the reanalyze of PPP approach and application in practical teaching

何文靜

【Abstract】With the development of Second language teaching, many teaching methods come into being. Although the typical PPP structure is not so popular today, it remains a paradigm in second language teaching. Therefore, based on this teaching approach, the author will reanalyze its strength and weakness in foreign language teaching. Believing that, it will provide instruction to the foreign language teaching.

【Key words】Second language acquisition; PPP approach; Communicative language teaching

1. Introduction

It is generally accepted that foreign language learning needs a lot of opportunities to use the language, that being the best way to absorb a new language. This requires language learners not only to understand the language, but also to use it in communication, which is the main objective of language learners in learning a foreign language. Therefore, a focus on language forms, while providing opportunities for communication in the language classroom, is very important in Second Language Learning and Teaching. Since the 1970s, the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) method has become the most important methodology in Second Language Teaching (SLT). With the development of CLT, a three-part approach (referred to as PPP), which integrates the language form and communication, has come into being. This approach was developed from the 1970s on, and became famous between the 1970s and the 1990s.

Since the PPP approach came into being, there have been many different views about it. Hedge (2000), for example, recommends that the PPP approach should integrate the input of language forms with communicative practice. The PPP approach emphasizes the language input, simply offering raw material on the basis of which learners may review their picture of the target language system. Research into second language acquisition (SLA) (Ellis, 1985 and 1993) has established that teaching cannot determine the way the learners language develops. Ellis (1993: 4) argues that the PPP approach is ineffective to achieve what intended to do in that it controlled nature of input that students receive.

“We can do PPP until we are blue in the face, but it doesnt necessarily result in what PPP was designed to do. And yet there is, still, within language teaching, a commitment to trying to control not only input but actually what is learned” Ellis (1993: 4).

Furthermore, the processes by which the learner operates are ‘natural processes, teachers and learners cannot simply ‘choose what is to be learned. So, it is necessary to reanalyze the role of PPP approach in practical foreign language teaching and learning.

2. The structure of a typical PPP language lesson

Presentation, Practice and Production are the three main stages in a PPP language lesson. These three stages construct a simple, clear and workable framework in a class. They clearly represent the input to output process of language teaching and learning, and the control exerted by the teachers will gradually reduce from the first to the third stage.

Presentation

The Presentation comes at the beginning of a lesson and aims to help learners to understand the meaning of language. In this stage, the new structure will be ‘presented to the students, and the teachers often introduce the new language to students in a context, meanwhile trying to encourage the students to learn new patterns, new dialogues or new articles; and to stimulate the intellectual curiosity of students and check their understanding of the elements of the new language. ‘The form is contextualized in some way to make the meaning clear. Learners are encouraged to produce the target form under teachers control until they produce it with some consistency. (Willis, D, 1996: V). In another word, it is in order to help students better comprehend the language structure.

The teacher plays a dominant role in this stage, controlling the whole stage, and is in charge of giving a clear and logical introduction to students. In this stage, teacher should have drawn up a clear plan of what should be taught, which will help students understand the new language structures. Learners in this stage are more passive than the teacher. What they need to do is to listen to what their teachers say and try to understand the content. They do not need to work out the language rules or new structures by themselves, and communication will not occur in this stage.

Practice

The Practice stage is a teacher-controlled stage sometimes called the ‘mechanical-practice stage. The emphasis of the practice stage is focused on both form and meaning of the language. Teachers often give opportunities to students to encourage them to use their knowledge, such as through drills or mini-dialogues to improve the accuracy of their language. Widdowson (1998) also points out that learners should pay attention both to the form and the meaning of the language. A focus on form can help the learner to gain greater accuracy in the new language, and a focus on meaning can help them use it more fluently. In a word, Practice is seen as a stage to improve the fluency and to measure the accuracy of new language.

Teachers should provide practical opportunities to students. However, the teacher is still the central unit, and acts through a teacher-controlled method which provides a model, and controls the direction in which the classroom activities and materials, dialogues and drills, repetition and memorization pattern practice, will be performed. Meanwhile, classroom is beginning to seen as more learner-centered in this stage. They will follow the teachers direction to repeat correct reproduced language. This can be seen as a behavioristic process.

Production

Production can be seen as a culmination of learning process. Students are beginning to use the new language rather than study it. In the Production stage, more extensive activities will be used to reach the objective of accurate and fluent communication, and students will use the target language in freer and more creative activity. ‘PPP views language as a series of “products” that can be acquired sequentially as “accumulated entities” (Rutherford, 1987).

The teacher became a monitor in this stage. Teachers role is to facilitate the communicative situation or activities. The teacher will not involve the activities or correct students unless they ask for. This is a freer stage for learners to incorporate the new structures or knowledge into their communication, which often involves speaking activities or talking about oneself. In Presentation, learners acquire new information and they consolidate it in the second practice stage; now, in the third stage, it is time to use the new knowledge freely. They can also check whether they have already comprehended it.

3. Strengths and weaknesses in language teaching

There are some strengths of this kind of teaching structure:

1.The teaching structure is clear and logical sequenced. The teacher is in charge of proceedings, and has a clear professional role, in other words, it is easy to organize. And the clear logical sequence can help Students to acquire the new language step by step.

2. It sets a clear teaching goal for teachers. Teacher should guide students to work out the new language structures at first and then help students to consolidate the outcomes. It makes teaching and learning more interactive and achievable.

3. The Practice part can also help learners memorization of the new language. If learners have already learnt the rules of the language, it is a good chance for them to consolidate them, and if they have not, it is also a good chance for them to reproduce the rules.

Although it is a clear, simple and workable structure in language teaching, we can also identify some shortcomings. The weakest is that this structure is lacking in real communication in the classroom, even though there is a set discussion part of the lesson. Real communication is full of unpredictability, for the speaker cannot know in advance how to answer questions or prepare the answers to them. But in this structure, the aims and objectives are prepared by the teacher, and language use is limited to this purpose. It is hard to achieve the needs of real communication. They will not actually enjoy freedom of situational communication. As Dave Willis (1996) said, if the main objective of the students is to prove their level of mastery of the target language to their teacher rather than through the use of language to absorb knowledge. It is hard to believe that this classroom is the setting for real communication. Therefore, there is the problem of lack of real communication in the lesson structure, and it is necessary to find a good way to solve this problem.

4. Conclusion

Although the typical PPP structure is not so popular nowadays, it remains a paradigm in second language teaching. That is because while PPP is not the only structural lesson plan approach in the field of language teaching, it has already been commonly used in Language teaching all over the world, especially in the higher levels of language teaching. And it is really a helpful structure in language teaching especially in the area of grammar or other special items about language. “The aim of PPP lesson is to teach a specific language form.” (Willis, J. 1996: 133) The main idea behind the PPP approach is for the teacher to give students the correct, model samples, and through repetition practice help them to absorb the new language and use it in communication. However, It still has major problems: while learners use the limited language patterns in their communicative practice, it is hard to achieve simulation of their actual needs in their real life communication. Therefore, a learner-centered and freer communication stage is necessary in this kind of lesson to solve such problems.

References：

[1]Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

[2]Ellis, R. (1993). Second language acquisition research: how does it help teachers? An interview with Rod Ellis. ELT Journal.

[3]Ellis, R. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press

[4]Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[5]Rutherford, W.E. (1987). Second Language Grammar Learning and Teaching. Harlow: Longman.

[6]Widdowson, H.G. (1978). Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[7]Willis, D. (1996). Accuracy, Fluency and Conformity. In: J. Willis & D. Willis, eds. Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, 44-51. London: Macmillan .

[8]Willis, D. & J. Willis. (1996). Consciousness-raising Activities in the Language Classroom. In: J. Willis & D. Willis, eds. Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, 63-78. London: Macmillan.

[9]Willis, J. (1996). A Flexible Framework for Task-based Learning. Longman.