Table of Contents
Introduction
The PPP approach, an acronym for Presentation, Practice, and Production, serves as a pedagogical framework in language teaching. This article explores the origin, merits, and criticisms of the PPP model, shedding light on its advantages and disadvantages in contemporary language education.
Definition of PPP
What is the PPP approach to language teaching?
PPP stands for Presentation, Practice, and Production. It is referred to as a procedure, model, paradigm, or approach to teaching language components.
The procedure is straightforward. The teacher presents the target language. Then students are asked to practice it, first in well-controlled activities, then in freer activities. It is only later that the students are allowed to produce the desired language.
The process starts with the input and ends with the output. What happens in between is practice.
The Origin of the PPP Approach To Language Teaching
The PPP model of teaching has always been considered to originate from a behaviorist approach to language teaching. The audiolingual method, which is based on Behaviorism, puts much stress on slicing language into smaller bits and on the importance of practicing these language bits until perfection.
PPP Lesson Plan
A typical PPP lesson plan is structured as follows;
| Stage | Description |
|---|---|
| Presentation | Teacher introduces the target language, providing models and explanations to convey meaning and usage. |
| Practice | Students engage in structured activities to reinforce the newly presented language, focusing on controlled exercises. |
| Production | Students apply the learned language in freer, open-ended activities, demonstrating understanding and creativity. |
Merits Of the PPP Approach
The PPP paradigm has its proponents in the classroom although it has been proved to originate from weak learning theory. Teachers still stick to the same procedure in delivering their lessons. This is mainly due to the following points:
- It is thought to reflect a so-called ‘logical’ or ‘plausible’ procedure of learning. Production comes only after presentation and practice.
- It is easy to implement. Teachers who still use this model of teaching start by slicing bits of language, sequencing them from easy to difficult. Then, they proceed by presenting, practicing, and asking their students to produce.
- Although Scott Thornbury believes that the PPP model does not reflect how learning actually takes place, he saw in it the possibility to prime language for later use.
Criticism
Learning a language is not the sum of smaller bits
The first criticism addressed to the PPP model is that it considers language as a sum of smaller bits that can be taught separately.
Language is holistic and learning is organic (very much like a seed growing) and recursive. It is not linear. Language can’t be sliced into smaller chunks and taught discretely. We don’t learn one bit of language and then proceed to the next bit and so on and so forth.
When learning a new language point, one may go back in his/her learning to previously met language features to check consistency with present learning situations. What is taught to students is rarely retained in an individual lesson despite seeming to be mastered in the course of that lesson.
Depriving learners of learning opportunities
A second disadvantage of the PPP approach to teaching English is that it limits learners’ encounters with learning opportunities. When presenting a bit of language in isolation, we strip away other important language features. This leads to depriving students:
- From comprehensible input, which might be of use to them.
- From the opportunity to notice other language items that might be implicitly ‘acquired’.
Most of the time, learning is incidental. While helping learners to learn, we do not know for sure what they have actually learned and what is still in the process of being acquired.
Lack Of Genuine Production
The audio-lingual method, from which PPP draws inspiration, places less emphasis on the final stage of production.
After mastering language structures, students in the audio-lingual method are not given free vent to produce anything. The aim is only to imitate/repeat, apply/practice, not to genuinely produce.
Neglect of Personalization
The PPP paradigm lacks another (fourth) P: Personalization. Language learning should extend beyond mechanics to include meaningful, personal connections, enabling students to relate language to their experiences and emotions.
It is crucial to understand that we learn language to talk about our knowledge, experience, and feelings. The aim is to be truthful and meaningful. Personalization helps learners own, or better appropriate, the content and relate it to their lives. Students need to connect to the material taught. Unfortunately, this is missing in the PPP approach to teaching.
| Aspect | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
| Logical Procedure | – Provides a logically sequenced learning process, with production logically following presentation and practice. | – Simplifies language learning, treating it as a sum of isolated components, overlooking its holistic nature. |
| Ease of Implementation | – Straightforward for teachers to implement, involving a step-by-step sequence from simple to complex language elements. | – Limits learners’ exposure to comprehensive input, hindering their ability to grasp nuances and implicit language features. |
| Potential for Priming | – Recognized for its potential to prime language for later use, aiding in the retention and application of language structures. | – Incidental learning is limited, and it may not fully reflect how natural language learning takes place. |
| Controlled Practice | – Structured practice activities provide a controlled environment for learners to reinforce language skills before moving to more open-ended activities. | – May restrict learners’ creative expression and real-world language use, particularly in the initial stages of learning. |
| Structured Learning | – Facilitates a systematic approach to language instruction, breaking down complex language elements into manageable components. | – Neglects the organic and recursive nature of language learning, which is not always linear and may involve revisiting previous language features. |
| Imitation and Repetition | – Emphasizes repetition and imitation, contributing to the development of accuracy and automaticity in language use. | – Places less emphasis on learners’ ability to independently produce language and express personal thoughts and experiences. |
| Sequential Learning | – Allows for a sequential learning process, starting with presentation, moving to controlled practice, and culminating in freer, more open-ended production. | – Lacks a crucial element of personalization, limiting students’ ability to connect language to their own knowledge, experiences, and emotions. |
Conclusion
While the PPP approach offers a structured and accessible language teaching model, its shortcomings, such as overlooking language’s organic nature and neglecting personalization, necessitate a reevaluation. Language educators must integrate a more dynamic and inclusive approach, accommodating the diverse and interconnected nature of language acquisition. In doing so, language teaching can evolve to better meet the needs of contemporary learners.