Video transcript - Mastering the PPP Framework Let’s talk about PPP.
Presentation. Practice. Production.
If you’ve been teaching for more than five minutes, you’ve probably met it.
If you’ve been teaching for more than five years, you’ve probably rolled your eyes at it.
And… I’m going to say something slightly controversial.
I think PPP
can be really useful.
But only if you get one thing absolutely right.
Let’s rewind for a moment.
PPP is a lesson framework you see all the time in coursebooks, especially at lower levels.
The idea is pretty simple and seems really logical:
First the
Presentation – you introduce the language.
For example, you might present “I’m going to…” for future plans- give them a short story about your plans for the next week or show them an imaginary diary page- something like that. Then that context leads to a teacher led explanation of the meaning, form and pronunciation issues of ‘going to’.
Then we have the second P-
Practice- which in this case means controlled practice. There’s only one (or at least a very limited number) of right answers.
Typically that’s Gap-fill exercises or matching tasks. Maybe a substitution drill. Things that check that the learners have understood how this bit of language works and they can mechanically put it together at least.
And then we get to
Production.
This is the point where learners are supposed to
actually use the language to communicate in a more realistic way.
Carrying on with the example of ‘going to’, the obvious context is to talk about their own plans and ask each other questions.
Now…
here’s the problem.
A lot of teachers feel that PPP is outdated, that it doesn’t correlate to research on how second languages are acquired and that it
doesn’t work.
I’ve got quite a bit of sympathy for this viewpoint and I definitely think that there are more useful frameworks to teach grammar at intermediate levels and above. But I also think that there’s a logic to this approach and a lot of learners appreciate that. It makes them feel secure, especially when the language is relatively new.
The big problem that I’ve observed over 25 years of watching novice teachers use a PPP framework is that too often, the lesson dies in the Practice stage.
That’s usually because of timing issues. The presentation takes much too long and so by the time the learners get through the controlled practice, the lesson’s almost over and the Production task is rushed in the last five minutes or just skipped completely.
So, what happens is that the learners end up knowing the rules (which, to be honest, they probably already knew)… but not being able to
use the language when it matters. And PPP gets blamed.
But if you ask me, the real problem isn’t PPP – it’s an issue of priority.
If the final P (the Production) isn’t the main event, then yes, PPP is pretty useless.
BUT if you treat Presentation and Practice as supporting acts, not the headline…
then PPP, I think, makes more sense.
It’s really common that learners understand the language and can fill in the gaps no problem at all – because they’ve got time to think and process. But when they have to navigate the language in real time, to say something meaningful, they really struggle. So THAT’S where you need to spend time.
So by all means use PPP. Especially with lower-level learners who need structure.
Just remember, if the last P doesn’t get the time, energy and importance it deserves…
you’re not really helping. You’re just warming up and never playing the game.
If you found this helpful and want more support with teaching grammar in a more communicative way, I’ve got some great courses for you:
Grammar for Language Teachers will ensure you KNOW the grammar you’re teaching and what’s difficult for your learners.
Teaching Grammar Communicatively will show you how to translate that into lessons that will be helpful, productive and enjoyable for your learners. Check them out at the links below.
Or get them together at a
Grammar Confidence Bundle Discount.
See you on the inside.
