It is not unreasonable to say the history of English language teaching is developing with the idea of being for or against grammar centered teaching. Lingering between grammatical accuracy and effective communication, people usualy associate excelent grammar with opportunities for employment and promotion, the attainment of educational goals, and social acceptance by native speakers. Teachers of second language acquisition hold different views on how, to what extent, and even whether to teach grammar in classroom. In fact, in popular communicative and task-based approaches, the second language is viewed firstly as "a tool for communicating rather than as an object to be analyzed" (Ellis, 2001).The past 20 years have seen a debate in foreign language (FL) teaching concerning the relative merits of focusing on form (accuracy) as opposed to focusing on meaning (fluency). The supporters of audio-lingualism argue that grammar is the main focus in FL teaching and immediate error correction is essential. While the theorists of natural approach insist that explicit grammar instruction and error correction should not be regarded as most important factors in the total FL instruction. They maintain that overemphasizing on grammatical forms wil interfere with the communicative purposes. Therefore, teachers who place too much emphasis on grammar-based instruction may sacrifice learners' fluency. However, if teachers only focus on meaning-based instruction, then learners wil not attain accuracy in their FL oral production. Nonetheless, most research now supports some attention to grammar within a meaningful, interactive instructional context. It is now necessary to evaluate focus on form instruction which provide FL teachers with effective teaching strategies to balance form and meaning.