Shared Identities: Our
Interweaving Threads

PAC7 at JALT2008 Conference Proceedings

521

Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its
effect on student learning
Kazuyoshi Sato
Nagoya University of Foreign Studies
Reiko Iwai
Aichi Prefectural High School
Mie Kato
Gifu Prefectural High School
Miwako Kushiro
Kagamihara High School, Gifu
Reference data:Sato, K., Iwai, R., Kato, M., & Kushiro, M. (2009). Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning.
In A. M. Stoke (Ed.), JALT2008 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: JALT.
Lee and VanPatten (1995) affirm that the debate of grammar teaching should reorient its focus from whether or not to teach grammar to
how to teach grammar and propose using both structured input and output activities in a communicative way. However, few studies havebeen done as to how using both input-based and output-based instruction influences student learning (Ellis, 2006). Based on three casestudies conducted in Japanese high school English classes, this paper introduces techniques to teach grammar communicatively by using
input-based and output-based activities and reports the results of action research projects.
Lee and VanPatten (1995)は文法の教え方についての議論について、文法を教えるのか否かではなく、どう教えたら良いのかに焦点を絞るべきだと主張している。
そして、文法項目に焦点をあてたインプットとアウトプット活動をコミュニカティブに教えることを提唱している。
しかしながら、文法
項目に焦点をあてたインプットとアウトプット活動が学習者にどのような効果を与えるのかはほとんど研究されていない。
このワークショップでは、３名の高校英語教師のアクション・リサーチに基づき、インプットとアウトプット活動を使用して文法をコミュニカティブに教える指導方法を紹介する。
また、どのような学習効果があったのか、
アクション・リサーチの結果を報告する。

M enu

Contents

Writers

Help & FAQs

Copyright

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

Introduction
Ellis (2006) claims “[a]lthough there is now a clear
conviction that a traditional approach to teaching grammar
based on explicit explanations and drill-like practiceis unlikely to result in the acquisition of the implicit
knowledge needed for fluent and accurate communication,
there continues to be disagreement regarding what should
replace this” (p. 102). Yet, by reviewing studies on grammar
teaching, Ellis (2006) concludes with 10 proposals about
grammar teaching, which he states are based on his own
beliefs and remain controversial. We would like to highlight
three of them. The first proposal is “[the] grammar taught
should be one that emphasises not just form but also themeanings and uses of different grammatical structures” (p.
102). Then, Ellis (2006; 2008) recommends focus-on-form
instruction (FFI). According to Ellis (2006), FFI “entails
a focus on meaning with attention to form arising out of
the communicative activity” (p. 100). There are two main
kinds of FFI. One is planned and the other is incidental.
Planned FFI “requires a focused task and is intensive,”
while incidental FFI instruction “is typically extensive (i.e.
addresses a wide range of linguistic features)” (Ellis, 2008,
p. 827). The second proposal is “[u]se should be made ofboth input-based and output-based instructional options”(p. 102). Regarding planned FFI, both input-based andoutput-based activities should be used. Similarly, Lee and
VanPatten (1995) claim both structured input (form-focused
input) and structured output (form-focused output) activities
should be incorporated into grammar teaching by saying that“learners need not only input to build a developing systembut also opportunities to create output in order to work on

522

fluency and accuracy” (p. 118). Nonetheless, few studies
have been done as to how using both input-based and outputbased instruction influences student learning (Ellis, 2006).
The third proposal is “[a]n incidental FFI approach is of
special value because it affords an opportunity for extensive
treatment of grammatical problems” (Ellis, 2006, p. 102).
An incidental FFI approach is output-based instructionin which no particular forms are focused. However, Ellis
places a great significance on it, because “in communicative
lessons a wide variety of grammatical forms are addressed
incidentally through corrective feedback” (p. 94). It means
the teacher can notice learners’ common errors and learners
may notice their errors through the teacher’s corrective
feedback. Ellis, Basturkmen, and Lowewn (2001) go on to
say that incidental focus-on-form “deserves more attention
from classroom researchers than it has received to date” (p.
407) based on the results of the study they conducted. In
short, it seems plausible to teach grammar communicatively,by using both FFI (structured input and output activities) and
incidental FFI. Then, what will happen to student learning,
if the teacher uses both approaches in Japanese high school
English classes?
This paper introduces techniques to teach grammar
communicatively and reports the results of three casestudies conducted in Japanese high school English classes.
These three high school teachers conducted their action
research projects supported by Nagoya University of Foreign
Studies. Although all three teachers did research on FFI,
each used a different approach in a different school context.
However, all of them found that FFI was more effective
for students to retain grammatical knowledge than theSato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

traditional explanation-drill method, which corroborates
the significance of FFI. First, Iwai reports how she usedstructured input activities with occasional inclusion of
structured output activities and what she learned from thestudent survey. Next, Kushiro describes how she used both
structured input and output activities in their classrooms andits effect on student learning. Compared to Iwai, Kushiro
placed more emphasis on output activities. Finally, Kato
reports how she incorporated an incidental FFI approach into
her writing class along with the results of a student survey.

Iwai’s action research
Introduction
This research was conducted at a public high school incentral Japan. The school has six classes in each grade,
five classes taking the General Curriculum and one theInternational Communication Curriculum. Before theaction research was conducted, grammar was taught using
the grammar-translation approach. In grammar class somestudents had difficulty understanding the complicated rulesof grammar and seemed to lose interest in English. Students
were learning little and soon forgot most of what they hadlearned. In addition, the majority of grammar textbooks
put out by Japanese publishers are “drill based and outputoriented, which will give learners only mechanical memories
and short-term memories. They will soon forget most of what
they ‘learned’ within a year” ( Lee & VanPatten, 2003, p.
133). The goal of this action research project was to improvestudents’ learning of grammar by changing from grammartranslation instruction to FFI. Learning how to implement
the unfamiliar approach of focus-on-form was a process of523

trial and error, and a number of weaknesses in procedureand design of the learning activities were found. In spite ofthis, a survey administered in September, mid-way throughthe Japanese academic year, showed that a greater numberof students than expected appreciated the value of thecommunicative activities. It appeared that the new FFI would
prove to be more effective than the conventional grammar
teaching method.

Teaching procedure
Structured input activity
One type of structured input activity used in this action
research was a simulated quiz show. A class of students was
divided into groups of four (see Appendix 1: Who do you
think I am?). In the Quiz 1 format, students listened to ashort text that contained many instances of passive voice
forms. Students’ attention, however, was not drawn to thegrammar. Students were focused on thinking what theanswer to the quiz question was. They were told not to callout the answer until the text had been completely read andthe teacher gave the signal. At the signal, the first group thatcalled out the right answer received a point. In the second
quiz format, students competed by rows rather than groups.
Students were shown the target form written in bold lettersand were told to identify the stress points. After finishing all
the questions, the instructor counted the number of students
in each row who correctly answered all the questions andawarded that number of points.
The second type of structured-input activity is an
information-gap pair activity (see Appendix 1: Information

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

Exchange Activity, sheet A). Students stood while doing
the activity and sat down as soon as they finished. The
information held by A and the different information heldby B caused them to say and hear the target grammar form
many times as they talked back and forth, exchanging
information in order to fill the gap. In the process, they
became more familiar with the target form.

Structured output activity
Although not a main feature of the design of this research,
structured output activities were sometimes used when time
permitted. For example, after finishing structured input
activities and textbook exercises, students were given a
handout (see Appendix 1: Output Activity 1 & 2). In Output
Activity 1, students were told to find eight grammaticalmistakes. This activity targeted the comparative form.
For Output Activity 2 students did process writing of ashort essay using comparative forms. First students were
given a number of sample topics for which to brainstorm
comparisons in order to get ideas for their essay. Afterlooking at a sample, students were told to write theirown essay at home. At the same time, they were given an
evaluation form that described how their essays would be
evaluated. In the following class, students had conversations
to tell a partner about the information in their essay,changing partners several times. Finally students exchanged
papers with each other and evaluated their partners’ writing.
The teacher then collected the essays and gave feedback in
the next class.

524

Results
As Table 1 shows, the number of students who felt “thetextbook was difficult” slightly increased from 51% (17%and 34%) to 56 % (20% and 36%). At the same time, thenumber of students who answered that the handouts andcommunicative activities were of great help to them inunderstanding the target grammar points increased slightly
from 24% (3% and 21%) in April to 32% (2% and 30%) in
September. However, those who answered “Not really” alsoslightly increased from 33% to 39%. The results indicate that
understanding grammar is still difficult for many students.
Nevertheless, the number of students who thought they
could speak and write steadily increased. The percentage ofstudents who could speak using the target grammar increased
from 62 % (9% and 53%) to 72% (11% and 61%), and thestudents who answered that they could write more than 10
English sentences with the target grammar also increased
from 20% (4% and 16%) to 30% (7% and 23%).
Table 2 shows the results of the analysis of student
comments to an open-ended question. The majority of
the answers (70 %) were positive. Generally speaking,communicative grammar instruction was gradually acceptedby the students. As for negative answers, several reasonscan be deduced. First of all, the early handouts had manytarget grammar points, so students had to read through themin advance. This proved to be too much for the students’
understanding. In addition, they didn’t have enough time toreceive negative feedback (incidental focus-on-form). Thatis because they did not have a chance to review what theylearned.

525

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

Table1. Survey results – 2008
1.Is the textbook
difficult?

Yes, very much

Yes

Yes and No

Not really

No

April

17%

34%

41%

6%

2%

September

20%

36%

34%

8%

2%

Yes, very much

Yes

Yes and No

Not really

No

April

3%

21%

38%

33%

5%

September

2%

30%

21%

39%

7%

I can speak English
fluently.

I can speak a little
using learned grammar.

I made many mistakes
but I can speak English.

I can speak English in a
few sentences.

I hardly speak English
9%

2. Can you understandgrammar?

3. Can you speak in
English?
April

0%

9%

53%

29%

September

0%

11%

61%

26%

2%

I can write more thanfifteen sentences.

I can write more thanten sentences.

I can write more than
five sentences.

I can write in a few
sentences.

I can hardly write inEnglish.

April

4%

16%

55%

21%

4%

September

7%

23%

51%

16%

3%

4. Can you write inEnglish?

(3 classes, 61 students)

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

Table 2: Open-ended question: “Werecommunicative activities and handouts useful or
helpful for your grammar learning?”
Positive (71%)
1. Effective & useful (17)“It is very effective to use these handouts and activities. They areuseful to emphasize or make up for points covered lightly in the
textbook.”
2. Understanding grammar better (13)“I am glad that grammar rules are more understandable for me now
than when I was in junior high. Moreover, I was surprised to find that
I can use English more competently.”
3. Enjoying grammar through pair and group activities (10)“I like pair work and these activities give me more chances to use
English.
I would like to do group work more. I want to discuss what we arelearning with the other group members. I can understand grammar
better as a result of these activities.”
4. Others (2)“I can get good scores on the tests owing to this class.”
Negative (29%)
1. I don’t understand grammar well yet. (6)2. I prefer to use only the textbook. (3)3. I cannot use grammar for communication yet. (3)4. There are too many things to learn in the handout. (2)5. It is not necessary to do pair work. (2)Summary
At the beginning, from April to July, each handout contained
several different grammatical points because these werecovered in each unit of the textbook. However, it was found526

that students were unable to properly notice and understandeach one when several were presented to them at thesame time. Upon reflection, the researcher realized that an
important rule of the Lee and VanPatten (2003) guidelines
for structured input was ignored, which was “Present one
thing at a time.” For the remainder of the research, handouts
were simplified so that students could focus on one grammar
point at a time.
For most of the students, this focus-on-form grammar
teaching seemed to be new. Learning grammar throughcommunicative activities was unfamiliar to them. Although
it is not easy to know how many students realized thesignificance of learning grammar through communicative
activities, it is clear that a great number of them appreciatedthe value of the communicative activities for their own
learning. At the same time, there were some students
who were not positive about doing such activities. It is
important to identify why some were unwilling to engage
in the activities positively and to modify the procedures or
activities so as to enhance the learning of all students.

Kushiro’s action research
Introduction
This research was conducted at a public high school incentral Japan. In each grade there are five classes taking
the General Curriculum, one taking the Science and Math
Curriculum, and one the English Curriculum. It appears
that many students failed to learn basic grammar structures
taught at junior high school, so they have difficulty dealing
with English taught at high school. In spite of the difficultySato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

such students face, English lessons have been conducted ina traditional way. As a result, the students have not acquired
English to an acceptable degree, considering the time andeffort they have spent.
At the beginning of the 2007 school year, the researcher
herself was teaching grammar to first-year students in the
traditional way of explaining grammar items explicitly
and having students work on textbook drills. Because thestudents were clearly losing interest in the lessons, anaction research plan to teach grammar communicatively
was started. The students’ participation became better andthey began to get better marks on their term examinations.
In the second semester, the idea of structured input andoutput was added. According to Lee and Van Patten (1995),
learners need to receive and process meaning-bearing input
to build an internal system of the language they are learning.
They claim that “grammar instruction should first occur atthe level of processing input” (p.99). In the action research
project this idea was implemented by modifying the content
of the textbook and providing activities for input.
However, in the 2007 school year, only small-scale
experimentation with structured output was attempted
because of the time pressure to keep up with the overall
English curriculum. Yet, structured input is not enoughwithout output-based activities. Lee and Van Patten (1995)
state that “output activities are useful in developing accuracyof access as well as fluency” (p. 103). In an attempt toexperiment with this concept, some grammar lessons that
progressed from structured input to output were introduced.

527

Teaching procedure
In this lesson, students learned about gerunds and infinitives
and practiced using them by talking about their dream jobs
with their classmates (see Appendix 2).
First, for an input activity, students read the remarks madeby six people on what they liked doing, wanted to do orwere good at doing, and decided which job was the mostsuitable for each person. Then, students exchanged theiropinions with their classmates using the conversation model.
Second, students thought of the meanings of the gerunds andinfinitives used in the remarks and wrote each meaning inJapanese.
In Communication Practice (1), students first answered theten questions in the questionnaire individually by circling
Y (Yes) or N (No). Then, they made pairs and interviewed
each other using the model conversation. Each interviewer
was supposed to choose a suitable job for the interviewee by
judging from the result of the questionnaire.
Communication Practice (2) was an information gap
activity. Two versions of the worksheet had three jobs
printed on them. The jobs were different on each sheet.
First, students wrote three elements necessary for each of
the three jobs. Second, they gave the three elements as hints
for their partners to guess what job they were talking about.
Students took turns giving hints until they finished asking
about all three jobs on their worksheets.
In Writing, students wrote a letter to apply for their dreamjobs. Before they actually wrote the letter, they worked onan error correction activity. After they learned about theverbs followed only by gerunds and those followed only

528

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

by infinitives, students read the sample application letterand corrected errors regarding the usage of gerunds andinfinitives. They checked the answers with their partners.
Students then wrote the application letter.
In Small Talk, students had pair conversations about
their dream jobs following a conversation model, using theinformation they wrote in the job application letter in thewriting section.

Results
Table 3 shows the average marks on the term exams of thegrammar class in 2007. At the beginning of the school year,
the average marks of Kushiro’s class were not very different
from those of the other groups. After the new activities wereincorporated, the average marks became higher than those
who were taught grammar explicitly using the textbook.
Especially after structured input and output activities wereintroduced in the second semester, this tendency becamevery clear. Interestingly, the questions on the term exams
were exactly the same as those in the textbook and theworkbook. The significant gap between the average marksof the action research groups and the other groups can be
explained by the following statement. Lee and VanPatten(1995) argue, “processing instruction has a significant impact
on learners’ developing linguistic systems, and that impact isobservable in both comprehension and production of target
items.”(p.103)

Table 3: Average marks on term exams of grammarclass in 2007
First Semester
Class
1
2
3
4

5

6

Group

Second Semester

Midterm

Final

Midterm

Final

A

74.1

56.7

55.2

57.3

B

78.9

65.1

55.9

59.8

Kushiro

78.5

65.2

61.4

70.8

B

81.5

67.3

54.5

64.3

A

75.0

63.0

52.6

59.0

B

77.2

53.0

44.8

52.9

A

76.3

64.7

56.2

61.9

B

79.3

63.7

53.6

56.8

Kushiro

83.7

69.9

68.8

73.9

B

82.5

67.9

61.1

62.5

A

70.7

60.5

46.1

58.3

B

74.7

61.1

44.7

50.4

Since April 2008, this action research project has focused on
structured input and output progression in grammar lessons.
Content of the textbook was modified by providing tasks
sequenced from input to output with specific goals. A survey
was administered to students at the end of the first semester toinvestigate how their English had developed. Table 4 shows
the comparison of students’ English development between
April and September. While students did not feel that theirEnglish ability had improved much since they entered highschool (Question No. 1, 2 and 3), their motivation to study
and use English had also increased noticeably through the past

529

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

Table 4: Results of the survey for the students’ English development in 2008
1. How do you feel about English lessons?

I’m very good at it.

I’m good at it.

Not decided.

I’m not very good at it. I’m poor at it.

April

1%

30%

30%

16%

21%

September

0%

29%

35%

18%

17%

Yes, very difficult.

Yes, difficult.

Not decided.

Not very difficult.

Not difficult.

10%

22%

47%

13%

5%

2. Is the textbook difficult?
April
September
3. Do you understand grammar?
April
September
4. Do you want to be able to use English?

10%

22%

47%

18%

4%

Yes, very well.

Yes.

Not decided.

Not really.

No.

6%

36%

31%

14%

10%

3%

35%

43%

12%

9%

Yes, very much.

Yes.

Not decided.

Not really.

No.
1%

April

29%

36%

26%

4%

September

29%

56%

10%

3%

1%

Reading

Listening

Writing

Speaking

Drill questions

5. Which skill do you want to develop most?
April

8%

9%

39%

29%

35%

September

8%

12&

34%

43%

44%

Yes, very much.

Yes.

Not decided.

Not really.

No.

April

3%

27%

39%

9%

4%

September

17%

34%

38%

1%

4%

6. Do you feel it necessary to use English?

(4 classes, 77 students)

six months of grammar learning through activities (Question
4, 5 and 6). Their overall desire to use English, especially to
improve speaking ability, increased greatly. Moreover, as
their comments show (see Table 5), they had learned English
better through pair and group work. But at the same time,some students were worried that they had not acquired as
many grammar structures as they had expected.

Summary
There were both negative and positive results of thequestionnaire. The reason for the negative results wasprobably because the number and complexity of grammar
items that students must learn increased greatly since they
entered high school. Teachers are required to teach those
items one after another at a fast pace. In such circumstances,

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

Table 5: Analysis of students’ comments
Sample positive comments(number of similar comments shown in brackets)
1. I have learned better using handouts and doing pair and group work. (31)
2. I have learned better than at junior high school. (10)
3. Pair and group work help me understand English better. (22)Sample negative comments
1. I can understand grammar structures in class, but soon forget them. (5)2. There are grammar items which I still don’t understand. (11)
3. My English ability hasn’t developed much. (6)the students are not provided with enough chances topractice using the items; therefore, they did not feel like they
could use them accurately. On the other hand, the reason forstudents’ increased motivation may be due to the lessons
given through structured input and output, which gave them
many chances to use and be exposed to English.
To better enable students to acquire English, the following
three things are essential: careful selection of grammar
items, recycling, and enhancing writing activities forcorrective feedback. It is important to choose minimal
essential grammar items, especially for first-year highschool students. We should not try to teach every item in
the grammar book. Instead, we should recycle activities torepeatedly teach minimal essential points through structured
input and output. Corrective feedback is indispensable
for students to notice their own language use and acquire
accuracy. Thus, it is important to have students write essays
on familiar topics regularly, encouraging them to use target

530

grammar items. Making a syllabus that incorporates those
three elements would be beneficial.

Kato’s action research
Introduction
Action research was conducted at this co-educational
public high school located in an outlying area of central
Japan. Each year has four classes, three taking the General
Curriculum and one the Science Curriculum. Some students
start working after graduation but most enter universities or
junior colleges.
Until last year, grammar had been put in the syllabus
for first-year students and had been taught throughmechanical drills. The assessment had not included students’communicative performance. In 2007 FFI was begun, in whichgrammar was instructed as a tool for communication throughstructured input and output activities. Oral presentation andwritten projects were included in assessment. Students learned
grammar communicatively and involved themselves in
performance tasks.
The next challenge for students who learned basic
grammar in the first year was to heighten their knowledge
and to automatize what they learned in communication.
Ellis (2008) says that subsequent and continuous access tocommunication that utilizes the target features is beneficial
even after the instruction has ceased. That is, recursive
practice in production should be placed in the curriculum inorder to retain their formal knowledge.
In addition to such intensive lessons, where each task
draws students’ attention to a predetermined structure, anSato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

extensive approach is also required in accordance withstudents’ linguistic needs as the communicative activity
proceeds (Ellis, 2006). Incidental FFI integrated with such aproactive approach should promote students’ understandingof linguistic forms and production of meaningful messages.

Teaching procedure
This section introduces how incidental FFI was developedand extended in a writing class for second-year students,
focusing on the following three points; the syllabus,
corrective feedback on incidental errors and autonomy.
First, two main parts, reviewing grammar and monthly
essays as extended activities, were set in the syllabus(see Appendix 3). Grammar items were reviewed using
communicative activities. For instance, the handout inAppendix 3 was incorporated for the review of the target
item (tense) and the production practice in a context.
Students reviewed tense completing a biography of a boy
introduced in the textbook of another subject. Then they
prepared for the monthly essay on the given topic “MyHero”, sharing their heroes with classmates in a speaking
activity.
Students wrote a 150-200 word essay on a given topic
every month, focusing on grammatical items and writing
strategies as sub skills. In the monthly essay, students also
wrote about a person they respected in chronological order,using tense effectively. Furthermore, in one of the three
speaking tests given, students in pairs interviewed each otherabout their heroes.

531

The second concern was corrective feedback on incidental
errors. As students wrote longer essays, more incidental
errors occurred than in fixed pattern practices. To givecorrective feedback, the teacher noted the location of errors
in students’ first drafts by underlining them. Students revised
their first draft while correcting errors, and submitted thesecond draft. The teacher checked and assessed the second
draft. As a result, most of the students corrected minor errors
by themselves, but lower proficiency students were unable tocorrect errors even when they were marked. Moreover, somestudents repeated the same errors.
The next type of corrective feedback was the “Common
errors” exercises (see Appendix 3). Working in groups,
students corrected a list of sentences with errors quoted fromtheir first drafts. The two kinds of feedback mentioned above
encouraged students to notice their errors, and to pay more
attention to formal accuracy. However, still students reliedon teacher’s feedback passively.
The third challenge was for students to control theirwriting independently with the help of peer feedback and self
assessment. Students gave feedback to other students’ firstdrafts following the rubric (see Appendix 3), which made theobjectives and feedback procedure clear. The first draft withteacher/ peer feedback was revised by the writer to complete
the second draft. Peer response helped writers to understandhow readers saw their work, and student reviewers viewed
their own texts from a reader’s perspective (Hyland &Hyland, 2006). The experience as a reader in peer feedback
made students conscious of readers while they were writing.
For self assessment, another rubric outlining the objectivesof the essay was given to students, before they wrote the532

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

first draft (see Appendix 3), so that they could independently
control their writing from the beginning. As Hyland andHyland (2006) claim, self assessment helps students
critically evaluate their writing to change their own writing
processes and make revisions where necessary.

Results
After trial and error, an established procedure for themonthly essay was developed: (1) contextualized drills using
the textbook, (2) first draft with self assessment, (3) teacher
feedback, (4) common error exercises, (5) peer feedback, (6)second draft, and (7) teacher assessment. Students readily
accepted this procedure and learned to control their writing
while being aware of the readers’ perspectives, objectives ofeach task and formal accuracy. Moreover, they came to enjoy
writing longer essays.
The questionnaire written in Japanese was conducted in
September. The results showed that students realized FFI in
writing was effective to improve their formal accuracy (seeTable 6). Students’ free comments in Japanese (translated by
the researcher) revealed that a number of them appreciatedthe value of writing essays, such as “Essays are troublesome,
but the most useful way to improve English,” “Essays
deepen my understanding of grammar more than learningmodel sentences by heart,” “In essay and oral pair work, I
realized I could use learned grammar,” or “I realized I canretain grammar if I use it over and over again.” Furthermore,
the other activities such as self-assessment, teacher/ peer
feedback, revision, the “common errors” exercises wereregarded as helpful to improve students’ writing skills and to
motivate them to write more.

Table 6: Results of the survey in 2008
1. Do you think focusing grammar in monthly
essays is helpful for you to learn grammar?
2. Do you think self-correction and revision isuseful?
3. Do you want teachers to give corrective
feedback?

Yes

No

72%

28%

don’t know
0%

Yes

No

don’t know

49%

41%

10%

Yes

No

don’t know

100%

0%

0%

4. Do you try not to repeat the same errors afterrevision?

try not

repeatdon’t know

65%

32%

3%

5. Do you think “Common errors” exercises areuseful to reflect your errors?

Yes

No

don’t know

80%

15%

5%
don’t know

6. Do you think peer feedback motivates you?

7. Do you think self assessment is useful?
8. Do you intend to use the target grammar
accurately in monthly essays?
9. Can you writer longer essays than last year?

10. Do you enjoy writing?

11. Can you speak in a pair without hesitation?
12. Did you speak what you wanted to say in the
speaking test?
13. Do you enjoy speaking?

(1 class, 39 students)

Yes

No

72%

24%

4%

Yes

No

don’t know

67%

4%

29%
don’t know

Yes

No

69%

8%

23%

Yes

No

don’t know

67%

8%

25%

Yes

No

don’t know

43%

18%

39%

Yes

No

don’t know

29%

21%

50%

Yes

No

don’t know

18%

26%

56%

Yes

No

don’t know

22%

23%

44%

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

Summary
A great number of studies have confirmed that grammar
should be taught ensuring that learners are able to connect
grammatical forms to their meaning in communication.
However, there has been little discussion of relative meritsof planned and incidental FFI (see Ellis, 2006). This study
shows a positive effect of integrating both. Communicative
activities and essays focusing on certain forms create
the necessity for students to use grammatical items formeaningful communication, as well as causing them toattend to the target structures. Moreover, teacher, self, andpeer feedback clarify the objectives and promote theirautonomy. Students realize that this step-by-step process
approach has enhanced both their formal accuracy andsuccessful communication.
A problem remains for future studies, which is theintegration of writing with speaking activities. Students
do not have confidence in speaking, and have difficultyin unplanned conversations. More opportunities should
be provided in daily classes, in which they can express
their ideas through interaction. Then, the effectiveness ofcorrective feedback towards incidental errors in speaking
should be examined.

Conclusion
There has been little documentation about how language
teachers put theory about grammar teaching into practice.
In fact, Celce-Murcia (1991) acknowledged “that TESOL
methodologists have not offered consistent advice to teachers
about the role of grammar in language teaching over the533

past 25 years” (p. 462). The results of Iwai’s and Kushiro’s
action research indicate that students learned grammar
better through input and output-based activities than throughtraditional grammar teaching. Kato’s study shows thatincidental focus-on-form instruction together with teacher
feedback and self/peer-evaluation seem to be effective since
students can recycle the grammar points they have learned
and attend to common errors.
It is true that these three action research projects arestill on going, descriptive in nature, and quite different
from experimental studies. Nevertheless, these studies
by practitioners will encourage other teachers who arestruggling with teaching grammar communicatively. In short,
Ellis (2006) acknowledges that there is no one best approachto teaching grammar and calls for developing a personal
theory of grammar teaching.
The acquisition of the grammatical system of an
L2 is a complex process and almost certainly canbe assisted by a variety of approaches. But what
is important is to recognize what options areavailable, what the theoretical rationales for these
options are, and what the problems are with theserationales. This is the starting point for developinga personal theory of grammar teaching (p. 103).
We hope similar studies will be conducted by other teachers
based on theoretical rationales so that they too can develop
their own personal theories of grammar teaching.

Sato, et al: Focus-on-form instruction (FFI) and its effect on student learning

PAC7 at JALT2008: Shared Identities

Kazuyoshi Sato teaches at Nagoya University of Foreign
Studies. He holds a PhD in Applied Linguistics fromthe University of Queensland, Australia. He has written
several papers on communicative language teaching andteacher education. His research interests include teacher
development, language learning strategies, and curriculum
development.
Reiko Iwai is an Aichi Prefectural High School teacher.
She obtained an MA in TESOL from Nagoya Universityof Foreign Studies in 2009. Her research interests include
communicative grammar teaching and curriculum
development.
Mie Kato teaches English at a senior high school in Gifu.
She obtained an MA in TESOL from the University of
Queensland, Australia, in 2005. Her research interests
include corrective feedback, conversation strategies andautonomy.
Miwako Kushiro is a Gifu Prefectural High School teacher.
She holds a BA in British and American Studies from
Nanzan University, Japan. She is now doing postgraduate
studies in MA in TESOL at Nagoya University of Foreign
Studies. Her research interests include task based language
teaching and curriculum development.

References

Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar pedagogy in second andforeign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 439-480.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Preemptive
focus on form in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly,
35, 407-432.

534

Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar:
An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 83-107.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition(2nd Ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second
language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39, 83101.
Lee, J. F., & VanPatten, B. (1995). Making communicative
language teaching happen. New York: McGraw-Hill
Lee, J. F., & VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative
language teaching happen (2nd Ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill

Appendix 1! !!!!!!!!!!! !"#! $%&! ! '())*+,! -.*/,! ! ! ! ! !

Quiz0 12345678!

Listening & Guessing ( level 1)

Now your teacher is telling you some hints in English. Listen carefully and guess who or what?

12!!!!!!

!

Your Answer
0

3

4

5

!!!!!!

!!!!!!!

!!!!

!

!

!

!
!!!!!

!

!!

9

:

;

<

Quiz 0! Answers
1! ! ! =>?

2! @A

3! ! ! AKB48! ! ! ! !

4! BCDE 5! GHI
F

Script
1. We are made of 3 young men.
We were formed on January 2nd, 2008.
We are known for born fools. ( second bananas )We can be seen on the TV program, “ Quiz Hexagon.”
We are called “JKLMNOPCQRS! and! TUVW.”
2. I was originally invented by Graham Bell in the U.S. in 1876.
I have been used by many people in the world since then.
I can be easily carried anywhere and I can be used all over the world.
Voice and mails can be sent through me.
3. We were formed in 2005.

We are sometimes messed up with XYZ[\]^_ by middle aged people.
We are produced by `ab.
We are made up of 48 high school girls.
We are named after `cd! $AKiBa&, our home field.
4. I am located in the middle of Chita peninsula (efgh).
I am made up of 18 classes.
Air conditioning was being built a few months ago.
The air conditioning has just been worked.
I was build 30 years ago.
I am known for volunteer and club activities.
5. I can be found in comic books and an animated TV program.
I am helped by many fellows.
I was created by ijklm.
I was sometimes messed up with Gold Rodger, pirate king.
My body can be wound and changed freely. Because my body is made up of gum.

nInformation Exchange Activityofor Student A
pL 9 JLqrLsL0tuLvwxyLz{|}~Y•{5€•‚ƒ„…†‡ˆ‰Š‹OŒ€ŠL•Ž••4‘ƒ’wxyLz{|}~“‹”‚•O–—˜“‹–[4™š€•‚ƒŠ›5O
œ5‚™š›‰Š‹OŒ€ŠL•Ž••Y€•ž‘†O™š†Œ‰•‚•Ÿ™š

†‡ˆ‰•‚

Š‹„…L•Ž••Y€•ž‘ƒ
No.9 Lz{2OŒ€ŠL¡ž¢£|•{5€•‚ƒ¤JL¥••2¦§¨©4‚7\ªƒ$‚š€“‰Š‹„…L•Ž••4‘ƒ&

Answer in 5 seconds, otherwise you will lose the point and your partner will
get one point.
(Example )Student A ( Read ) : When was Agui high school built?
«! Student B (Answer) : Let’s see…( within 5 seconds ) , Agui high school was built in 1978.
Student A«

Student B(Answer): Let’s see…( 6 seconds have passed )Student A«: True. ( ¬! student B can get 1 point. ): Time out! ( ¬! student A can get 1 point )Student B ( Answer ): in 1978.
Student A : Beep! You didn’t answer in whole sentence. ( ¬! student A can get 1 point.)- What is eaten at ® a) in a restaurant
Christmas in the U.S?
b) in a coffee shopc) in a book shopAns.) Turkey is eaten at Ans.) They are sold in
Christmas there.

¯ When was the first
Harry Potter bookpublished?

Ans.) It was published in
1997.

°

a) by Volkswagenb) by Benzc) by Alfa Romeo± Which animal cannot
be seen in T P zoo
now?

Ans.) It was invented byAns.) A panda cannot beseen there now.
Â a) on June 23rdb) on July 23rdc) on August 23rd

¿ In which city are many
hotels and gyms being
built
for
2008
Olympic game?

Ans.) They are being built Ans. ) It will be publishedin Beijing (ÀÁ).
on _____.

a) ³´•µ¶·µb)! r¸¹c)! º•»¼½¾G

²

Ans.)
has not beenprotected in Japan.
Ã Which month was I
born?
( You have to give three
options to your partner.)Ans.) You
in
.

were

born

nOutput Activity 1o!
"#$%&'()*+,-./01 2#()*34567589*0!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! My Sister and I
I have a sister. She is by four years older than I. But she is shorter of us two.
She is a university student. She leaves home very earlier than I. Because she goes toGifu-city. My sister and I have some differences. First, she is shorter than I three
centimeters. Second, she likes to listen to YUI. She is a great fan of YUI. I like
YUI, too. She has many as YUI’s CDs as I have. She sometimes sings YUI’s song,playing the piano. However, I believe I am a good singer than she. Lastly, she loves
cats well than dogs. But I like dogs well than cats. Because a dog is friendly than acat. We sometimes have different opinions. But we are good sisters.

!
! !!!!!!!!!!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!Point/8!

nOutput Activity 2o!
:;<=:;3>?@ABC$32D-./0"# EFGHI ;JKL8M#3>?@ABC$3N-89*0EFGHI OP@Q*2*RJSTMUVW!
XTOPICYMac VS Windows / cell. phone Dokomo VS Softbank / a pen VS a pencil / Z[! VS JR/ a bicycle VS an electric bike / Agui VS Nagoya / Soccer club VS Baseball club /a letter V S an E-mail / a movie V S a DVD / \]^!_ ` !abc!/ My father V S My brother/defghijk! _ `! dlmnh'op! / an apple VS an orange / qrs_ `! tu/ vw!
VS xy! / English VS Mathematics / z{|j}|! _ `! ~•€•‚• /ƒ„…†! VS ‡ˆ…†! / a paper dictionary VS an electric dictionary / ik‰Š! VS ••‹•!

!
Œ"#•Ž•#•‘3’6“B89*0@LC”•RD9?–*.5—˜!
!!!!! XAdjective Y
difficult / easy / exciting / fun / popular / interesting / new / old / tall / short / colorful / good / bad /expensive / economical / quick / fast / slow / long / small / big / kind / strict / generous / heavy/ light / soft / hard / cool / sweet / sour / cold / hot / convenient / dark / bright / quiet / noisy etc.

!
™šš›!œ•žŸ ž¡HF¢!F›!£šŸ¤!œ•žŸ ž¡HF¢!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
Point Distribution
1
2
3
4
5
6

! !
Points of Assessment
Using Comparative A¥+–¦6,C
Free from Grammatical Mistakes $ª()*+8*
Put One Topic Sentence «¬-{®k¯k•+,C
Reason at Least 2 points °±+ 2 2O²³56,C
Conclusion ´µ+¶56,C
Total Impressions ’·#.<.-=„Ž#¸M5¹98º

points§! ! ¨! ! ©
§! ! ¨! ! ©
§! ! ¨! !
§! ! ¨! ! ©
§! ! ¨! !
§! ! ¨! ! ©

1
2
3
4
5
6

! !
Points of Assessment
Using Comparative A¥+–¦6,C
Free from Grammatical Mistakes $ª()*+8*
Put One Topic Sentence «¬-{®k¯k•+,C
Reason at Least 2 points °±+ 2 2O²³56,C
Conclusion ´µ+¶56,C
Total Impressions ’·#.<.-=„Ž#¸M5¹98º

points§! ! ¨! ! ©
§! ! ¨! ! ©
§! ! ¨! !
§! ! ¨! ! ©
§! ! ¨! !
§! ! ¨! ! ©

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!
!
!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! Total/10

Appendix 2!
!

!
> 5 ž¡ !B H¢b !F ¤ !c F= !b F !a F!( ž¢¡ !¡ F !` š¡ !H ¢ !¡ 5š !¤

¡

›š!!

!

» ¼½&¾*R¿À3Á2•C&'=.Â¼½35CÃ<+xÀ@/0
OÄ#Å!#"˜Ã<3#$=ST%Tº#¿À+&56*C;>'˜0!
!

d!ŸHBš!¡F!6¡ ba@ !

!

d!5FGš!¡F!BššG!

6¡ baH¢`!žŸŸ!8a!ŸHBš@!

!

!! ! ! ! ! ! A`FFb !ž¡ef! g

!

+²hC!
) * + , - .

!
!

d!ŸHBš!›šžbH¢` !

!

=FFB6@!

0 1 , 1 - 2 3 4!!!!£F¤¡(ž›š !/š•šŸFGš› !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!EšžI5š›!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!

!

!!!!!£IHš¢¡H6¡!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 7I¡F›!
0 1 9 * 4 2 : ; +!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/HGŸF8ž¡ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<H=›ž›Hž¢!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/FI¡F›!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>›H¡š›!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!

!

!

!!?@!A!7BH›ž!C!

!!!!D@!A!EšHBF!C!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
d! ž8! `FFb ! ž¡! (F›BH¢` !!
!

(H¡5!8a!5ž¢b6@!

d!(ž¢¡ !¡F!bF !

!

!! ! ! ! ! ! A`FFb !ž¡e f! gbH¤¤š›š¢¡!¡5H¢`6!

!

+²hC!

š•š›a!bža@!

!
G

H

I

4

J

K

M 1 N 1 O P

R

,

S

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Fž›Gš¢¡š› !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! L 6H¢š66 !Q(¢š›!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
R H +

U

G

V

;

W

R

*

9

X

! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!7 ¡F!TšI5ž¢HI !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!™FŸHIš!Q¤¤HIš› !
0 1 J 0 9 P +!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/š¢¡H6¡ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Y@A!Zž¢žBF!C! !!!!!!!!T 6HIHž¢!
N - *! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!F5š¤!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7I¡F›!
!!![@!A!£ 6 8 !C !

d!bF¢i¡!ŸHBš !

d!ŸHBš !8šš¡H¢` !

!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(šž›H¢` !ž!6 H¡š@!!d!

GšFGŸš@!!d!š¢cFa !

!

¡›a!¢F¡!¡F !(šž› !

¡žŸBH¢` !(H¡5!GšFGŸš@!

!

¤F›8žŸ!IŸF¡5š6@!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!

\@AEž›FC!
]ž›8š›!!

!

!!!!!

EšžI5š›!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7›¡H6¡!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
£FIHžŸ!>F›Bš›!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

!!!!!!!^@A_ 8HC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!FF8G ¡š›!™›F`›ž88š›!!!!!!!!!™5a6HIžŸ!E5š›žGH6¡!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!F5HŸb!Fž›š!>F›Bš› ! !!!!!!!!!!!
ZF¡šŸ!Tž¢ž`š›!

Talk with your partner.

!

I enjoy singing. I!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7f!!>5ž¡!BH¢b!cF=!H6!`FFb!¤F›!! ! Z j ! ! !!

like to stand of!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Lf!!d!¡5H¢B !!¿ À !!!H6!`FFb !¤F›!5H8 !A5š› C@!
!

the stage.

!!>5ž¡!bF!aF !¡5H¢B!

!A!Tariko )!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7f! d k9?<lo¿À3>?@*RJh!

Teacher!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!d!ž`› šš!(H¡5!aF @ !
Actor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!d k9?<)˜¿À3>?@*RJh
Singer!

!!!!d!¡5H¢B !!¿ À !!!H6!=š¡¡š› !¤F›!5H8 !A5š›C@

Karaoke Owner

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

m! " # $ $ # " ! % " & ' & ( ) # ) * + ( !
!"#$%&'()*+,-*./01234567849:;<=>*?15@
like to study
hope to keep
like reading
good at working
want to do
like wearing
try not to wear
like meeting
enjoy talking!

A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ BCD>@
A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ @ @ BEF)G1.@
A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ BCD>@
A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ BCHI@
A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ @ BEF)G1.@
A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ BCD>@
A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ BEJCK.@
A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ BCD>@
A@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ BELMN@

to ~
~ing

()*+,*#4P2/QRS5@
O3.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @mCommunication Practice( 1 )( 1 ) Answer following questions. Circle Y(yes) or N(no).
1. Do you enjoy working with people?
2. Do you want to be rich?
3. Do you want to be famous?
4. Do you like traveling?
5. Do you like helping people?
6. Are you good at playing music?
7. Do you enjoy working with animals?
8. Do you hate wearing business clothes?
dM1N1OPPHnh
9. Do you like playing with children?
10. Are you good at using computers?

Partner 1 Partner 2

You
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N

(

Y / N

Y / N

Y / N
Y / N

)
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N

Y / N
Y / N

(

)
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N
Y / N

Y / N
Y / N
Y / N

( 2 ) Interview 2 partners.
A: Question 1 ~ 10 ?

TU#V;EW1X9P\U#V;E]/-PU-^?

H#!-YZ[MRS5@_M1/0S`aEP!b49

B: ( Answer yes or no. )A: OK. I think ! o p #¿À ! ! is good for you.

c)GV;RS5@

mCommunication Practice( 2 ) ÆÆÆQuiz
@ d$#ef#fg#hiEj<klmlnCo+4nCD>4E!36EpqrEst<=>*?15@! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Zoo Keeper
StuntmanW q H W

! ! ! ! ! ! ! Shop Clerk!

I like _______________________
I enjoy _____________________I am good at ___________________________________________

I like _______________________
I enjoy _____________________!

I like_______________________I am good at _______________ I enjoy_________________________________________________I am good at _________________________________________

upr-'Pp qr E/.]# /v wrE/.]# Cxy235@Ç•! r! ~ing
avoid!
enjoy
finishkeep
think about
practicemind!
give upbe good at
8º!

Ç•! r! to ~agree
decideexpect
want
hope
wish
promise
plan
8º

ºsJ@M
like
hate
start
begin
continue8º`a-z{3.I|E=}S5@~•€•‚ƒ€@„‚…@†ƒ‡ˆ€‰Š#I|#6b#‹Œ1EP•-*9t<ŽM*?15••xy235@
To Whom It May Concern:
I want work at Kakamihara Library. I am in my third year of high school. I expect! ! ! ! !

tograduate next year and I plan finding a job.
I enjoy to read and to work with people. I am good at to use computers and I
like keep things tidy.
I hope hearing from you soon.
Sincerely yours,

Taro Kakami

~Now, it’s your turn to write a letter.
To Whom It May Concern:
I want to work at ___________________________. I _____________________________! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! d~LR*•€=•‚h ! ! ! dƒ„#¼½&…/C†Êh________________________________________.
I enjoy _____________________________________________________________________.
I am good!ž¡ !‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡ˆ!

ž¢b!d!ŸHBš !‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡@!
!!!!!!!!d!5FGš!¡F!5šž›!¤›F8!aF !6FF¢@!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!£H¢Iš›šŸa!aF ›6ˆ!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡!

Let’s talk about our dream jobs.
Panda: What kind of job do you want to have? (Where do you want to work?)Cat:( Your answer ) .

Panda: Why is that?
Cat: Because I like…ing… I enjoy …ing… I am good at …ing…
Panda: That’s great! ( Oh, really?/ I see. )t t t (Cat # uÈ&v/Cwx3:;¨25É˜)t t tt t tt?

*One follow-up questionCat:( Your answer )Panda:( Your answer ). How about you? What kind of job do you want to have?
.

Cat: Why is that?
Panda: Because I like…ing… I enjoy …ing… I am good at …ing…
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! d y3zpCh{&|*RÃ<3}ÈÉ˜h
Cat: That’s great! ( Oh, really?/ I see. )tdPanda # uÈ&v/Cwx3:;¨25É˜h! ! ! *One follow-up question
Panda:( Your answer ).

t t tt t t t?

Appendix ËSyllabus of Writing

Month Grammar items(textbook)

‰
Š

‹
Œ
•
¨§
¨¨

¨©
¨
©

Monthly essay
Topic

Target grammar

Writing strategies

Better Products

Inanimatesubject

discourse marker

Would you help
Bones?

indirectdiscourse

paragraph writing

My heropresent/ past
perfect

chronologicalwriting

Latest news
Self reflection

passive voice

how to use
informationinterrogative/
negativeinanimatesubject/emphasis/
preposition
conjunction/
narration/agreement
tense*speaking test
(My hero)voice/ auxiliary
verb

Self reflection

infinitive/
gerundparticiple/comparative*speaking test
(School
uniform)
relative

Witness (imaginary infinitivenews)
Do you think school comparative
uniform is needed?

concrete evidence

conditional/
negativephrase/clause*speaking test
(Humanclones)What is needed in
the world most
Pros and cons ofhuman clones?
A letter to myself
Self reflection

conditional

introduction/
conclusion
coherence

relativestopic / support
sentencesHandout for a communicative activity
Topic; My hero. Target grammar; Tense.
Iqbal Mashi’s biography: Circle a proper one in parentheses (1) – (5).
1982
1986-1992
1992
1994
1995

born
work at the carpet factory
start to go to school
start a worldwide campaign against child labor
receive Human Rights Youth Action Awardmurdered

Iqbal Mashin (1) ( was born / has been born ) in Pakistan in 1982. Iqbal was sold into slavery at a carpet
factory. He (2) ( was working / has been working / had been working) for six years at the factory.
When he was ten years old, he (3) ( left / has left ) the factory and started to go to school.

Also, hestarted a worldwide campaign against child labor. From 1992 to 1995, until he died, he (4) ( was making / hadbeen making ) speeches around the world talking about child labor and his life experiences.
He won many awards. He received Human Rights Youth Action Award in 1994.
Soon after that, he returned to Pakistan. He was killed by “The Carpet Mafia” when he was 12 years old.
He died but since then he (5) ( was / had been / has been) a hero of action against child labor.

Who is your hero? When was he/ she born? What has(had) he/ she been
doing so far?
MY hero is ().

How about your friends? Ask three friends.
‘s hero is ()‘s hero is ()‘s hero is ()

Use communication strategies below.
Will you say that again?
Do you mean
Really?

?

Common errors from students’ first drafts of “My Hero”

Let’s find errors and correct them.
[verb]
1. He has started baseball when he was a junior high school student.
started2. They have sold only 500 of their first single in June, 2003.
3. He formed a band when he was enter high school.
4. She was laugh and go on running.
5. Nobunaga was die in Honnoji.
6. In 1948, he was dead because of his lover’s death.
7. Mother Teresa acted to won the Novel Peace Prize.
8. We should have choose the best way based on our purpose.

[noun]
9. It consumes many energy.
10. There are many informations.
11. He didn’t have many money.

[adverb]
12. Even if a difficult ball comes to him, he catches it easy.
13. Speaking in dialect is naturally.

Handout for peer feedback
Peer feedback: My hero. Read a friend’s essay and tick in the table below.
ŠThe history Clearof Herostatement
followingchorological
order
Love
Good
towards
statement
Hero
expressing
how thewriterrespect thehero
Information Concrete
information
based ondetailed
research is
described.
Sentence
Elaborates
structurelearnedandgrammar or
vocabulary phrases intextbooks
Conscious Wellof readersconsidersreaders‰ËStatement
Statement offollowingparts of thechronological history
order©
Statement of
only a partof thehistory¨
Unclearstatementof thehistoryStatement
expressing
why thewriter respect
the hero

Not express
the writer’s
respect
towards herowell

Not express
the writer’s
respect
towards
hero

Not
express thewriter’s
impression
towards
the heroConcreteinformation
is described.

Lack inconcreteinformation

No concrete
information

Cannotjudge

Uses various
kinds ofgrammar andphrasesShort
sentencesand poor
vocabulary

Incomplete
sentencesNot
considerreaders

Hard toread

Accuracyin English

Has minor
errors but
make sense

Monotonous
repetition of
the samekinds ofphrases
Lack ofeffort inconsidering
readers
Has errors
and somesentences are
hard tounderstandAccurate
EnglishConsidersreaders

Comment/ Name

* A rubric in Japanese was given to students.

Has many
Incomplete
errors which English
makes it
hard tounderstandwhat thewritermeans

Handout for self assessment
Self assessment: My hero. Reflect your essay and tick in the table below.
ŠThe history Clearof Herostatement
followingchorological
order
Love
Good
towards
statement
Hero
expressing
how I
respect thehero
Information Concrete
information
based ondetailed
research is
described.
Target item Conscious
and1Ž
Past perfect appropriate
useTargetConscious
item2:
andPresent
appropriate
perfectuse
Sentence
Elaborates
structurelearnedandgrammar or
vocabulary phrases intextbooks
Conscious
Wellof readersconsidersreaders‰
Statement
following
chronologicalorderËStatementof parts of
the history©
Statement of
only a part of
the history¨
Unclearstatementof thehistoryStatement
expressing
why I respect
the hero

Not express
my respect
towards
hero well

Not express
my respect
towards hero

Concreteinformation
is described.

Lack inconcreteinformation

No concrete
information

Not
expressmyimpression
towards
the heroCannotjudge

Used but do
not know ifthey areaccurate.
Used but do
not know ifthey areaccurate.
Uses various
kinds ofgrammar andphrases
Considersreaders

Comment*A rubric in Japanese was given to students.

Did not use
but know
how to use
Did not use
but know
how to use
Monotonous
repetition of
the samekinds ofphrases
Lack ofeffort inconsidering
readers

Short
sentencesand poor
vocabulary
Not consider
readers

Neitherused norknow how
to useNeitherused norknow how
to useIncomplete
sentences

Hard toread