Lesson Planning Frameworks

Comparing PPP, Task-Based Cycles, ESA, and Scrivener's ARC model.

“I always start my lesson with a 20-minute grammar rule presentation, followed by a gap-fill worksheet, and then I ask students to talk.” This linear structure is the classic PPP framework. While PPP provides comfort for beginner teachers, relying on a single planning framework for every lesson context can lead to predictable, rigid teaching. Professional educators master multiple lesson planning frameworks and select the right tool for the specific learning goal.

Core Theory & Terminology

1. Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP)

The traditional workhorse of language teaching, aligning with Weak CLT:

  • Presentation: Teacher introduces target item in context, clarifying MFP (Meaning, Form, Pronunciation).
  • Controlled Practice: Learners complete accuracy-focused tasks (gap-fills, drills) with immediate error correction.
  • Production: Learners execute free speaking/writing tasks attempting to use the target item alongside existing interlanguage.

2. Jeremy Harmer’s ESA Model

Jeremy Harmer proposed ESA (Engage, Study, Activate) to offer structural flexibility beyond rigid PPP:

  • Engage: Activating affect, schema, and curiosity.
  • Study: Explicit focus on language construction (grammar, vocabulary, phonology).
  • Activate: Communicative tasks where learners use any language they know.

3. Task-Based Cycle (Jane Willis)

Moves focus away from pre-selected grammar structures:

  1. Pre-Task: Introducing topic, task goal, and activating schema.
  2. Task Cycle: Task execution in pairs/groups -> Planning report -> Public Report to class.
  3. Language Focus: Analysis of language used during task -> Targeted Practice.

4. Scrivener’s ARC Model

James Scrivener categorizes lesson components into:

  • A (Authentic): Using language for real communication without explicit form control.
  • R (Restricted): Language practice with tight form constraints.
  • C (Clarification): Explicit focus on structural rules and language mechanics.

In the classroom

Teacher educators evaluate framework selection against lesson goals during observations:

  1. In Formal Lesson Planning: Explicitly label the structural framework selected (PPP, TBL, Test-Teach-Test, ESA) and justify why it fits the target language item.
  2. On Observed Lessons: Avoid turning a Task-Based lesson into a disguised PPP lesson by pre-teaching the target grammar right before the pre-task phase.
  3. Mentor Feedback: Observers look for logical transition staging—ensuring each stage builds cognitively on the previous stage.

Practical Classroom Application

Framework Selection Decision Matrix

Learning Objective Recommended Framework Pedagogical Rationale
Introducing a discrete low-level structural item (e.g., Past Continuous) to elementary learners. PPP (Presentation, Practice, Production) High scaffold support; clear transition from controlled to free production.
Diagnosing intermediate learners’ existing knowledge before explicit focus. Test-Teach-Test (TTT) / Boomerang ESA Prevents over-explanation; targets exact gap in interlanguage.
Fostering real-world problem solving and pragmatic negotiation. Task-Based Cycle (Willis) Meaningful task drives acquisition; grammar addressed incidentally post-task.

Quick check

In Jeremy Harmer's ESA framework, what sequence characterizes a 'Boomerang' lesson structure?

Correct.

Quick check

What happens during the 'Language Focus' stage of Jane Willis's Task-Based Learning framework?

Correct.

Reflection & Further Reading

Reflective Question

Do you default to a standard PPP framework for every lesson, or do you vary your structures using Test-Teach-Test and Task-Based cycles?

Key Reference Areas

  • Willis, J. — A Framework for Task-Based Learning.
  • Harmer, J. — How to Teach English (Chapter 4).
  • Scrivener, J. — Learning Teaching (Chapter 6: “Planning”).