The PPP (Presentation,Practice and Production) approach to language teaching - Essay Example

?Running Head: PPP Approach to Language Teaching PPP Approach to Language Teaching [Institute’s PPP Approach to Language Teaching Language is the basic mode of communication amongst all animals, particularly advanced and complex in humans. Humans use language to express, communicate, inform, alert, instruct, and attract. Thus, learning to communicate in language is a very critical part of the learning phase and it is for this very reason that doctors, psychologists, and linguists have devoted their time and effort in analyzing, contemplating, and implementing the art and science of language acquisition. Semantically, language acquisition is a process through which children, or adults in cases of delayed learning or secondary language acquisition, learn to understand, speak and use words in order to communicate (Behrens, 245, 2008). This skill is an amalgamation of various other capabilities including the understanding of a vast vocabulary, phonetics, and syntax (Goodluck, 87, 1991). The use of language can either be in a form of speech i.e. vocal or in the form of sign i.e. manual. Although other animals also use language to communicate, theirs are fragments of vocabulary, which does not hold syntax and stay uniform amongst all varieties of the group. What has always been the primary focus of the studies conducted on psychology of linguistics is the process through which an infant learns to speak. From what seems to be a minimal amount of input, the young brain seems to learn to speak very fast and efficiently. This curiosity has resulted in to the formation of multiple theories, which, in their own ways, explain the phenomenon of language acquisition (Macaro, 381, 2010). This paper will attempt to explain in detail the PPP approach towards language acquisition and explore the foundations of its criticism. It will also juxtapose the validity and reliability of the theory of PPP to other theories of language acquisition and determine whether it still holds water. A huge part of language acquisition process depends on the language teaching methodologies that instructors use to teach the language effectively. There are six types of teaching methodologies. The first is collaborative learning in which the asymmetrical division of roles takes place, i.e. both student and teacher learn collaboratively drawing experiences form each other and using tools like conversations, interviews and other interactive tools. Second is the cooperative learning in which interaction amongst students fosters and language instills itself through the socializing experience. Discovery-based learning lies on constructivist notions and derives its essence from the theories of Piaget and others. In this type of learning, students ask questions and inquire about several aspects of language. Then comes engaged learning in which, as the name predicts, learners engage in the language through using several tools and resources. In problem-based learning method, students learn language in chunks and in a question answer format. Examples of this would be providing scenarios and questions to students and ask them to solve the questions using the target language. Finally, the whole language approach deals with the bigger picture, the pragmatics, and semantics of knowledge rather than the spellings and grammar. This approach ensures the understanding of the meaning of language rather than the construction of language. The technique of language acquisition under discussion is PPP. The three Ps denote Presentation, Practice, and Presentation and is a common method used for teaching language all across the world. The first P stands for Presentation. Presentation, in this context entails the introduction of the language and the context created for the acquisition to the same. At this stage, the approach is very teacher-centered and learners learn from their flaws through the feedback by their teachers. Tools like pictures, conversation and scenarios are important in assisting the learners and ease them into the language. Practice follows. This stage has more interaction and space for communicating with others. It acquaints the learners with the language at ease and develops their confidence to work with it. At this level-the teacher-centeredness diminishes a little and more focus lies on on learners. Nonetheless, the role of teacher as the guide stays intact. This leads to the last stage which is production. In production, the learners gain more freedom with the language and are not entirely dependent on their teacher. On the other hand, teachers limit their roles to facilitation and abstain from correcting the flaws unless asked to do so (Lambert, 76, 1987). PPP approach is easily comprehensible and very direct. Most teachers use the method to teach language when they launch the career. Historically, PPP (Presentation, Practice, and Production) is a response to the dislike shown by educators and the educated towards CLT. Communicative Language Teaching or CLT as it is widely known emerged in the late 70s, against the use of language as knowledge rather than a skill and heavy focus on the behaviorism of it. The proponents of CLT claimed that the best way to teach a language is by performing and communicating rather than just through grammar exercises. This approach, though very sensible, did not please the people and met hatred and displeasure (Freeman, 98, 2000). Later, in order to find a middle ground, CLT was diluted with other conventional approaches and was turned into a soft communicative approach, which came to be known as PPP. This approach was based on the theory that the initial part of the process stays same that is, the study of grammatical structures and substitution and gap-fills; however, the latter part of the process be made more communicative and include hands-on of language e.g. reading and speaking. A typical lesson plan of teaching language according to PPP would start with introducing the topic, then the first reading with an intention to grasp the gist of the passage, followed by the second reading intended to get hold of important information. This gives a lead to the language focus, which pays attention to the grammatical perspective. The activity ends with a second round of practice, which is freer and innovative and includes exercises such as role-plays and discussions. However, there are many loopholes in the PPP approach. First, it focuses too much on grammar. Second, the production part, which is the only factor that distinguishes PPP from CLT does not work the way it should. The former two parts of the PPP approach that is, presentation and practice, pay excessive attention to grammar, so much that when the time comes to present, the learner is too stressed by the pressure of following the right grammar that he misses out on the essence of the activity i.e. realistic communication. Thus, the emphasis on meaning and use of the language is totally missing. Third, PPP is an old approach and has been a part of the learning acquisition realm. Just like every other thing grows hackneyed and problematic with overuse, so has PPP. Finally, some people contend that since it is one of the easiest methods for language teaching, many teachers who are beginners prefer it and use it to keep the class in control thus making it less student-centered (Unsworth, 76, 2010). However, besides PPP, there are multitudes of other factors, which have been, employed in many parts of the world. It is important to mention few of them and compare them to the PPP techniques in terms of performance. The first is grammar-translation method, prevalent until early 1930s. Through this approach, language teaching included exercises of translating Classical Greek or Latin into English. Dictionary explanations of grammar rules, sample sentences, and exercise to test the knowledge of new structures were integral part of the teaching methodologies (Liu, 76, 2007). It demanded the student first to get the hold of the structure on which language is based. Thus, there was less emphasis on speaking and listening. On, the other hand, the reading, and writing aspects of the language received most attention, and so did vocabulary. The second approach is cognitive approach. This emerged in 1940s and remained most popular through 1950s (Katz, 159, 2009). This approach introduced the much-famous four principal language skills for the first time namely listening, writing, reading, and speaking. In addition, more emphasis laid on auditory input and its comprehension and knowing about the language was attended to. Then, in the 60s, Audio-Lingual method attained popularity. This new method was in line with the advent of audiotapes and used it as a learning resource. Learners, in this method, use voice recordings of native speakers to learn to speak and use audiotapes for this purpose. B. F. Skinner’s theory of behaviorism also supported this view since it favored techniques, which were beneficial in habit formation. However, this method was not successful enough in using the lessons learnt in language classes in their real lives. In addition, the comprehension of language improved only in areas of language discourse, which were covered in class. This method is used in the absence of a live teacher (Farrell, 65, 1987). Later, in 70s, the field of language acquisition saw the emergence of the Direct Method, which was characterized by its preference to oral part of language. Grammar was taught rather covertly through discussions in the language rather than explicitly attending to the details of structure. More focus was laid on pronunciation. It enabled the students to communicate more efficiently because it lets them be creative (Atkinson, 54, 2011). The best part about this approach is that it gives the maximum access to understanding of the language and thus speaking in it. The approach is the optimal choice in sessions where teaching through speaking and listening is the technique of instruction. Another approach that emerged during the 60s but attained fame in the late 90s was the Natural/Communicative approach (Sanz, 89, 2005). Developed by Tracy Terell and Stephen Krashen, this approach works in three stages, which are highly focused on acquisition more than any other aspect of learning. The first stage is aural comprehension where understanding through listening is emphasized (Perdue, 125, 1993). Then is the early speech production, which is followed by the speech activities, which encourages the natural acquisition i.e. learning by hearing and talking. Employing the notion of total immersion, only the target language is used and livelier textbooks with more interactive features are introduced (Brewster, 104, 1976). Although, the communicative approach is not very well structured, it is however a strong combination of ideal techniques from all other methods of language teaching. Many contemporary language teachers adopt and apply the methods of communicative approach in their language classes. During 70s, with the advent of more liberal arts schools, which focused on the learning and comprehension of students, rather than the technicality of education process, the language discourses gained more popularity and incompetency of the existing approaches was felt at large. Thus, communicative approach was adopted which, like other traditional approaches, did not focus much on the in-depth command of the language. Rather, it took language as a medium of expression and paid more attention to the social purpose of a language. Instead of focusing on just a few aspects of a language like letter-writing or gender, the communicative approach took into account all the functions and uses of the target language that could range from giving orders to apologizing to asking for directions to a particular address. Another method used for language acquisition, called Total Physical Response or TPR for short also emerged during the same period as direct method. This method maximizes the use of both body and brain through the methods involving commands and action responses. This method integrates the notion of psycho-neuro kinetics by asking learners to act out the command thus facilitating the rote-learning process. Linked to the ‘trace-theory’, which notes that the more strongly one binds a memory connection, easier it will be to recall it. TRP uses motor activity to trace the connection strongly along with the verbal activity to increase the odds of recalling. James Asher from University of California designed this approach on the claim that second language acquisition can be made easier if one follows the clues from first language acquisition (Vievra-King, 78, 1996). He further explains that initially when a young baby is taught how to speak, they are given commands to which they respond through physical actions, which is later facilitated by small words. Similarly, while teaching a language to adults, if motor actions and body movements are induced in the teaching method, learning could be made faster and long lasting due to the coordinated movement of memory and muscles (Clarke, 179, 2008). Asher also mentions the role of emotions in the language learning process. Making language learning less competitive and more like a class activity diminishes the stress and gives a positive outlook to learning (Corson, 54, 1997). The emphasis of communicative approach on comprehension makes it integrate into another method called Comprehension approach, which claims that ability to comprehend is the most primary one in language learning and all other skills like speaking, reading, and writing are heavily dependent on comprehension. In addition, there is a method called ‘the Silent Way’, which was originally developed by Dr Caleb Gattegno of Egypt wherein the instructor stays silent and learners produce the responses on cue. Instruments such as Cuisenaire rods are used to teach prepositions and colors (Richman, 398, 1991). This method keeps the learners in the limelight and the teacher stays latent and instruct with objects. Suggstopedia is yet another method, which was invented by Bulgarian psychologist Georgi Lozanov in 1967. This method relies on esoteric and unorthodox methods of learning, which includes melodic and artistic presentation of objects, soft lights, and cushions, songs to memorize words etc. there is very little focus on grammar, and the method’s overall target is to arouse the creative right hemisphere of the brain to learn the language more holistically. There are two branches of this method, ‘Suggestive-Accelerative Learning and Teaching or SALT,’ designed by Donald Schuster’s and Lynn Dhority, and ‘Acquisition through Creative Teaching or ACT’ (MacWhinney, 98, 1987). A very significant method of language acquisition is Community Language Learning or CLL. Also known as Counseling-Learning method; Charles Curran’s approach focuses on the collective learning of the language and its effect on personal development rather than a skill to be learned (Lieven, 98, 2011). The foundation of CLL lies on the philosophy of SARD in which ‘S’ denotes security which they gain through the boost in confidence. ‘A’ denotes attention that reflects the passion with which they study; ‘R’ stands for retention, which describes the internalization of language, and finally the ‘D’ denotes discrimination where the learner juxtaposes the concepts to the previously comprehended notions. Used in second-language acquisition, Total-Immersion technique engages the learners directly into the language (O’Malley, 67, 1990). It has two types: effective immersion when instructor slowly inducts the language in the environment using easy words and elaborate hand gestures. On the other hand, in effective immersion is when the target language is spoken around as the native language and no convenience of learning is granted to students, thereby creating a distance between the language and its learners. M. Lewis proposed lexical approach in 1990s. He was of the opinion that a good way to teach a language is to teach it in the form of lexical phrases (Freeman, 23, 2000). Through this method, students will have both: strong hold on grammar and understanding of the meaning. To put it in other words, this method prefers understanding of vocabulary more than understanding of grammar. Finally, Task-based language learning (TBLL), also referred to as task-based language teaching (TBLT) emphasis the utility of the target language. By asking learners to perform ordinary and slightly difficult tasks in the language to be taught, the proficiency is achieved and measured through the outcomes of the task assigned (Menn, 90, 2000). This way, more focus is laid on the ability of student to ‘get things done’ in that language rather than the intricacies of grammar rules. It also increases the confidence in the learner to speak that language fluently and fearlessly. All these methodologies employed for language acquisition have pros and cons and as per linguists, there is no one single best method for teaching a language. However, one method might be more preferable than the rest in a certain situation. For example, in lower classes, teaching with vignette scenarios and Suggstopedia might not be a very good idea since the kids do not have that much patience in them to stay in one place and concentrate on a single object for a long time. However, the same approach might be very useful when teaching a foreign language to adults since they have developed enough discipline to sit through the tedious and overwhelming sessions. Thus, the best learning methodology for language acquisition is always the one, which best complements the needs, learning pace, and context of learners. In other words, the best approach is Principled Eclecticism approach i.e., the approach that best fits the situation (Ingram, 58, 1989). However, objectively speaking, PPP has similar number of drawbacks than other approaches and there is no reason to believe that it is the best learning method at all times. References Ambridge, B., Lieven, E. V. M. 2011. Child Language Acquisition: Contrasting Theoretical Approaches. Cambridge University Press. Atkinson, D. 2011. Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition. Taylor and Fraancis. Behrens, H. 2008. Corpora in language acquisition research: history, methods, perspectives. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Blom, E., Unsworth, S. 2010. Experimental Methods in Language Acquisition Research. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Brewster, T., 1976. Language acquisition made practical: field methods for language learners. Lingua House. Calteaux, K, Vievra-King, M. 1996. Language assessment and the national qualifications framework: conference proceedings. HSRC Press. Clahsen, H, Richman, K., 1991. Child language and developmental dysphasia. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Clarke, M. 2008. Language teacher identities: co-constructing discourse and community, Multilingual Matters. Freeman, D.L., 2000. Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford University Press Goodluck, H. 1991. Language acquisition: a linguistic introduction. Wiley-Blackwell. Grumberg, O, Kaminski, M., Katz, S. 2009. Languages: From Formal to Natural. Springer. Hornberger, N. H., Corson, D. 1997. Research methods in language and education. Springer. Ingram, D. 1989. First language acquisition: method, description, and explanation. Cambridge University Press. Lambert, R. D. 1987. Volume 490 of Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Sage Publications. Liu, J. 2007. English language teaching in China: new approaches, perspectives and standards. Continuum. Macaro, E. 2010. Continuum Companion to Second Language Acquisition. Continuum International Publishing Group. MacWhinney, B. 1987. Mechanisms of language acquisition. Routledge. Menn, L. 2000. Methods for studying language production. Routledge. O’Malley, J. M., Chamot A. U. 1990. Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press. Perdue, C., 1993. Adult Language Acquisition: Field methods. Cambridge University Press. Richards, J. C., Farrell, T. S. C. 1987. Foreign language instruction: a national agenda. Sage Publications. Sanz, C. 2005. Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: methods, theory, and practice. Georgetown University Press. Read More