Focus on form = reactive, incidental attention to language inside meaning-focused work (Long 1991). Focus on formS = proactive, pre-selected structures (PPP).
Claim
The distinction is about when and why form gets attention. Long (1991): focus on form “overtly draws students’ attention to linguistic elements as they arise incidentally in lessons whose overriding focus is on meaning or communication.” FonFS is the structural syllabus delivered proactively. FonF fits TBLT and Dogme.
Mechanism / theory
- Long (1991), via Doughty & Williams (1998, p. 3).
- Doughty & Varela (1998): recasts of past tense during ESL science lessons gave gains lasting at least 2 months.
- Comments cite Norris & Ortega (2000), DeKeyser (2003), Lightbown & Spada (2006), Lyster (2007): prompts/clarification requests vs recasts.
Classroom moves
- See The 5 Rs of reactive teaching.
- Learners transcribe their own recorded speech “warts and all” and correct it (Mennin 2003, ELTJ).
Limits & critique
- Krashen (comment): gains are modest, mostly on grammar tests, short-lived.
- Coelho (comment): recasts may be heard as agreement, not correction. Lyster’s prompts (clarification requests, elicitation) push self-repair.
- Thornbury: “the jury is still out.”
Apply in my context (Claude)
- DELTA M1 terminology item: know FonF / FonFS / planned vs incidental FonF (Ellis 2001) and proactive vs reactive.
- With teens (KET/PET), recasts are often missed. Use a prompt (“Yesterday I… ?”) when the target is known, and a recast when it’s beyond them. That follows Lyster & Ranta’s (1997) uptake findings.