Leila Pooshaneh - IAU, South Tehran Branch, Iran
Gholam-Reza Abbasian - Imam Ali University & IAU, South Tehran Branch, Iran

Many empirical investigations have demonstrated that explicit Focus on Form (FOF) methods are more effective than implicit Focus on Meaning (FOM) methods (Norris & Ortega, 2000), because in FOF instructionlearners’ attention is drawn to linguistic form while FOM instruction requires learners attention to communicate(Ellis, 2001). However, this piece of research focused on both the effectiveness and feasibility study of FOF vs. FOMin reading class. In this quasi- experimental study, 20 adult EFL learners of pre-intermediate level were divided into two experimental groups which received two different types of instruction. During a ten-session treatment, the firstgroup was provided with FOF instruction (Dictoglass task), while the second group was provided with FOMinstruction (Discussion task). The results revealed a significant difference between two experimental groups. TheFOF group scored significantly higher than the FOM group. Regarding the students and teachers’ perspectives towards feasibility of FOF in reading class, the students believed that FOF was feasible in reading classes, while the teachers were not unanimous in this regard, but towards feasibility of FOM both groups held positive attitudes.Generally, the data revealed that both FOF and FOM have feasibility in reading classes. In terms of feasibility, both methods are equally well- functioning, but as to developing reading skill FOF proved a bit more effective than FOM.

Focus on Form (FOF), Focus on Meaning (FOM), Feasibility of FOF and FOM