1. Learner Autonomy in Focus-on-Form: Task Explicitness and Language Proficiency
Su Yunwen

2. Purpose learner-generated attention to form focus-on-form instruction
task explicitness & language proficiency

3. The Study — Focus-on-Form (FonF)
Any instructional activities, no matter planned or incidental, reactive or preemptive, which are meaning-based but with a focus on language form

4. — Independent Variables
The Study
— Independent Variables
Task Explicitness
Learner Proficiency Level

5. Task Explicitness U: unobtrusive O: Obtrusive U ←────────────→ O
Input flood *
Task-essential language *
Input enhancement *
Negotiation *
Recast *
Output enhancement *
Interaction enhancement *
Dictogloss *
Consciousness-raising tasks *
Input processing *
Garden path *
U: unobtrusive O: Obtrusive

6. Task Explicitness Picture Sequencing (PS) Task-essential language (TE)
Dictogloss (DG)

7. Language Proficiency
PL1: 24 1st year non-English majors from A classes
PL2: 24 2nd year non-English majors form CET-4 classes
PL3: 24 2nd year non-English majors from CET-6 classes

8. The Study — Dependent Variable Learner Autonomy:
Language-related Episode (LRE)

9. Definition
Discourse in which the learners talk or ask about language, or question, implicitly or explicitly their own language use or that of others.
Iris: Were moored on
Kim: Sorry, I reckon in River Thames
Iris: Why in?
Kim: On…yes on… on the River Thames on the Yarra not in the Yarra

10. Typologies Learner-learner (LLP) Learner-teacher (LTP)
LREs of different exchange types
-Preemptive LREs (learner-initiated)
Learner-learner (LLP)
Learner-teacher (LTP)
-Reactive LREs (learner-learner)
Implicit (IR)
Explicit (ER)

11. Typologies Phonological Lexical Syntactical
LREs with different linguistic focuses
Phonological
Lexical
Syntactical

12. Typologies With an uptake move Without an uptake move
LREs with different move structures
With an uptake move
Without an uptake move

13. Research Questions
Is individual proficiency level related to the extent to which learners pay attention to form?
Is explicitness of FonF task (planned/incidental) related to the extent to which learners pay attention to language form?
Is there any interaction of proficiency level and task type on learners’ attention to form?
How do LREs vary (number and type) at different proficiency level and in different FonF tasks?

14. — Proficiency Level and Learner Autonomy
Results
— Proficiency Level and Learner Autonomy

15. — Task Type and Learner Autonomy
Results
— Task Type and Learner Autonomy

16. — Interaction of Task Type & Proficiency Level
Results
— Interaction of Task Type & Proficiency Level

17. — Investigation into LRE Types
Results
— Investigation into LRE Types

18. — Investigation into LRE Types
Results
— Investigation into LRE Types

19. LREs –Exchange Types
Significantly more preemptive LREs than reactive ones
The number of reactive LREs rises up as learners’ proficiency increases.
With the increase of explicitness of the task, the portion of reactive LREs in all the LREs found in the same FonF task rises.

20. — Investigation into LRE Types
Results
— Investigation into LRE Types

21. — Investigation into LRE Types
Results
— Investigation into LRE Types

22. LREs –Linguistic Focuses
Significantly more lexical LREs than syntactical and then phonological ones
The number of all the three types of LREs rises as learners’ proficiency increases, with the number of syntactical LREs at the highest rate
Both lexical and syntactical LREs increase in number as the explicitness of the task rises, with the latter at a significantly higher rate.

23. — Investigation into LRE Types
Results
— Investigation into LRE Types

24. — Investigation into LRE Types
Results
— Investigation into LRE Types

25. LREs –Uptake Move
Significantly more LREs with an uptake move than those without
LREs with uptake an move and LREs without am uptake move increase in number at almost the same rate when the proficiency level and/or the explicitness of the task increases.

26. Discussion — Pedagogical Implications
Directing learners’ attention to language form without intervening with the process so much
Encouraging learners to make response to other’s language or feedback to increase awareness of language form and the association between form and meaning
Calling learner attention to other aspects of language other than lexical ones

27. Discussion — Further Research
Longitudinal studies that address the effectiveness of learner-generated attention to form are needed.
Whether teacher intervention to increase attention to form can accelerate learners’ acquisitional processes. If so, how and when?
Do learners’ perception of task difficulty and their beliefs in language learning influence their attention to form and in what way?

28. THANK YOU