge.
  • Long, M. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg and C. Kramsch, eds., Foreign Language Research in Cross-cultural Perspective, 39-52. John Benjamins. [https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.2.07lon]
  • Long, M. and P. Robinson. 1998. Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty and J. Williams, eds., Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition, 15-41. Cambridge University Press.
  • Nassaji, H. 2016. Research Timeline: Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition. Language Teaching 49(1), 35-62. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444815000403]
  • Nguyen, C., D. Le and H. Ngo, H. 2022. EFL teachers’ perceptions of the individualized learning model: A case at an English language center. International Journal of Instruction 15(1), 437-456. [https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15125a]
  • Norris, J. M. and L. Ortega. 2000. Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning 50(3), 417-528. [https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136]
  • Ortega, L. 2003. Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics 24(4), 492-518.
  • Özdemir, S. 2024. The effects of collaborative writing on l2 individual writing performance in terms of complexity, accuracy, fluency and functional adequacy. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction 14(4), 235-244.
  • Peng, Y. and J. S. Barrot. 2023. Post-writing form-focused instruction in process-genre-oriented writing classrooms: Effects on second language learners’ writing accuracy. Porta Linguarum 39, 249-264.
  • Polio, C. and C. Shea. 2014. An investigation into current measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Journal of Second Language Writing 26, 10-27. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.003]
  • Richards, J. C. and R. Reppen. 2014. Towards a pedagogy of grammar instruction. RELC Journal 45(1), 5-25. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214522622]
  • Robinson, P. 2001. Task Complexity, Cognitive Resources, and Syllabus Design: A Triadic Framework for Examining Task Influences on SLA. In P. Robinson, ed., Cognition and Second Language Instruction, 287-318. Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012]
  • Skehan, P. 1998. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford University Press.
  • Spada, N. 2011. Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflections on past, present and future research. Language Teaching 44(2), 225-236. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444810000224]
  • Spada, N. and P. M. Lightbown. 2008. Form‐focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly 42(2), 181-207. [https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00115.x]
  • Spada, N., L. Jessop, Y. Tomita, W. Suzuki and A. Valeo. 2014. Isolated and integrated form-focused instruction: Effects on different types of L2 knowledge. Language Teaching Research 18(4), 453-473. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813519883]
  • Suhaimi, S. and Musdizal, M., 2022. The implementation of the consciousness-raising (CR) method in improving EFL students’ writing skills. Tarbawi: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan 18(1), 22-35. [https://doi.org/10.32939/tarbawi.v18i1.1744]
  • Swain, M. and S. Lapkin. 2013. Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In Researching Pedagogic Tasks, 99-118. Routledge.
  • Telila, B., T. Olana and M. Zewudie. 2023. Effects of integrated form-focused instruction on students’ writing attitude, motivation, and achievement: Grade 10 in focus. Veda’s Journal of English Language and Literature 10(1), 98-109.
  • Valeo, A. and N. Spada. 2016. Is there a better time to focus on form? Teacher and learner views. Tesol Quarterly 50(2), 314-339. [https://doi.org/10.54513/JOELL.2023.10112]
  • Williams, J. 2005. Form-focused instruction. In Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, 671-691. Routledge.
  • Xu, J. and C. Y. Li. 2021. The effects of the timing of form-focused instruction in EFL learners’ learning of difficult and easy grammatical features: A comparative study. System 101, Article 102612. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102612]