Symposium on English Teaching, English Teachers’ Association/ROC Taipei, pp 630–633 Mason, B., & Krashen, S (2004) Is form-focused vocabulary instruction worth-while? RELC Journal, 35(2), 179–185 doi: 10.1177/003368820403500206 Mason, B., Vanata, M., Jander, K., Borsch, R., & Krashen, S (2009) The effects and efficiency of hearing stories on vocabulary acquisition by students of German as a second foreign language in Japan The Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 5(1), 1–14 Nagy, R., Herman, P., & Anderson, R (1985) Learning words from context Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 233–253 doi: 10.2307/747758 The Authors Reply KIERAN A FILE Victoria University of Wellington Wellington, New Zealand REBECCA ADAMS University of Auckland Auckland, New Zealand doi: 10.5054/tq.2010.238720 & We would like to thank Mason and Krashen for their comments on our recent article published in TESOL Quarterly They have provided an interesting reinterpretation of our results and have also brought up several valid points regarding the efficiency of vocabulary learning from instruction, especially with regard to attrition We take the opportunity below to respond to several of the points made by Mason and Krashen A growing body of research has found that form-focused instruction can lead to favourable learning gains (Hill & Laufer, 2003; Knight, 1994; Laufer, 2003; Paribakht & Wesche, 1997; Watanabe, 1997) What has yet to be thoroughly explored is the timing of such form-focused instruction and whether timing of instruction has an effect on the learning and retention of vocabulary items (Spada & Lightbown, 2008) It was our focus in the current study to examine two of the commonly employed choices that teachers have at their disposal when providing focus on form during reading lessons: isolating instruction (before the reading lesson) or integrating it (during the reading lesson) Our data illustrated that form-focused instruction promoted learning, at least over the short term, but that there was no statistically significant difference detected between the two approaches to providing instruction While the main purpose of our study was to compare integrated and isolated instructional focus, we also examined incidental learning of lowfrequency vocabulary items for comparison purposes Mason and THE FORUM 793 Krashen claim our results indicate the occurrence and superiority of incidental learning We acknowledge the occurrence of incidental vocabulary learning in our article (File & Adams, p 239) and agree that the results suggest incidental learning can and does occur, even with short texts However, at least in the short term, incidental learning of vocabulary was significantly outperformed by either form-focused instruction approach, likely, as Mason and Krashen point out, because focus on form necessarily involves more instructional time per vocabulary word than simple incidental exposure during reading Mason and Krashen argue that this indicates that incidental learning is more efficient, because learning occurs in far less time However, we would argue that increased time is part of the focus on form treatment, and that allowing for more than fleeting exposure to targeted vocabulary allows for increases in word knowledge not found in the incidental condition A closer examination of our results (see Figure 1) shows that Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS) increases in each of the focus on form conditions suggest a greater depth of word knowledge gained in a number of target items after focus on form instruction was given Posttest results indicate that learners gained the ability to at least define a greater number of target words, tentatively (level 3) and more concretely (level 4), and in some cases use target words in a sentence (level 5) In addition, in the instructed conditions fewer words remained unknown at the posttest and delayed-posttest stages for words taught in the focus on form conditions (level 1) For incidental learning, however, the main increases in the VKS scale seem to suggest learners’ gains were primarily a case of noticing the word, with far less gain reported at higher levels of word knowledge Mason and Krashen also highlight, as does Figure 1, the high level of attrition evident between the posttest and delayed-posttest results for the focus on form conditions There is clearly a higher level of attrition for words learned in the instructed conditions Of course, because there were higher levels of learning for these words, there was also much greater potential for attrition We would also argue that this is to be expected considering there was no further instruction or exposure to the words In a coordinated vocabulary learning programme, as opposed to an experiment, additional focus could be devised to reinforce learning For this reinforcement to happen with incidental learning of vocabulary, we would need to rely on learners’ meeting the word again incidentally This is far less likely to occur with low-frequency words like those selected for this study We would also like to point out that many of the benefits that Mason and Krashen claim for incidental vocabulary acquisition may relate more to extensive than intensive reading In extensive reading, where certain vocabulary items are met repeatedly, the cumulative effect may be 794 TESOL QUARTERLY FIGURE VKS scores: isolated, integrated, and incidental learning greater than the expected effect of meeting a word once in a short, intensive reading lesson, as in our study We agree with Mason and Krashen that extensive reading has a number of benefits (including opportunities for incidental vocabulary acquisition), and support the proposal of vocabulary researchers including Nation (2001), that a wellbalanced vocabulary learning programme would include both extensive reading and intensive reading, allowing for both incidental vocabulary learning as well as focused vocabulary instruction Clearly, vocabulary learning has been confirmed in both focus on form studies (Hill & Laufer, 2003; Knight, 1994; Laufer, 2003; Paribakht & Wesche, 1997; Watanabe, 1997) and extensive reading studies (Day, Omura, & Hiramatsu, 1992; Horst, Cobb, & Meara, 1998; Waring & Takaki, 2003) Our findings illustrate the relative learning gains for incidental and instructed vocabulary learning in two relatively short, intensive reading passages In this context, more learning gains on low-frequency vocabulary knowledge seem to be associated with instructional focus REFERENCES Day, R R., Omura, C., & Hiramatsu, M (1992) Incidental EFL vocabulary learning and reading Reading in a Foreign Language, 7, 541–551 File, K A., & Adams, R (2010) Should vocabulary instruction be integrated or isolated? TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 222–249 doi:10.5054/tq.2010.219943 THE FORUM 795 Hill, M., & Laufer, B (2003) Type of task, time on task and electronic dictionaries in incidental vocabulary acquisition International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 41, 87–106 doi:10.1515/iral.2003.007 Horst, M., Cobb, T., & Meara, P (1998) Beyond a clockwork orange: Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading Reading in a Foreign Language, 11, 207–223 Knight, S (1994) Dictionary use while reading: The effects on comprehension and vocabulary acquisition for students of different verbal abilities The Modern Language Journal, 78, 285–299 doi:10.2307/330108 Laufer, B (2003) Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence The Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 567–587 Nation, I S P (2001) Learning vocabulary in another language Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press Paribakht, T., & Wesche, M (1997) Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition In J Coady & T Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp 174–200) New York, NY: Cambridge University Press Spada, N., & Lightbown, P (2008) Form-focused instruction: Integrated or isolated? TESOL Quarterly, 42, 181–207 Waring, R., & Takaki, M (2003) At what rate learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader Reading in a Foreign Language, 15, 130– 163 Watanabe, Y (1997) Input, intake and retention—Effects of increased processing on incidental learning of foreign language vocabulary Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 287–307 doi:10.1017/S027226319700301X 796 TESOL QUARTERLY