Some by the way the material is seen, others by the way it is heard, and others if it is associated with a physical movement perhaps. We need to make sure our presentation has something to enable all these types of learners to retain the information. Below are some of the characteristics of an effective language practice: 1 — Practice Validity The practice activity must have learners rehearsing the skill or material it purports to practice. So in the case of the lesson you will view shortly, it must have the learners practicing both the food vocabulary items and the structure of the dialogue, i.
We will have done this during the presentation stage. If they have not had the new language clearly presented to them and been aided in being given some understanding of it, then they the learners will not be practicing at this stage but will be going through another initial learning stage. The more opportunities each student has to practice the target language, the more effective this stage of the lesson is.
So in the case of likes and dislikes, we might give the students individual worksheets where they have to fill in some part of the dialogue and the name of a food. Managing the activity should consist of the teacher being mobile during the activity, offering praise and being on hand to show struggling students where relevant information may be found on the whiteboard.
If we return to the swimming instructor analogy, it is now time to let them take their first few tentative strokes in the pool on their own with supervision and encouragement from the instructor.
As with the practice stage, we have to initiate an activity that allows them opportunities to use the target language in the classroom. In fact, the characteristics of a production stage activity are quite similar to the practice stage with one key difference and that is, student autonomy.
The learning path in PPP is extremely rigid. It is based on the assumption that the Presentation-Practice-Production sequence suffices for the acquisition of knowledge. Here lies the second criticism against PPP from a psychological point of view. Negative criticisms at a psycholinguistic level These encompass the following aspects: the fact that PPP emphasizes a an excessive focus on accuracy of forms at the expense of a focus on meaning- this assumption clashes against naturalistic learning principles and does not take into account the possibilities for linguistic experimentation on the part of the learner all along the learning path; b the association of the practice phase with mechanical drills and the fact that the linear nature of learning assumed by PPP ignores the readiness-to-learn, the delayed-effect-of- instruction and the silent period principles.
Firstly, PPP has been severely criticized for its emphasis on accuracy and correctness, favoured by the strict discrete-item based version of PPP. Since risk-taking is an important ingredient of natural learning, the search for perfection and fully defined linguistic goals does not allow for variety and hence for the selection of elements or structures which deviate from what is already prescribed.
According to J. Willis , optionality is crucial for the development of interlanguage. Willis , supporters of TBLT, recommend an initial focus on meaning which should be explicitly reflected in receptive and productive activities. This provides students with the necessary context to make the selected structures comprehensible. Moreover, language work after completing the task will highlight language features and make learners notice them.
Secondly, the P2 phase has often been associated to mechanical drills DeKeyser, , and consequently has also received harsh criticisms. The main criticism against mechanical drills lies in their lack of resemblance to real- life communication and in the dissociation of form and meaning. Emphasis on form alone does not favour the association form-meaning, and thus does not go in line with the cognitive parameters of language processing DeKeyser, Thirdly, the linear and teaching-equals-learning perspective leads to the neglect of three important second language learning principles: Readiness to learn, the delayed effect of instruction and the silent period.
The readiness-to-learn principle has dramatic consequences in materials design from the perspectives of both activity and language content ordering. Students seem to follow a natural acquisition sequence, which takes a long time and is not fully predictable; therefore it cannot be replicated by textbooks based on PPP teaching sequences, which are typically linear, static and the result of accumulated elements.
As Tomlinson b points out, premature instruction will result in production of erroneous forms, replacement by easier forms and avoidance strategies. It basically claims that these learners will not speak the language they learn before they are ready to do so, i. Although the silent period is usually applied to speaking, it may also be applied to other linguistic skills, as it is the case of writing.
The first three factors are linked to the quantitative type of learning assumed by PPP as explained in section 3. Well-defined goals probably account for the widespread use of PPP in teacher training courses and its presence in commercial materials Tomlinson, b.
The initial PPP pattern has changed and adapted to a more communicative format. In my opinion, it would be unfair and inaccurate not to recognise the existence of a contemporary FLT materials version of PPP. We can summarize its main features as follows: 1 Language elements are not reduced to structures alone. The sequencing pattern involves vocabulary and even linguistic longer stretches of discourse Harmer, This allows for a combination of linguistic and skill focus in the same related group of activities.
The main objective of focused skill activities is language forms, which are contextualised in aural or written texts; in fact, such texts are used as a pretext to study language forms. This study can take the shape of presentation of structures or lexis located in the texts or practice generating samples similar to those encountered in the texts, for instance. Attention to form is not eliminated, though. The same reasons as those mentioned in 3.
The three stages are not so rigidly sequenced in all instances. Some textbook lessons may offer P2 or P3 at the beginning and either a P1 or a P2 at the end. This is especially so in intermediate and more advanced levels.
Elementary textbooks in their turn may include a P2 or even a P3 activity at the onset for diagnostic purposes.
This contemporary FLT materials version of PPP somehow soothes certain psychological and linguistic features which are the core of more severe criticisms. Admittedly, the acknowledged higher degree of variety given by different activity types and formats of the stages does not exclude the A crticial review of the Presentation-Practice-Production Model PPP in Foreign Language Teaching constant repetitive patterns of action.
The transitions created by the combination of skill and linguistic practice in focused skill activities, by the modification of the phase order and even by small digressions linguistic notes, brief review sections, etc. Students are not perhaps aware of this uniformity in the lesson structure, but they will unconsciously perceive it in their daily work as a well-defined routine.
Probably their motivation will be negatively affected by such a perception. FLT researchers have the responsibility of offering alternatives to PPP in order to successfully contribute to the following: a Efficacy in language learning; b avoiding an unbalanced degree of variety in the classroom organisational procedures; c adjusting to the psychological and psycholinguistic principles illustrated in sections 3.
Conclusion One of the most important implications of this critical review of PPP is that it cannot be regarded as either the panacea, fit-in-all solution or a devil in FLT. There is no empirical support in favour of either one or the other stance.
What we do have, however, is a well-established pedagogical tradition and the experience of many thousands of learners who seem to have learned foreign languages in this way Swan, Many of the negative criticisms that PPP has received on the part of contemporary authors derive from its ascription to the Structural Methods. These teaching strategies were thought to be the best pedagogical adaptation of behaviourism in the language classroom.
The PPP as understood in the Structural times was a failure because the kind of practice activities it included was excessively focused on form and excessively far away from meaning. Furthermore, the language transference offered by production activities designed to reproduce language samples structurally similar to those presented in P1 and practised in P2 was too limited. This gap was to be filled in by CLT, whose strong version Howatt, in turn overemphasized the final P P3 in the shape of communicative activities or tasks at the cost of focus on form.
A quick glance at any contemporary textbook reveals that such extremely dogmatic and mechanical practices, common forty years ago, are not so frequent nowadays. Instead, modern teaching materials are more flexible in the sequence they offer and abound in better contextualized aural and written dialogues, inductive discovery learning exercises, use of skill-based activities in-between the actual presentation and practice of language items, etc.
Nevertheless, it is also true that a rigid PPP model alone cannot be adopted as the single pedagogical strategy in the FL classroom. Not all aspects of language can be taught following a PPP sequence; for instance, certain subtle pragmatic aspects and even some grammar forms which are abstract and complex. Such intricacies are better explained or discovered by students themselves after they have been met in language use; in other words, they seem to adjust to a P1 phase coming after P3.
On the other hand, PPP contains elements which adapt well to the classroom situation and adult foreign language pedagogy, although authentic communicative situations do not easily fit this linear pattern.
Also, teachers should make sure that students constantly recycle the language items that had been introduced in a PPP lesson, since abundant practice at both receptive and productive levels is necessary to fully consolidate language knowledge.
References Anderson, J. Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89 4 , Anderson, J. Cognitive Psychology and its Implications 7th ed.
New York: Worth Publishers. An Integrated Theory of the Mind. Psychological Review, , Acquisition of procedural skills from examples. How can you expect students to succeed if you use different vocabulary and grammar to the one you taught in the presentation stage? Production All meaningful activities which give students the opportunity to practise the language more freely. Students are taught grammar inductively.
Your lesson is made up of task that maxime student talking time. Conclusion When teaching grammar, there are several factors we need to take into consideration and the following are some of the questions we should ask ourselves: How useful and relevant is the language? What other language do my students need to know in order to learn the new structure effectively? What problems might my students face when learning the new language? How can I make the lesson fun, meaningful and memorable?
Although I try to only use English when teaching a grammar lesson, it is sometimes beneficial to the students to make a comparison to L1 in the presentation stage. This is particularly true in the case of more problematic grammatical structures which students are not able to transfer to their own language.
It is also important to note that using the PPP model does not necessarily exclude using a more inductive approach since some form of learner-centred guided discovery could be built into the presentation stage.
When presenting the 2nd conditional I sometimes present the language in context and then give the students a worksheet with a series of analysis questions to do in pairs.
PPP is one model for planning a lesson. All models have their advantages and disadvantages and I, like many other teachers I know, use different models depending on the lesson, class, level and learner styles. Scott Thornbury, Longman Find out more about inductive and deductive approaches in our teacher development module Engaging with grammar — different approaches.Anderson distinguishes three stages in the route towards knowledge attainment: declarative stage, procedural stage and automatic stage. Tasks for absolute beginners and beyond: Developing and sequencing tasks at basic proficiency levels. Howatt, A. Roles 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 can be applied to controlled practice, whereas all of them are relevant to freer practice activities. Considerations when Teaching Listening and Reading The Presentation, Practice and Production is usually used to teach speaking, writing or grammar.
This will push them to pay more attention to those features that they do not master. During this stage, the students will be producing the target language with minimal assistance from the teacher as opposed to the practice stage where the teacher will be on hand to assist students rehearse target language that has only just been presented to them.
The strategies for achieving such a goal are based on a freer use of the targeted structures. Martin Luther King that continue to inspire us today, and something as simple and mundane as a road traffic sign. FLT researchers have the responsibility of offering alternatives to PPP in order to successfully contribute to the following: a Efficacy in language learning; b avoiding an unbalanced degree of variety in the classroom organisational procedures; c adjusting to the psychological and psycholinguistic principles illustrated in sections 3.
This means that some of the skills we will be equipping you with may feel a little alien at first, but your experience will not prove to be a hindrance. Wu, K.
Try not to introduce lots of words. Cook, V.
Once the leaner has been shown how to do certain tasks and he has performed certain tasks.