A case study of efl young learners' engagement in grammar learning through focus on form tasks

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAININGCAN THO UNIVERSITY NGUYEN THI MY HUE A CASE STUDY OF EFL YOUNG LEARNERS' ENGAGEMENT IN GRAMMAR LEARNING THROUGH FOCUS -ON -FORM TASKS MASTER OF EDUCATIO

Research Aims and Research Questions

Definitions of student engagement

Student engagement is a multifaceted concept that encompasses the time and effort students dedicate to activities linked to positive college outcomes According to Kuh et al (2007), it involves both the students' investment in their studies and the institutional efforts to promote participation Krause and Coates (2008) further elaborate that engagement includes students' interactions with peers and educators, as well as their overall involvement in the learning process Hu and Kuh (2001) emphasize the personal effort students put into meaningful educational activities that contribute to achieving their goals Additionally, Coates (2007) highlights that engagement reflects the active participation of students in various educational endeavors.

Scholars continue to debate the components that define student engagement, with some researchers identifying three primary elements: affective/emotional, cognitive, and behavioral dimensions.

2016) However, more recent studies have proposed adding a fourth component,agentic engagement (Reeve, 2012; Reeve & Tseng, 2011), or even a fifth component,social engagement (Fredricks, Filsecker, & Lawson, 2016).

Dimensions of engagement

Behavioral Engagement is a crucial aspect of learner engagement, focusing on observable actions and participation Key elements include effort, initiative, and persistence, which showcase how learners actively engage in educational activities This dimension is reflected in the time spent on tasks, the frequency of verbal contributions, and the adherence to instructions.

8 Essentially, behavioral engagement captures the extent and intensity of learners' involvement in tasks, providing a tangible measure of their participation.

Emotional Engagement emphasizes the crucial role of learners' emotional responses in the learning process It encompasses positive emotions like joy, enthusiasm, and interest that boost engagement, alongside negative emotions such as anxiety and boredom that can hinder it This dimension illustrates how learners' feelings significantly affect their motivation and interactions with educational materials, ultimately shaping their overall learning experience.

Cognitive Engagement enhances our comprehension of learning by emphasizing the mental processes at play, including sustained attention, active thinking, and the use of self-regulation strategies (Dao, 2021; Helme & Clarke).

2001) Cognitive engagement is defined by how deeply learners process and integrate new information with prior knowledge, and how they monitor their own learning

(Mitchell & Carbone, 2011) This dimension reflects the intellectual effort that learners invest in understanding and mastering content.

Agentic Engagement highlights the proactive involvement of learners in their educational journey, underscoring their active participation in shaping the learning environment This aspect encompasses intentional actions by learners, including asking questions, giving feedback, and voicing preferences, which enhance the overall learning experience.

& Thorsen, 2020) Agentic engagement distinguishes itself from related concepts like learner autonomy by focusing on the specific actions learners take to influence and enhance their educational experience (Oga-Baldwin, 2019).

Social Engagement emphasizes the significance of interaction and collaboration in learning, showcasing learners' willingness to connect with peers and foster social ties in the classroom (Svalberg, 2009) This aspect underscores the impact of social dynamics and peer relationships on the effectiveness of learning and the overall educational atmosphere (Moranski & Toth, 2016).

To foster a dynamic and supportive learning environment, it is crucial to understand and address the five dimensions of student engagement identified by Fredricks, Filsecker, and Lawson (2016) Emphasizing behavioral engagement, along with the other dimensions, enhances the overall educational experience and promotes active participation among students.

9 cognitive, emotional, social, and agentic engagement, educators can more effectively engage students in language learning and promote positive educational outcomes.

Figure 1: The hypothesized conceptual framework of the study

This study explores the five dimensions of engagement—affective/emotional, cognitive, behavioral, agentic, and social—in the context of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) young learners' grammar learning through Focus-on-Form (FonF) tasks By examining these dimensions, the research aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of how young learners interact with and respond to these tasks, highlighting the diverse aspects of their engagement and offering valuable insights into the effectiveness of FonF approaches in grammar instruction.

2.3.4 The role of teachers in enhancing student engagement

Teachers are essential in boosting student engagement, especially in second language learning By implementing diverse strategies that address various aspects of engagement, effective educators foster a dynamic and inclusive classroom atmosphere where every student feels appreciated and involved.

10 and supported According to Ryan and Deci (2000), teachers who provide autonomy support, structure, and involvement contribute significantly to students' intrinsic motivation and engagement.

Egbert et al (2021) highlight the crucial role of teachers in creating challenging yet attainable tasks, delivering meaningful feedback, and fostering collaborative learning environments Teachers' enthusiasm, responsiveness, and adaptability greatly impact students' emotional and cognitive engagement Furthermore, employing a variety of instructional strategies that utilize authentic materials, technology, and real-life communication scenarios enhances the relevance and engagement of language learning for students.

Understanding and enhancing student engagement in second language learning

Form-Focused Instruction and Focus- on –Form Tasks

Form-focused instruction

Form-focused instruction (FFI) is a teaching method that prioritizes the explicit attention to language forms and structures while still engaging in communication Unlike meaning-focused instruction, which emphasizes communication without a strong focus on grammatical accuracy, FFI aims to enhance learners' understanding of language rules within a contextual framework According to Robinson (2001), this approach effectively combines form and meaning in language education.

Focus on Form Instruction (FFI) is defined as an instructional approach that intentionally directs learners' attention to linguistic forms, distinguishing it from methods that prioritize meaning alone According to Spada (2011), FFI includes various strategies designed to enhance learners' awareness of language structure, ultimately improving their grammatical accuracy Long (1991) emphasizes that FFI incorporates multiple approaches that enable learners to concentrate on formal language aspects while participating in communicative tasks Similarly, Ellis (2006) describes FFI as instruction that specifically targets linguistic forms instead of merely focusing on meaning.

Form-focused instruction encompasses various approaches to teaching grammar Explicit instruction entails the direct teaching of grammatical rules and structures, as highlighted by Robinson (2001) In contrast, implicit instruction provides learners with indirect exposure to formal rules through interactive practice, as noted by Ellis (2006) Additionally, focused instruction combines both explicit and implicit methods to enhance language learning.

11 focused activities within communicative tasks, providing opportunities to address specific language forms as they arise (Spada, 2011).

Long (1991) identifies two distinct types of form-focused instruction: "focus on form" and "focus on forms." "Focus on forms" emphasizes explicit teaching of specific grammatical rules through isolated practice, while "focus on form" incorporates form-focused activities within communicative tasks, allowing learners to notice and practice language forms in contextually rich environments This latter approach enhances relevance and engagement in language learning.

Focus-on-form tasks

Focus-on-form tasks are instructional activities designed to direct learners' attention to particular language forms during communicative tasks According to Long (1991), these tasks offer learners the chance to notice and practice specific language structures while engaging in communication.

According to Doughty and Williams (1998), instructional tasks that emphasize specific language forms are essential for meaningful communication (p 41) Similarly, as noted by 2003, these tasks require learners to engage with language forms in a communicative activity, drawing attention to language structure within a natural context (p 80).

Focus-on-form (FonF) tasks play a crucial role in merging grammatical instruction with meaningful communication, as highlighted by Ellis (2003) These tasks encourage learners to focus on specific grammatical features within a communicative framework This thesis examines four unique FonF task types—Consciousness-Raising (CR), Dictogloss, Grammar Interpretation (GI), and Grammaring—to assess their effectiveness in engaging young learners with grammatical structures.

Consciousness-Raising (CR) tasks are effective tools for enhancing learners' awareness of specific grammatical forms through data analysis According to Ellis (2003b), these tasks present learners with examples that illustrate particular linguistic structures, encouraging them to identify patterns and rules By engaging in activities that compare verb tenses, CR tasks help learners understand and internalize target forms, emphasizing the importance of "noticing" and recognizing grammatical patterns.

Dictogloss tasks involve learners listening to a text read aloud and reconstructing it from memory, engaging both receptive and productive language skills (Wajnryb, 1990) By comparing their versions with the original text, learners can identify gaps in their language proficiency, promoting awareness of grammatical discrepancies and enhancing their understanding of grammatical structures (Ellis, 2003b).

Grammar interpretation (GI) tasks involve learners in differentiating between similar grammatical forms by analyzing texts and choosing suitable structures based on the given context As noted by Ellis (2003b) and Thornbury, these tasks enhance understanding and application of grammar in practical situations.

In 2001, GI tasks emphasized both meaning and form, helping learners distinguish between different grammatical structures These tasks often include activities like matching sentences to pictures, which effectively target the active and passive voice, promoting cognitive comparison and the restructuring of grammatical knowledge.

Grammaring tasks This kind of task, on the other hand, is production-oriented and emphasizes the use of grammatical structures for communicative clarity Swain's

The Output Hypothesis (1995) posits that engaging in specific tasks encourages learners to transition from relying heavily on vocabulary to employing more complex grammatical structures in their language output By using grammaring tasks, such as narrating stories through pictures and key verbs, learners are prompted to reflect on their language use, ultimately improving their grammatical accuracy (Swain, 1995).

This study employs three Focus on Form (FonF) tasks: Guessing Name, Finding Differences, and Favorite Foods, designed to enhance learners' consciousness and awareness of target grammatical structures through meaningful communication By engaging in these tasks, learners can notice and apply grammatical forms in context, thereby fostering both language awareness and practical usage.

The guessing game emphasizes the target structure "I’ve got " by having participants describe individuals to identify them, which enhances engagement through the use of descriptive language and personal attributes Similarly, the activity Finding the Differences Between Two Pictures focuses on the structure "What is she/he doing?" prompting learners to identify discrepancies between images, thereby fostering the use of the present continuous tense and encouraging cognitive comparison through interaction Lastly, the Favorite Foods task centers on the structure "Like/don’t like + N," allowing learners to articulate their food preferences while integrating grammatical practice into the learning experience.

13 communicative activities, prompting learners to use the target structure in discussing their likes and dislikes.

Related Studies

Engaging learners is essential for successful grammar acquisition, especially in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts Numerous studies have investigated various teaching strategies that enhance learner engagement in grammar instruction, offering valuable insights that inform the current research.

A study by Smagorinsky et al (2007) examined how English teacher Laura Wright adapted her grammar teaching methods to enhance student engagement across different contexts By analyzing data from her university coursework, student teaching, and early career experiences through interviews and self-reports, the research revealed her commitment to making grammar instruction engaging, meaningful, enjoyable, and relevant for her students.

The limitation of this study is that it just focused on a single teacher.

Shintani (2015) investigated the incidental grammar acquisition of young beginner L2 learners through two instructional approaches: Focus on Form (FonF) and Focus on Forms (FonFs) The research revealed that FonF, which incorporates grammar into communicative activities, was more effective than FonFs, where grammar is taught in isolation, resulting in greater engagement and better incidental learning of grammatical structures, such as the plural "-s" However, the study also identified limitations in both methods, particularly regarding the acquisition of the copula "be" Overall, the findings highlight the effectiveness of FonF tasks in promoting engagement and incidental grammar learning.

Afzali and Izadpanah (2021) investigated the impact of the Flipped Classroom model on the engagement and motivation of intermediate and upper-intermediate EFL learners in grammar over a six-week period in the summer of 2019 The study involved 360 participants from four institutes and utilized a quasi-experimental design, comparing control and experimental groups Through pre- and post-tests and the use of eight selected grammar videos, along with validated questionnaires, the results indicated that learners in the flipped classroom model demonstrated significantly higher levels of engagement and motivation than those in traditional classrooms Nevertheless, the study acknowledged limitations, including its brief duration and specific educational context.

Ardi and Rianita (2022) explored the effects of the game-based platform Kahoot! on learner engagement in EFL grammar learning, involving a grammar lecturer and 22 English-major students Utilizing observations, reflective journals, and interviews for data collection, the study found that Kahoot! significantly improved learner engagement, encouraged collaboration, and fulfilled students' desires for rewards and competition However, the small sample size presents a limitation that may restrict the generalizability of the findings.

Recent studies have primarily focused on grammar learning for EFL learners other than young learners However, Fatemipour and Hemmati (2015) explored the effects of Grammar Consciousness-Raising (GCR) activities on the grammar performance of EFL young learners Their research highlighted the GCR approach, which encourages learners to engage with grammar rules through interaction with authentic language data while focusing on language form, as noted by Ellis (2002) and Richards and Schmidt (2002) The study involved 60 Iranian pre-intermediate learners aged 11 to 16, who were divided into experimental and control groups, using GCR techniques and traditional grammar instruction, respectively The researchers utilized questionnaires and pre- and post-tests to assess outcomes Results indicated that GCR significantly enhanced grammar performance and was positively received by students, although the study acknowledged limitations due to its narrow context.

Kaminski (2019) investigated the engagement of young EFL learners with multimodal texts, revealing that the integration of diverse modes—movement, sound, image, and speech—significantly improved comprehension, participation, and language retention The study emphasized that repeated exposure to these multimodal resources enabled learners to internalize language chunks for fluent use in various contexts Ultimately, this research underscores the importance of multimodal input in enhancing learner engagement and its valuable application in grammar instruction.

Menni (2020) investigated the Board Race Game as an effective strategy to enhance engagement among EFL learners, particularly addressing the challenges first-year students at Mohamed Kheider University in Biskra face with grammar due to low motivation in traditional classes Utilizing a mixed methods approach, the study found that the boat racing game significantly increased student engagement and improved grammar proficiency Nonetheless, the research was limited to a single game and a specific cohort of first-year students.

Trung and Quyen (2023) explored the effectiveness of the Socratic Questioning Technique (SQT) in boosting engagement among young EFL learners aged 7 to 12 during grammar lessons The structured debate involved three steps: hypothesis generalization, cross-examination, and knowledge formation, utilizing Socratic questions to foster critical thinking and active participation The study highlighted SQT's potential to enhance enthusiasm for learning English grammar, with results indicating significant improvements in learner engagement and participation through a qualitative approach However, the research faced limitations, including a short duration and context-specific findings that may not be applicable in all settings.

Recent studies emphasize various instructional strategies to boost learner engagement in grammar learning, including FonF tasks, GCR activities, multimodal texts, flipped classrooms, gamification, and Socratic questioning While these methods have demonstrated potential in enhancing engagement, further investigation is needed into the extent of EFL young learners' engagement with grammar through FonF tasks and how specific features of these tasks influence that engagement This study seeks to address these critical questions.

1 What is the level of EFL young learner engagement in grammar learning through focus- on- form tasks?

2 What features of focus-on-form tasks impact learner engagement in grammar learning?

This chapter outlines the methodology for investigating the engagement of EFL young learners in grammar learning via focus-on-form tasks It includes an overview of the research design and participant selection, details the materials and instruments utilized—such as questionnaires, observations, and interviews—and describes the data collection procedures and analysis methods The chapter concludes by providing a comprehensive framework that elucidates the research process.

This study utilizes a case study research method to explore the engagement of young EFL learners in grammar learning through Focus-on-Form tasks By focusing on a detailed investigation of specific instances within their real-life context, this approach allows for a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon, preserving the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events, as noted by Yin.

(2009) explains, case studies are particularly useful for understanding the complexities of a specific phenomenon, offering detailed insights that may not be captured by broader quantitative studies.

The case study method was utilized in this research due to its ability to explore complex phenomena in their natural settings, providing a deeper understanding that other methods may miss Yin (2009) emphasizes its flexibility in studying real-life contexts, particularly when the boundaries between the phenomenon and context are ambiguous Additionally, this method offers a comprehensive view of the unique factors and dynamics of the case, with Stake (1995) highlighting that multiple sources of evidence enhance data richness and validity through triangulation Ultimately, case studies facilitate in-depth analyses and interpretations of phenomena, as noted by Soy (1997), making them invaluable for understanding intricate issues and building upon existing research.

The primary objective of this research is to assess the level of learner engagement in grammar learning through focus-on-form tasks This will be achieved by conducting

This comprehensive case study of young EFL learners explores the impact of focus-on-form tasks on learner engagement By examining specific features of these tasks, the study offers valuable insights into their effectiveness as instructional methods, highlighting their role in enhancing language learning experiences.

The study was conducted at a foreign language center in Can Tho city, involving thirteen young learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL), all assessed to be at the same proficiency level through an initial language proficiency test The participants, aged between 6 and 12 years, were carefully selected to ensure uniformity in language skills.

4 learners aged 9, 2 learners aged 11, and 7 learners aged 8 These learners were following the Kid’s Box 1 textbook (Nixon & Tomlinson, 2014).

Instruments

Questionnaire

Observation Interview grammar learning through focus-on-form tasks.

To gather direct, real-time data on learner engagement during focus-on-form tasks through systematic observation of classroom interactions and behaviors.

To gain in-depth qualitative insights into participants' perspectives,experiences, and beliefs regarding the features of focus-on-form tasks and their impact on learner engagement in grammar learning.

A questionnaire is an effective research tool that consists of a series of questions aimed at collecting information from respondents Its popularity in educational research stems from its efficiency in gathering data from large populations, its capacity to explore various aspects of a research topic, and its standardized format, which facilitates straightforward comparison and analysis (Creswell, 2012).

Questionnaires are essential research tools that yield quantifiable data, enabling statistical analysis to reveal clear trends and patterns Their versatility allows for adaptation to diverse research purposes and contexts, making them highly effective for gathering insights.

This study utilizes a questionnaire as a key data collection tool to assess the engagement levels of young EFL learners in grammar learning through focus-on-form tasks This approach facilitates the systematic gathering of data on various dimensions of learner engagement, offering valuable insights into the impact of these tasks on student involvement and participation.

The questionnaire is designed to assess student engagement across five key dimensions: behavioral, emotional, cognitive, agentic, and social engagement, as identified by Fredricks, Filsecker, and Lawson (2016) This comprehensive approach captures students' actions, feelings, thoughts, autonomy, and interactions throughout the learning process Comprising 22 questions, the instrument is organized into clusters; the first five items focus on behavioral engagement (adapted from Skinner, Kindermann, and Furrer, 2009), the next five address emotional engagement (based on Sang and Hiver, 2021), and items 11-14 are centered on cognitive engagement (adapted from Mitchell & Carbone).

2011), the fourth cluster (items 15-18) is based on agentic engagement (Reeve, 2012), and the fifth cluster (items 19-22) on social engagement is adapted from Svalberg (2009).

Table 3.2 Summary of questionnaire items

Behavioral engagement Skinner, Kindermann, and Furrer ( 2009)Q1,Q2,Q3,Q4,Q5 Emotional engagement Sang and Hiver (2021) Q6,Q7,Q8,Q9,Q10 Cognitive engagement Mitchell and

Carbone (2011)Q11,Q12,Q13,Q14 Agentic engagement Reeve (2012) Q15,Q16,Q17,Q18 Social engagement

The questionnaires aim to evaluate learner engagement in grammar learning through focus-on-form tasks, utilizing a 5-point Likert scale from "never" to "always" for detailed analysis of engagement behaviors and attitudes The collected data will be analyzed with SPSS 20.0 software to ensure reliability This approach will yield important insights into the influence of various focus-on-form task features on learner engagement, ultimately enhancing the understanding of effective grammar instruction for young EFL learners.

Observation checklist

Observation serves as an essential research method in education, offering real-time insights into participants' behaviors and interactions in their natural settings As noted by Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2011), this approach enables researchers to grasp the evolving dynamics of the classroom, providing a deep contextual understanding of the learning process It is especially adept at uncovering non-verbal cues, spontaneous interactions, and the overall classroom environment, aspects that traditional data collection methods like questionnaires or interviews may overlook.

This study employed a 17-item observation checklist, adapted from Dao et al (2017), to systematically assess learner engagement during grammar lessons The checklist encompasses various engagement aspects, facilitating a thorough analysis of participant interactions and behaviors Observations were conducted across three grammar sessions featuring focus-on-form tasks, with the researcher recording each lesson to capture all classroom activities To enhance accuracy and reduce observer bias, a colleague in the same field reviewed the recordings and assisted in completing the checklist Additionally, to prevent any influence on learner behavior, the recording device was discreetly positioned, ensuring a natural and comfortable classroom environment.

This study seeks to explore participants' perspectives, experiences, and beliefs about focus-on-form tasks and their effects on learner engagement in grammar learning By documenting classroom dynamics and learner interactions, it aims to deliver a comprehensive understanding of how these tasks enhance engagement in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) grammar education.

Interviews 22 3.5

Interviews serve as a valuable qualitative research method in educational studies, offering profound insights into participants' experiences, thoughts, and emotions (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009) This technique enables researchers to delve into complex phenomena, capturing the richness and depth of individual perspectives, which ultimately enhances the overall understanding of the research topic (Creswell, 2012).

22 the clarification of responses and the opportunity to probe deeper into specific areas of interest, enhancing the quality and accuracy of the data collected (Merriam, 2009).

This study utilized five semi-structured interview questions based on the engagement dimensions identified by Egbert et al (2021) to explore learners' experiences with grammar tasks The questions addressed emotional engagement by asking about feelings towards the tasks, behavioral engagement by inquiring about motivations for participation, and cognitive engagement by identifying beneficial aspects of the tasks Additionally, the study captured agentic engagement by asking participants to recall moments of focused involvement and aimed to understand factors influencing overall engagement, interest, and enjoyment.

Following the completion of three focus on-form tasks, semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants to explore their experiences and perceptions related to factors influencing their engagement in grammar learning This timing enabled participants to thoroughly reflect on their recent task experiences Each interview was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, ensuring an accurate representation of their responses for further analysis This methodological approach guarantees that the collected data is rich, detailed, and truly reflective of the learners' genuine insights.

3.5 Piloting the Questionnaire and Interview Questions

To effectively gather data from EFL young learners aged 6 to 12, the questionnaire and interview questions were crafted for clarity and understanding The aim was to ensure that the questions were suitable and comprehensible for this age group A pilot study involving four EFL learners, who shared similar demographics but were not part of the main study, was conducted to refine the questions These pilot interviews were conducted in Vietnamese to minimize linguistic barriers and enhance the authenticity of the responses.

The piloting phase provided valuable insights that were crucial for refining the research instruments The questionnaire and interview questions underwent careful revisions to improve clarity and effectiveness, ensuring they were optimized for capturing meaningful data from participants By integrating feedback from the pilot study, the research tools were enhanced, significantly boosting the potential for obtaining rich and reliable data in the main study.

Data Collection Procedures

The data collection process was carefully crafted to meet the study's goals of exploring EFL young learners' engagement in grammar learning through Focus-on-Form tasks Conducted over four weeks, the study involved weekly 30-minute classes that incorporated tasks aligned with the grammar textbook units, covering themes like “I’ve got …,” “like/don’t like,” and “What is she/he doing?” Each lesson presented language structures implicitly through these tasks The primary focus was to assess student engagement with the Focus-on-Form tasks at the conclusion of each unit during their grammar learning journey.

During the implementation of each task, observation data were collected to gain real-time insights into student engagement, with lessons being video-recorded to capture student interactions and participation An experienced EFL teacher reviewed the recordings using an observation checklist that included key engagement indicators such as participation, attentiveness, and responsiveness This systematic evaluation allowed for an objective assessment of each student's level of engagement during the tasks.

Following the completion of each task, students completed a tailored questionnaire to evaluate their engagement levels, focusing on interest, enjoyment, and perceived difficulty This process was essential for gathering quantitative data on how various features of the Focus-on-Form tasks impacted learner engagement The questionnaires were conducted in a controlled setting, ensuring that students' responses accurately reflected their genuine experiences during the lessons.

After completing all three tasks, interviews were conducted with five randomly selected students to gain deeper insights into their engagement experiences The

In a distraction-free private room, 24 interviews were conducted to promote open communication, each lasting 8-10 minutes and guided by semi-structured questions The interviews focused on students' perceptions of Focus on-Form tasks, exploring their feelings, challenges, and engaging aspects of the tasks Audio recordings were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis to uncover recurring themes related to learner engagement.

Table 3.3 Summary of data collection procedures

Conduct the Guessing name task

- Implement the task in the classroom - Record the lesson

- Observer reviews the video - Implement the task in the classroom

Observation data and questionnaire data Observation

- Implement the task in the classroom - Record the lesson

- Conduct semi-structured interviews data and questionnaire data Observation data and questionnaire data

4 with five selected students in a private room

Data Analysis

Analysis 1: The level of EFL young learners’ engagement in grammar learning

After each task, three questionnaires were administered to gather quantitative data, which was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Initially, reliability analysis ensured the internal consistency of the questionnaires, followed by descriptive statistics to summarize student engagement levels across the three tasks This analysis offered a quantitative assessment of student engagement, revealing significant trends and patterns in the data.

Quantitative data were collected through classroom observations during the execution of three Focus-on-Form tasks, utilizing a criteria-based approach for analysis This involved recording and assessing specific statements from an observation checklist to identify met and unmet criteria for each task Furthermore, free note-taking was utilized to document students’ behaviors, emotions, and engagement levels, providing a comprehensive understanding of their interactions with the tasks.

Analysis 2: The features of focus-on-form tasks that impact learners’ engagement

Qualitative data were gathered through interviews with five students following the completion of three tasks The recordings of these interviews were transcribed, and thematic analysis was utilized to examine the data This approach focused on identifying, analyzing, and reporting common themes regarding the students' perceptions.

Focus-on-Form tasks significantly enhance learner engagement, as revealed through thematic analysis that highlights the key features influencing this engagement These insights complement the quantitative data gathered from questionnaires and observations, providing a comprehensive understanding of how specific task characteristics can motivate learners.

In conducting this study, the researcher prioritized ethical considerations by obtaining consent from both the parents of the young learners and the management of the language center involved.

We offered detailed insights into the study's goals, methodologies, and potential advantages for both parents and learners, ensuring that all participants willingly consented to their involvement in the case study.

In a study involving 26 learners and their families, it was emphasized that participation would not interfere with the educational process, as focus-on-form tasks in grammar learning would be seamlessly integrated into the course curriculum The research also assured that participants' information would remain confidential, highlighting the importance of ethical considerations in fostering trust among participants and their families Additionally, the study was conducted with a strong commitment to respecting participants' rights and privacy.

This 12-week study systematically collected and analyzed data through well-defined stages to investigate how young EFL learners engage in grammar learning via Focus-on-Form tasks The carefully planned procedures were designed to align with the study's objectives, ensuring a thorough examination of the learners' engagement in grammar acquisition.

In the first two weeks, the focus was on creating essential research instruments for data collection, including three Focus-on-Form tasks aimed at enhancing grammar learning, tailored to the curriculum and learners' proficiency levels Concurrently, three questionnaires were developed to assess various aspects of learner engagement related to each task An observation checklist was also created to systematically document classroom interactions and learner behaviors during the tasks Finally, a set of interview questions was designed to collect qualitative insights into learners' perceptions of the tasks and their overall engagement.

In the following two weeks after developing the instruments, a pilot test was conducted to assess their effectiveness and clarity with a small group of learners not involved in the main study The feedback gathered proved crucial for identifying ambiguities and inconsistencies in the tasks, questionnaires, observation checklists, and interview questions Revisions were made to improve the reliability and validity of the instruments Once finalized, formal permission was obtained from the Center to conduct the study in the classroom, ensuring ethical compliance and administrative approval.

The data collection phase spanned five weeks, during which the Focus-on-Form tasks were implemented in the classroom setting Each task was introduced according

The grammar lessons were delivered according to a pre-determined schedule aligned with the learners' curriculum, and each session was recorded for later analysis Following each lesson, learners completed a questionnaire to provide immediate feedback on their engagement Simultaneously, the classroom teacher reviewed the recordings and filled out an observation checklist for each task, adding another layer of data on learner engagement The phase concluded with interviews conducted with selected learners to collect in-depth qualitative insights into their experiences and perceptions of the grammar tasks.

The final phase of the research focused on analyzing the collected data and compiling the research report Statistical methods were utilized to analyze quantitative data from questionnaires, revealing patterns in learner engagement levels Additionally, observation data were examined against predefined criteria to assess engagement across various tasks Thematic analysis was applied to interpret qualitative data from interviews, providing insights into the factors affecting learner engagement The synthesized findings were then documented in the final report, completed during the last two weeks of this phase.

3-4 Pilot Testing and obtaining permission for classroom data collection 5-8

9-12 Data Analysis and Report Writing

This chapter outlines the participants and materials utilized in the study, detailing the data collection instruments, which include questionnaires, observations, and interviews It describes the procedures for gathering data from participants and concludes with an overview of the data analysis methods and procedural steps taken to conduct the study Overall, this chapter offers a thorough account of the methodological approach employed to address the research questions and fulfill the study's objectives.

To measure EFL young learners' engagement in grammar learning through focus on-form tasks, a 22-item questionnaire was used This questionnaire employed a

This study employed a 5-point Likert scale for responses, ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always) To analyze the questionnaire results, the mean scores were interpreted based on the framework established by Moidunny (2009), as detailed in Table 4.1.

A Descriptive Statistics test was conducted to evaluate the average score of learners' engagement in grammar learning through three specific focus-on-form tasks: guessing names, finding differences, and discussing favorite foods Each task was accompanied by a questionnaire, and the reliability of these questionnaires was validated using Cronbach's alpha coefficients, as detailed in Table 4.2 below.

Questionnaire Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

As presented in table 4.2, the reliability of the questionnaires was confirmed byCronbach's alpha coefficients of 0.80, 0.85, and 0.76, indicating that they were reliable instruments for this study.

Young learners’ engagement in guessing name task

Descriptive statistical analysis results (Table 4.2) showed that student engagement in grammar learning through the "Guessing Name" task was high, with a (M= 3.86,SD

In a recent study on engagement dimensions, emotional engagement emerged as the highest, with a mean score of 4.43 (SD = 0.27), while agentic engagement recorded the lowest mean of 2.77 (SD = 4.30) Overall, behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement levels were reported as high, whereas agentic and social engagement were assessed at moderate levels.

Table 4.3 The mean score of learners’ behavioral engagement in guessing name task

Mean SD Learner engagement in Guessing name task 3.86 19 Behavioral engagement4.28 32

1 I tried to guess my friend's name even when it's hard to guess 4.38 65 2 I put in maximum effort to complete the guessing name task 4.69 63 3 During the guessing name task, I stayed focused 4.08 76 4 I attempted to keep myself engaged to the guessing name task 4.23 83

5 During the guessing name task, I did everything I could to stay focused and not get distracted.4.00 91

Table 4.2 reveals that the average score for behavioral engagement is 4.28, accompanied by a standard deviation of 0.32, signifying a strong level of engagement among students Notably, students expressed a willingness to attempt guessing their friends' names, even when it posed a challenge.

The study revealed that participants demonstrated a strong commitment to the guessing name task, achieving a high mean effort score of 4.69 (SD = 0.63) Their focus during the task was notable, with a mean score of 4.08 (SD = 0.76) Additionally, students actively worked to remain engaged, reflected in a mean score of 4.23 (SD = 0.83), and made significant efforts to avoid distractions, resulting in a mean score of 4.00 (SD = 0.91).

Table 4.4 The mean score of learners’ emotional engagement in guessing name task

The guessing name task elicited a strong emotional engagement, with participants rating their interest at 4.77 and expressing happiness at 4.38 Comfort levels during the activity were high, averaging 4.46, while excitement to guess a friend's name was noted at 4.38 Overall, the task fostered a positive and enjoyable experience.

10 The guessing name task stimulated my curiosity 4.15 80

The study revealed a strong emotional engagement among learners, with an overall mean score of 4.43, indicating that the task was highly enjoyable and interesting Notably, the guessing name task received the highest mean score of 4.77, reflecting its appeal to students Participants expressed happiness during the task, achieving a mean score of 4.38, and felt comfortable engaging with the activity, as evidenced by a mean score of 4.46 Additionally, students were excited to guess their friends' names, scoring 4.38, and the task successfully stimulated their curiosity, with a mean score of 4.15.

Table 4.5 The mean score of learners’ cognitive engagement in guessing name task

Cognitive engagement4.11 51 11 I tried really hard to guess my friend's name 4.38 65

12 During the guessing name task, I tried to connect new grammar knowledge with what I had learned before.4.30 85

13 When I was unable to guess the name immediately, I stayed patient until I figured it out.4.23 83

14 I carefully analyzed the clues to guess my classmate's name 3.54 88

The study revealed a strong level of cognitive engagement among learners, with a mean score of 4.11 (SD= 0.51) indicating significant mental effort in the task Students demonstrated a notable commitment to guessing their classmates' names, achieving a mean score of 4.38 (SD= 0.65) They effectively connected new grammar concepts with prior knowledge, reflected in a mean score of 4.30 (SD= 0.85) Additionally, students exhibited patience when faced with challenges, scoring 4.23 (SD= 0.83), and although they analyzed clues carefully, this aspect received a lower mean score of 3.54 (SD= 0.88).

Table 4.6 The mean score of learners’ agentic engagement in guessing name task

15 I searched for additional materials or exercises to improve my name guessing skills.1.31 63

16 I let the teacher know what I needed and wanted during the guessing name task.2.31 75

17 I actively participated in discussions and shared opinions during the guessing name task.4.23 60

18 I asked the teacher for help during the guessing name task 3.23 1.73

Agentic engagement among learners was notably low, with a mean score of 2.77, indicating a lack of proactivity in seeking resources or expressing needs during tasks Students infrequently searched for additional materials to enhance their name guessing skills, reflected in a mean score of just 1.31 While they communicated their needs to the teacher with a mean score of 2.31, they demonstrated higher levels of participation in discussions, achieving a mean score of 4.23 Additionally, students sought help from the teacher during tasks, resulting in a mean score of 3.23.

32 Table 4.7 The mean score of learners’ social engagement in guessing name taskSocial engagement3.46 63

19 I helped my friends when they faced difficulties in the guessing name task.2.77 1.09

20 I participated in group discussions about the guessing task 4.08 76

21 I requested assistance from the teacher when encountering difficulties in the guessing name task.3.62 87

22 During the guessing name task, I asked my teacher to check my work to make sure it was right.3.38 1.33

The social engagement dimension revealed a moderate level of interaction and collaboration among learners, with a mean score of 3.46 (SD= 0.63) Additionally, students demonstrated support for their peers during challenges, reflected in a mean score of 2.77.

Participants engaged in group discussions about the task, achieving a higher mean score of 4.08 (SD = 0.76) When faced with challenges, they sought assistance from the teacher, reflected in a mean score of 3.62 (SD = 0.87) Additionally, they requested their teacher to review their work for accuracy, resulting in a mean score of 3.38 (SD = 1.33).

The analysis indicates that learners demonstrated significant behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement during the "Guessing Name" task, whereas agentic and social engagement levels were relatively lower These insights highlight the different dimensions of learner engagement in grammar learning through focus-on-form tasks.

Young learners’ engagement in finding differences task

The analysis of learner engagement during the "Finding Differences" task revealed a high overall engagement level, with an average score of 3.69 (SD = 0.40) Notably, behavioral engagement was the highest among the different dimensions, achieving a mean score of 4.09.

SD = 0.47), while social engagement was the lowest (M = 3.11, SD = 0.63) Both behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement levels were reported to be high, whereas agentic and social engagement were at moderate levels.

33 Table 4.8 The mean score of learners’ behavioral engagement in finđing differences task

Mean SD Learner engagement in finding differences task 3.69 40Behavioral engagement4.09 47

1 I tried to find differences between two pictures even when it's hard to guess.4.15 70

2 I put in maximum effort to complete the finding differences task 4.69 63 3 During the finding differences task, I stayed focused 4.69 75 4 I attempted to keep myself engaged in the finding differences task 4.00 91

5 During the finding differences task, I did everything I could to stay focused and not get distracted.2.92 1.19

Students exhibited strong behavioral engagement, achieving a mean score of 4.09 (SD = 0.47) They demonstrated significant effort in identifying differences between pictures, reflected by a mean score of 4.15 (SD = 0.70) The highest level of effort was observed in task completion, with a mean score of 4.69 (SD = 0.63) Additionally, students effectively maintained focus during the task, also scoring a mean of 4.69 (SD = 0.75), and consistently aimed to stay engaged, with a mean score of 4.00.

SD = 0.91) However, they struggled more with staying focused and avoiding distractions, which had the lowest mean score in this category (M= 2.92,SD= 1.19).

Table 4.9 The mean score of learners’ emotional engagement in finding differences task

Emotional engagement 4.06 63 6 The finding differences task was interesting to me.

I experienced a high level of happiness and comfort while participating in the finding differences task, with an excitement that fueled my curiosity This engaging activity allowed me to enjoy the challenge of identifying differences between two pictures, enhancing my overall experience.

The study revealed high emotional engagement among students, with an average score of 4.06 (SD = 0.63) Most participants found the task interesting, reflected in a mean score of 4.46 (SD = 0.78) Additionally, happiness during the task was notably high, achieving a mean score of 4.69 (SD = 0.63) Comfort in participating also scored well, with a mean of 4.31 (SD = 1.03) However, levels of excitement and curiosity stimulation were comparatively lower, with a mean score of 3.69.

Table 4.10 The mean score of learners’cognitive engagement in finding differences task

Cognitive engagement3.92 69 11 I tried really hard to find differences between two pictures 4.08 1.26

12 During the finding differences task, I tried to connect new grammar knowledge with what I had learned before.4.31 95

13 When I couldn't find the differences between the two pictures right away, I stayed patient until I figured it out.3.46 1.33

14 I carefully analyzed the clues to find differences between two pictures.3.85 1.07

The study revealed a strong level of cognitive engagement among students, with a mean score of 3.92, indicating significant mental effort Students demonstrated notable diligence in identifying differences between images, scoring an average of 4.08, and effectively linked new grammar concepts to their existing knowledge with a mean score of 4.31 While their patience in dealing with challenges was moderate, averaging 3.46, their analysis of clues was thorough, reflected in a mean score of 3.85.

Table 4.21 The mean score of learners’ agentic engagement in finding differences task

15 I searched for additional materials or exercises to improve my searching skills.1.92 1.50

16 I let the teacher know what I needed and wanted during the finding differences task.3.23 1.54

17 I actively participated in discussions and shared opinions during the finding differences task.3.85 1.07

18 I asked the teacher for help during the finding differences task 3.31 85

Agentic engagement scored moderately at (M = 3.08,SD= 0.77) Students seldom sought additional materials to enhance their skills (M= 1.92, SD = 1.50). Communicating needs to the teacher during the task scored moderately (M= 3.23,SD

= 1.54), while active participation in discussions and sharing opinions was higher (M 3.85, SD = 1.07) Seeking help from the teacher had a mean score (M= 3.31, SD 0.85).

Table 4.12 The mean score of learners’ social engagement in finding differences task

19 I helped my friends when they faced difficulties in finding differences.2.31 1.49

20 I participated in group discussions about the finding differences task 4.08 1.04

21 I requested assistance from the teacher when encountering difficulties in the finding differences task.2.77 73

22 During the finding differences task, I asked my teacher to check my work to make sure it was right.3.31 95

The study revealed that social engagement had the lowest average score (M = 3.11, SD = 0.63), with helping friends during difficult times scoring particularly low (M = 2.31, SD = 1.49) In contrast, participation in group discussions was notably higher (M = 4.08, SD = 1.03) Additionally, seeking assistance from teachers when encountering challenges also received a lower score (M = 2.77, SD = 1.49).

= 0.73), and asking the teacher to check their work to ensure accuracy scored a mean

In summary, the findings reveal that students exhibited strong behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement during the "Finding Differences" task, while their agentic and social engagement levels were moderate This highlights the varying dimensions of learner engagement in grammar acquisition through focus-on-form activities.

Young learners’ engagement in favorite foods task

The analysis of learner engagement in the "Favorite Foods" task revealed a high overall engagement level, with a mean score of 3.80 (SD = 0.36) Cognitive engagement stood out as the highest dimension, achieving a mean score of 4.52 (SD = 0.30), while social engagement recorded the lowest score at 3.12.

The study revealed a high level of behavioral and emotional engagement among learners, with agentic and social engagement rated as moderate Table 4.12 below displays the mean score for learners' behavioral engagement in the favorite foods task, indicating a significant level of participation.

Table 4.33 The mean score of learners’ behavioral engagement in favorite foods task

The analysis of learner engagement in the Favorite Foods task reveals a mean score of 3.80 with a standard deviation of 0.36 Behavioral engagement was notably higher, with a mean of 4.28 and a standard deviation of 0.30 Participants reported strong commitment, with an average score of 4.62 (SD = 0.51) for their perseverance in completing the task despite difficulties Maximum effort was also emphasized, reflected in an average score of 4.54 (SD = 0.52) Additionally, focus during the task was rated at 3.85 (SD = 0.80), while participants expressed a commitment to maintaining engagement, scoring an average of 4.62 (SD = 0.51).

5 During the favorite foods task, I did everything I could to stay focused and not get distracted.3.77 93

In the field of behavioral engagement, students demonstrated a notable level of commitment, achieving an average score of 4.28 (SD = 0.30) Key indicators of this engagement included persistence in task completion despite challenges, which received an impressive score of 4.62 (SD = 0.51), and a strong emphasis on exerting maximum effort to accomplish tasks, rated at 4.54 (SD = 0.30).

The study revealed a reasonable level of focus during the task, with a mean score of 3.85 and a standard deviation of 0.80 Participants demonstrated a strong commitment to engagement, reflected in a mean score of 4.62 and a standard deviation of 0.51 Nevertheless, the lowest score in this dimension pertained to the ability to maintain focus without distractions, which had a mean score of 3.77 and a standard deviation of 0.93.

Table 4.44 The mean score of learners’ emotional engagement in favorite foods task

Emotional engagement4.37 39 6 The favorite foods task was interesting to me. 4.54 66

7 During the favorite foods task, I was very happy 4.54 52 8 I felt comfortable participating in the favorite foods task 4.46 52 9 I was excited to do the favorite foods task.4.62 65 10 The favorite foods task stimulated my curiosity 3.69 1.18

Students demonstrated significant emotional engagement with the task, reporting a high level of interest and positive feelings, with an overall mean score of 4.37 (SD = 0.39) The task was viewed as particularly interesting (M = 4.54, SD = 0.66) and enjoyable, as indicated by their happiness scores, also averaging 4.54 (SD = 0.52) Additionally, participants expressed a strong sense of comfort during the activity.

= 4.46, SD = 0.52), along with excitement (M = 4.62,SD = 0.65) However, the task's ability to stimulate curiosity was slightly lower, with a mean of 3.69 (SD= 1.18).

Table 4.55 The mean score of learners’ cognitive engagement in favorite foods task

Cognitive engagement4.52 30 11 I tried really hard to do the favorite foods task.

12 During the favorite foods task, I tried to connect new grammar knowledge with what I had learned before.4.92 28

13 When I had trouble with the favorite foods task, I stayed patient until I finished it.4.62 51

14 I carefully analyzed the clues to do the favorite foods task 3.85 69

Cognitive engagement was identified as the most prominent dimension, achieving a mean score of 4.52 (SD = 0.30), indicating substantial mental effort from students They showed a strong commitment to task completion (M = 4.69, SD = 0.48) and made significant efforts to connect new grammar knowledge with their previous learning experiences (M = 4.92, SD = 0.28) Additionally, students exhibited high levels of patience and persistence when encountering challenges (M = 4.62, SD = 0.51) In contrast, the analysis of clues within the task received a comparatively lower score (M = 3.85, SD = 0.69).

Table 4.66 The mean score of learners’ agentic engagement in favorite task Mean SD

15 I searched for additional materials or exercises to do the favorite foods task better.3.92 1.19

16 I let the teacher know what I needed and wanted during the favorite foods task.2.69 1.18

17 I actively participated in discussions and shared opinions during the favourite foods task.4.46 1.20

18 I asked the teacher for help during the favorite foods task 3.00 1.35

The study revealed a moderate level of agentic engagement among students, with a mean score of 3.52 (SD = 0.77) Students demonstrated a strong willingness to seek additional materials for performance improvement, scoring 3.92 (SD = 1.19) However, their communication of needs to teachers was notably lower, with a mean score of 2.69 (SD = 1.18) Active participation in discussions was high, reflected in a mean score of 4.46 (SD = 1.20), while the willingness to ask for help from teachers was moderate, scoring 3.00 (SD = 1.35).

Table 4.77 The mean score of learners’ s social engagement in favorite foods task

19 I helped my friends when they faced difficulties in the favorite foods task.3.31 1.80

20 I participated in group discussions about the favorite foods task.4.15 69

21 I requested assistance from the teacher when encountering difficulties in the favorite foods task.3.00 1.29

22 During the favorite foods task, I asked my teacher to check my work to make sure it was right.2.00 1.15

The study revealed that social engagement among students had a low overall mean score of 3.12, indicating limited interaction While students showed a moderate level of engagement in peer assistance (mean score of 3.31) and actively participated in group discussions (mean score of 4.15), they were less inclined to seek help from their teacher, with a mean score of 3.00, and even less likely to request feedback on their work, which scored only 2.00.

The findings indicate that cognitive, behavioral, and emotional engagements in grammar learning are strong; however, there is potential for improvement in agentic and social engagements By enhancing these aspects, a more balanced and holistic approach to grammar learning through focus-on-form tasks can be achieved.

Table 4.18 The level of EFL young learners’ engagement

Mean SD Guessing name task 3.86 19 Finding differences task 3.69 40 Favorite foods task 3.80 36

The Guessing Name Task recorded the highest mean engagement score of 3.86, with a low standard deviation of 0.19, indicating a consistent and high level of engagement among participants This suggests that learners found the task particularly engaging, likely due to its interactive and personal nature, as it involved guessing their classmates' names, which enhanced their interest and motivation.

The Favorite Foods Task achieved a mean engagement score of 3.80 with a standard deviation of 0.36, indicating a high level of engagement despite being slightly lower than the Guessing Name Task The moderate standard deviation reflects some variation in learner responses, suggesting that while the task resonated with many, engagement levels differed among individuals This task, which involved identifying and discussing favorite foods, connected with learners' personal interests, contributing to its overall high engagement However, its structure may have been less engaging than that of the Guessing Name Task, resulting in less consistency in engagement levels.

The Finding Differences Task recorded the lowest mean engagement score (M 3.69, SD = 0.40), indicating it was less effective in maintaining learner engagement compared to other tasks The higher standard deviation reflects greater variability in engagement levels among participants, suggesting that while some learners found the task engaging, others did not The task's focus on identifying differences between images may have contributed to its lower average engagement score due to its less interactive and stimulating nature.

40 more passive approach could explain why it was less effective in capturing and sustaining learner interest.

The comparison of engagement levels among three tasks reveals that the Guessing Name Task was the most effective in capturing learners' attention, while the Favorite Foods Task, though engaging, was slightly less impactful In contrast, the Finding Differences Task demonstrated the lowest level of engagement These findings highlight the significance of thoughtful task design in enhancing learner engagement, indicating that interactive and personally relevant activities are more likely to sustain interest.

Results from the Observation 41 4.3 Results from the

In this study, the researcher conducted three grammar lessons focused on Focus-on-Form tasks, recording each session while collaborating with a fellow teacher for review and scoring To maintain data accuracy and minimize any psychological impact on the learners, the researcher discreetly concealed the camera, fostering a natural classroom environment.

The findings from three observation sessions indicated that young EFL learners engaged actively in grammar lessons by participating in diverse Focus-on-Form tasks, including the guessing name task, finding differences, and discussing favorite foods The analysis utilized four clusters outlined in the observation checklist.

The observation revealed that students were actively engaged in all three tasks, evident through behaviors such as raising their hands to share answers, maintaining focus during lessons, and listening attentively to both the teacher and their peers Notably, during the guessing name task, learners exhibited an even greater eagerness to participate, highlighting their enthusiasm for the activity.

"Students raise their hands to ask questions," "Students keep trying and don’t give up easily," and "Students stay engaged and actively participate in the task."

41 Table 4.198 The results of behavioral engagement observation

1 Students raise their hands to share

Findings differences Favorite foods answers or ideas.✔ ✔ ✔ 2 Students pay attention and stay focused on the lesson.✔ ✔ ✔

3 Students stay engaged and actively participate in the task✔ ✔ ✔

4 Students listen carefully to the teacher and classmates.✔ ✔ ✔

5 Students raise their hands to ask questions.✔

6 Students keep trying and don’t give up easily.✔

7 Students answer questions with excitement.✔ ✔ ✔

Learner engagement is evident through their emotions and attitudes during tasks, as students demonstrate interest in the material, participate with positivity, and express happiness when praised Notably, the guessing name task garnered the highest levels of enthusiasm and active participation among the 13 observed learners.

Table 4.20 The results of emotional engagement observation

Findings differences Favorite foods enjoyment in the task.✔ ✔ ✔9.Students are interested in what is being taught.✔ ✔ ✔

10 Students take part in activities with a happy and positive attitude✔ ✔ ✔

11 Students are happy and satisfied when they receive praise.✔ ✔ ✔

12 Students show interest and enthusiasm in the task.✔ ✔ ✔

In terms of cognitive engagement, across all tasks, students demonstrated that

Students demonstrate active engagement by applying their knowledge to tasks and managing themselves to complete assignments independently This reflects their behavioral, emotional, and intellectual investment in the learning process.

Table 4.21 The results of cognitive engagement observation

13.Students can manage themselves to

In comparing the three tasks, observations revealed that during the finding differences and guessing name tasks, students demonstrated a higher frequency of collaboration and social interaction They actively worked together and engaged in discussions, exchanging ideas with their peers This indicates that these specific tasks effectively promote collaborative learning and enhance social engagement among students.

Table 4.92 The results of social engagement observation

Social engagementGuessing name 15.Students actively collaborate with

Findings differences Favorite foods their peers, working together on the task.

16.Students engage in discussions with

Students actively share their own ideas and listen to others' ideas during the task.

The qualitative analysis indicates that EFL young learners demonstrated significant engagement in all Focus-on-Form tasks, with the guessing name task notably enhancing both behavioral and emotional involvement The learners' active participation, enthusiasm, and collaborative skills emphasize the effectiveness of these tasks in improving grammar learning These results underscore the necessity of integrating diverse and interactive activities in EFL classrooms to elevate learner engagement across various dimensions.

Semi-structured interviews with five learners were conducted to investigate their experiences and perceptions of features influencing their engagement in grammar learning Each interview was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim for accuracy Thematic analysis was utilized to identify and analyze recurring themes and patterns related to the elements of grammar tasks that impact learner engagement.

Theme 1: Curiosity and Interest in Grammar Tasks

Curiosity and interest play a crucial role in boosting learner engagement with grammar tasks Many participants noted that tasks designed to ignite their curiosity were especially captivating, highlighting the importance of stimulating interest in educational activities.

Interviewee 1 expressed enthusiasm for the "guessing names" activity, highlighting their curiosity about the identity of the person on the paper, which enhanced both the enjoyment and comprehension of the exercise.

I find the exercises you give me intriguing and enjoyable, especially when it involves guessing names My curiosity is piqued as I wonder about the identities of the individuals represented on the paper in my class Overall, I appreciate how interesting and easy to grasp these activities are.

Similarly, Interviewee 3 emphasized the importance of curiosity in the "guessing names" task, noting that it kept them focused and motivated to participate.

“I liked trying to figure out who the person was based on the clues It made me curious and excited to participate.”

Theme 2: Social Interaction and Collaborative Learning

Social interaction and collaborative learning emerged as crucial elements in enhancing the educational experience Participants emphasized that engaging with peers during grammar tasks not only made the activities more enjoyable but also significantly improved their learning outcomes.

Interviewee 1 found the tasks that involved interaction with friends particularly motivating, stating,

“I want to interact with friends to solve the search problems together I like the task of interacting with friends who listen and expect my name.”

This sentiment was echoed by Interviewee 5, who found the collaborative aspect of the "Finding Differences" task particularly helpful, as it allowed them to practice speaking and listening in English.

Collaborating with my classmates to identify differences was an exciting experience We engaged in friendly competition to see who could spot the most discrepancies while applying the grammar skills we had learned in class.

Theme 3: Engagement Through Task Variety and Challenge

The influence of task variety and challenge on learner engagement is significant, as students found that engaging tasks, particularly those demanding careful observation and attention, enhanced their interest and involvement in the learning process.

Interviewee 4 mentioned the "Finding Differences" task as an example of a challenging yet engaging activity, stating,

Engaging in the task was both enjoyable and challenging, which heightened my focus and involvement My determination to identify all the differences and accurately explain them using proper grammar kept me fully concentrated on the activity.

On the other hand, Interviewee 2 discussed how tasks that were too repetitive or lacked variety were less enjoyable.

Conclusion

This study highlights the significant impact of Focus-on-Form (FonF) tasks on the engagement of young EFL learners in grammar learning Tasks that spark curiosity, promote social interaction, and present cognitive challenges are particularly effective in enhancing learner engagement Successful FonF tasks incorporate emotional, behavioral, and cognitive aspects, resulting in more dynamic and motivating educational experiences Educators are encouraged to create engaging activities, such as the guessing name task, to foster emotional involvement, while collaborative tasks can enhance social and behavioral engagement It's essential to balance task difficulty to maintain cognitive engagement without causing frustration, and to tailor tasks to meet diverse learner preferences for improved motivation However, the study's limited sample size and specific context restrict the generalizability of the findings, suggesting that future research should involve larger, more diverse samples and investigate the long-term effects of FonF tasks on engagement and grammar acquisition.

Afzali, Z., & Izadpanah, S (2021) The effect of the flipped classroom model on Iranian English foreign language learners: Engagement and motivation in English language grammar.Cogent Education,8(1), 1870801.

Ardi, P., & Rianita, E (2022) Leveraging gamification into EFL grammar class to boost student engagement.Teaching English with Technology,22(2), 90-114.

Cambridge Assessment English (2019).TKT: Young learners handbook for teachers.

Cameron, L (2005).Teaching Languages to Young Learners Cambridge University Press.

Chang, S.-C (2011) A Contrastive Study of Grammar Translation Method and

Communicative Approach in Teaching English Grammar.English Language Teaching, 4(2),

Coates, H (2007) A model of online and general campus‐based student engagement.

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 121-141.

Creswell, J W (2012).Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating

Quantitative and Qualitative Research.Pearson Education.

Dao, L (2021) Cognitive engagement in language learning: Strategies and applications.

Journal of Language and Education, 15(3), 45-60.

Dao, P., Le Diem Bui, T., & Nguyen, M X N C (2017) Public primary school teachers’ perceptions and assessment of young learners’ engagement Language Teaching

Dửrnyei, Z (2003).Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction,

Administration, and Processing.Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dürnyei and Kormos (2000) explore the significant impact of both individual and social factors on foreign language learning Their research, featured in a compilation edited by G R Tucker, emphasizes how personal attributes and social interactions contribute to the process of second language acquisition The findings underscore the importance of understanding these factors to enhance language learning experiences.

Doughty, C J., & Williams, J (1998).Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge University Press.

Eccles, J (2016).Engagement: Where to next?Learning and Instruction, 43, 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.003.

Eccles, J S (2016) The development of achievement motivation In W Damon & R M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (pp 82-120). John Wiley & Sons.

Egbert, J., Bakar, N A., & Smith, H (2021) The effects of task engagement on second language learning outcomes.Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 12(3), 451-

Ellis, N C (2006) Language acquisition as rational contingency learning.Applied linguistics, 27(1), 1-24.

Ellis, R (2003).Task-based language learning and teaching Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R (2003b).Second language acquisition Oxford University Press Ellis, R.

(2006).The study of second language acquisition Oxford University Press.

53 Fatemipour, H., & Hemmati, S (2015) Impact of Consciousness-Raising Activities on Young English Language Learners' Grammar Performance English Language Teaching,8(9),

Fredricks, J A., Blumenfeld, P C., & Paris, A H (2004) School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence.Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.

Fredricks, J A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M A (2016) Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues.Learning and Instruction, 43, 1–4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.002.

Fredricks, J A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M A (2016) Student engagement and its relationship to other variables In H T Chen & W K Huang (Eds.), Theoretical perspectives on student engagement(pp 32-55) Routledge.

Helme, S., & Clarke, D (2001) Cognitive engagement: A theoretical framework In T E. Smith (Ed.),Perspectives on cognitive engagement(pp 103-123) Routledge.

Henry, J., & Thorsen, C (2020) Agentic engagement in language learning: A new perspective Language Learning Journal, 47(2), 220-235.

Hu, S., & Kuh, G D (2001) Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics Research in Higher Education, 43(5), 555-575.

Kaminski, A (2019) Young learners’ engagement with multimodal texts.ELT Journal,73(2),

Krause, K L., & Coates, H (2008) Students’ engagement in first‐year university.Assessment

Kuh, G D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J A., Bridges, B K., & Hayek, J C (2007) Piecing together the student success puzzle: Research, propositions, and recommendations(ASHE Higher Education Report, Volume 32, Number 5) John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kvale, S (2009).InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing Sage.

Long, M H (1991) Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology In K. de Bot, R Ginsberg, & C Kramsch (Eds.),Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective(pp 39-52) John Benjamins.

Long, M H (1991) Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognitive approaches to second language acquisition (pp 39–52). Cambridge University Press.

Marcucci, D (2011) Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion, & Keith Morrison (2011) Research methods in education New York: Routledge Journal of Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS Journal),2(4), 201-206.

Menni, S (2020) Board Race Game as a Strategy to Boost EFL Learners’ Engagement to Learn Grammar The case of first year EFL LMD Students at Mohamed Kheider University of Biskra.

Merriam, S B., & Tisdell, E J (2009) Dealing with validity, reliability, and ethics.

Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation, 209-235.

Mitchell, D J., & Carbone, E (2011) The role of cognitive engagement in academic achievement.Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 259-278.

54 Moidunny, K (2009) Mean score interpretation.The Effectiveness of the National

Professional Qualification for Educational Leaders(NPQEL).

Moranski, D J., & Toth, M (2016) Social engagement in classroom settings.Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(1), 50-62.

Nixon, C., & Tomlinson, M (2014).Kid's Box Level 1 Pupil's Book(Vol 1) Cambridge University Press.

Oga-Baldwin, W (2019) Agentic engagement and learner autonomy: An empirical study.

Oxford University Press (2010).The Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary(8th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Pearson Education (2009).Longman dictionary of contemporary English(1st ed.) Pearson Education.

Philp, J., & Duchesne, S (2016) Behavioral engagement in language learning: Measurement and analysis.Applied Linguistics Review, 7(2), 100-121.

Piaget, J (1972).The psychology of the child Basic Books.

Reeve, J (2012) A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement In S L. Christenson, A L Reschly, & C Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement, (pp 149–172) Boston: Springer US Retrieved from http://link. springer.com/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_7.

In the context of student engagement, Reeve (2012) explores the significance of self-determination theory, emphasizing its role in fostering student motivation and active participation in learning Additionally, Reeve and Tseng (2011) discuss the concepts of agency and engagement, providing theoretical insights and practical implications that highlight the importance of empowering students to take control of their educational experiences Together, these works underscore the critical relationship between student autonomy, motivation, and engagement in the learning process.

Reeve, J., & Tseng, C.-M (2011) Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002.

Robinson, P (2001) Task complexity, the cognition hypothesis, and second language task performance In P Robinson (Ed.),Task complexity and second language development

Ryan, R M., & Deci, E L (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

Sang, G., & Hiver, P (2021) Emotional engagement in educational contexts.Educational Psychology, 41(6), 720-738.

Skinner, E A., Kindermann, T A., & Furrer, C J (2009) A motivational perspective on student engagement and achievement In S J Hargreaves & R R Shute (Eds.),

Motivational theories in education(pp 120-150) Routledge.

Smagorinsky, P., Wright, L., Augustine, S M., O’Donnell-Allen, C., & Konopak, B (2007). Student engagement in the teaching and learning of grammar: A case study of an early career secondary school English teacher.Journal of Teacher Education,58(1), 76-90.

55 Soy, S K (1997).The case study as a research method.University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved from https://www.utexas.edu

Spada, N (2011) Focus on form: Research, theory, and practice In B VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 113–138) Routledge.

Stake, R E (1995).The Art of Case Study Research Sage Publications Svalberg, A M L.

(2009) Social engagement in the language classroom.Language Teaching Research, 13(3),

Swain, M (1995) Three functions of output in second language learning In G Cook & B. Seidhofer (Eds.),Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H G.

Widdowson (pp 125-144) Oxford University Press.

Thornbury, S (2001).Uncovering grammar.Macmillan Education.

Trung, N N., & Quyen, B T T (2024).The use of Socratic questioning technique to enhance young EFL students’ engagement in learning grammar Nurturing Open Minds, Shaping

Inclusive Futures in Language Education, 271.

Wajnryb, R (1990).Grammar dictation Oxford University Press.

Yin, R K (2009).Case Study Research: Design and Methods 4th ed.Sage Publications.

APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 Task 1:Guessing name

Prepare some pieces of paper.

Step 1:Ask students to predict who it is with the description " I've got long brown hair I've got blue dress and black shoes." The correc answer is Ms Hannah

In Step 2, students are instructed to write two sentences describing themselves on paper within a three-minute timeframe The teacher actively monitors the class, offering corrective feedback to address any mistakes Once completed, the teacher collects the papers and places them in a box for further activities.

Step 3:Students take turns picking a piece of paper at random, reading it out loud, and guessing which friend the two sentences are about.

Target structure:What is she/he doing?

Prepare two slightly different pictures Both pictures have 10 people who are doing something.

In two images, ten individuals are engaged in similar activities, yet five of them are participating in distinct tasks For instance, in Student A's picture, Lisa is piloting a plane, while in Student B's image, she is operating a helicopter.

Model how to do the task by asking one student “What is Ken doing in your picture?”

Divide the students into pairs and have them find 5 people who are doing different things Ask them to speak English.

Target structure:Like/don’t like + N

- Prepare seven flashcards about food (apple, banana, burger, cake, chocolate, ice cream, kiwi)

- Design a handout about foods, requiring students to put a tick or cross in the box.

Step 1: Show a picture of apples and say, "I like apples," then put a tick next to the picture.

Step 2:Show a picture of bananas and say, "I don’t like bananas," then put a cross next to the picture.

In Step 3, provide each student with a handout featuring images of various foods, instructing them to mark their preferences by checking for items they like and crossing out those they dislike Step 4 involves asking a student about their food preferences by posing the questions, "What do you like? What don’t you like?" The student will then refer to their handout to provide their answers.

Step 5:Put students into pairs and askthem to ask and answer what they like and what don't they like.

Put a tick () or a cross () in the box:

BẢNG CÂU HỎI KHẢO SÁT DÀNH CHO HỌC SINH

Về bài tập đoán tên

Nguyễn Thị Mỹ Huệ, học viên cao học ngành Lý luận và Phương pháp dạy học Bộ môn Tiếng Anh tại Đại học Cần Thơ, đang tiến hành nghiên cứu về sự tham gia của học viên trong việc học ngữ pháp qua các bài tập hình thức Mục đích của bảng câu hỏi là khảo sát mức độ tham gia của học viên vào bài tập đoán tên, với cam kết bảo mật thông tin và sử dụng kết quả cho mục đích nghiên cứu.

Xin chân thành cảm ơn sự tham gia nhiệt tình của các em

Các em trả lời câu hỏi bằng cách đánh dấu  vào ô tương ứng, theo thang điểm sau:

 Sự tham gia về mặt hành vi

1 Tôi cố gắng đoán ra tên bạn mình ngay cả khi khó đoán

2 Tôi cố gắng hết sức để hoàn thành bài tập đoán tên

3 Trong quá trình làm bài tập đoán tên, tôi luôn tập trung

4 Tôi cố gắng duy trì việc tham gia vào bài tập đoán tên

5 Trong lúc đoán tên , tôi đã làm mọi thứ có thể để không bị phân tâm

 Sự tham gia về mặt cảm xúc

6 Bài tập đoán tên rất thú vị đối với tôi 7 Tôi rất vui khi làm bài tập đoán tên

8 Tôi cảm thấy thoải mái khi tham gia vào bài tập đoán tên

9 Tôi cảm thấy hào hứng khi đoán tên bạn mình 10 Bài tập đoán tên khơi dậy sự tò mò của tôi  Sự tham gia về mặt nhận thức

11 Tôi cố gắng thật nhiều để đoán ra tên bạn mình

Trong quá trình làm bài tập đoán tên , Tôi cố gắng 12 kết nối kiến thức ngữ pháp mới với những gì đã học trước đó

13 Khi không thể đoán tên ngay lập tức, tôi kiên nhẫn cho đến khi đoán ra

14 Tôi phân tích kỹ lưỡng những gợi ý để đoán ra tên của bạn trong lớp

 Sự tham gia chủ động

15 Tôi tự tìm thêm tài liệu hoặc bài tập để cải thiện kỹ năng đoán tên

16 Tôi đã cho giáo viên biết những gì tôi cần và muốn trong quá trình làm bài tập đoán tên

17 Tôi tham gia tích cực vào việc thảo luận và chia sẻ ý kiến trong quá trình làm bài tập đoán tên

18 Tôi nhờ giáo viên giúp đỡ trong quá trình làm bài tập đoán tên

 Sự tham gia về mặt xã hội

19 Tôi giúp bạn bè khi họ gặp khó khăn trong bài tập đoán tên

20 Tôi tham gia vào các cuộc thảo luận nhóm về bài tập đoán tên

21 Tôi yêu cầu sự giúp đỡ từ giáo viên khi gặp khó khăn trong bài tập đoán tên

22 Khi làm bài tập đoán tên , tôi nhờ giáo viên kiểm tra bài làm của tôi để chắc chắn rằng nó đúng

Xin chân thành các em đã tham gia bài khảo sát ☺

BẢNG CÂU HỎI KHẢO SÁT

Về bài tập tìm sự khác nhau giữa hai bức tranh Các em thân mến,

Nguyễn Thị Mỹ Huệ, học viên cao học ngành Lý luận và Phương pháp dạy học Bộ môn Tiếng Anh tại Đại học Cần Thơ, đang tiến hành nghiên cứu về sự tham gia của học viên trong việc học ngữ pháp qua các bài tập hình thức Mục tiêu của bảng câu hỏi là khảo sát mức độ tham gia của học viên vào bài tập tìm sự khác biệt giữa hai bức tranh Thông tin từ các em sẽ được giữ bí mật và chỉ sử dụng cho mục đích nghiên cứu.

Xin chân thành cảm ơn sự tham gia nhiệt tình của các em

Các em trả lời câu hỏi bằng cách đánh dấu  vào ô tương ứng, theo thang điểm sau:

 Sự tham gia về mặt hành vi

1 Tôi cố gắng tìm các điểm khác nhau ngay cả khi chúng khó thấy

2 Tôi cố gắng hết sức để hoàn thành bài tập tìm sự khác biệt giữa hai bức tranh

3 Trong quá trình làm bài tập tìm sự khác biệt giữa hai bức tranh, tôi luôn tập trung

4 Tôi cố gắng duy trì việc tham gia vào bài tập tìm sự khác biệt giữa hai bức tranh

Trong lúc tìm sự khác biệt giữa hai bức tranh,

5 tôi đã làm mọi thứ có thể để không bị phân tâm.