5.1 Lesson Planning Frameworks: PPP, ESA & SMART Objectives

5.1 Lesson Planning Frameworks: PPP, ESA & SMART Objectives

Purpose of Systematic Lesson Planning

Systematic lesson planning transforms broad curricular goals into coherent learning experiences. In ELT, planning fulfills five vital functions:

1. Pedagogical Coherence: Connects every task to an explicit communicative aim.
2. Cognitive Scaffolding: Guides learners from structured input to autonomous communicative output.
3. Pacing and Timing: Balances interactive collaboration with reflective processing.
4. Cognitive Load Reduction: Pre-determining routines frees working memory to monitor learner language.
5. Reflective Benchmark: Provides an objective baseline for post-lesson evaluation.

Presentation, Practice, and Production (PPP)

The Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP) model is a structural paradigm in language teaching for introducing discrete grammar, lexis, or functional exponents.

• Presentation Stage: The teacher introduces the target item in context (visuals, dialogues), highlighting Form (syntax), Meaning (semantics), and Pronunciation (phonology), verified through concept checking questions.
• Practice Stage (Controlled): Learners practice the structure through restricted exercises (drills, transformations, gap-fills) to build accuracy and automaticity.
• Production Stage (Free): Learners deploy language in open-ended communicative tasks (role-plays, simulations, debates) prioritizing fluency over mechanical accuracy, while the teacher notes errors for delayed feedback.

Criticisms of PPP

While PPP offers clarity for novice teachers, applied linguists (Michael Lewis, Scott Thornbury) critique its assumption that learners master each presented item on the spot. SLA research shows interlanguage development is non-linear and recursive (Pienemann's Processability Theory), rather than a conveyor belt where discrete items are mastered immediately.

Harmer's ESA Framework

To provide greater pedagogical flexibility than linear PPP, Jeremy Harmer formulated the ESA (Engage, Study, Activate) framework:

• Engage (E): Sparks curiosity, activates schemata, and lowers the affective filter via visuals, stories, or discussion prompts.
• Study (S): Focuses on language construction—analyzing grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, or discourse patterns.
• Activate (A): Communicative tasks where students use any available linguistic resources to achieve authentic communicative goals.

ESA Sequencing Models

• Straight Arrows ($E \rightarrow S \rightarrow A$): Progresses linearly from engagement to study and communicative activation.
• Boomerang ($E \rightarrow A_1 \rightarrow S \rightarrow A_2$): Following engagement, learners attempt an unassisted task ($A_1$). The teacher diagnoses gaps, conducts targeted study ($S$), and directs re-activation ($A_2$).
• Patchwork ($E \rightarrow A \rightarrow S \rightarrow E \rightarrow S \rightarrow A$): An iterative sequence suited for advanced classes and task-based learning.

Backward Design (Understanding by Design)

Pioneered by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe, Backward Design (UbD) establishes outcomes first:

1. Stage 1: Identify Desired Results: Determine essential questions, communicative functions, and transfer goals.
2. Stage 2: Determine Acceptable Evidence: Establish assessment tasks and rubrics before designing learning activities.
3. Stage 3: Plan Learning Experiences: Design scaffolded instructional steps aligned directly with target assessments.

Backward Design prevents aimless activity-oriented instruction (engaging tasks without linguistic focus) and coverage-oriented teaching (marching through textbooks regardless of comprehension).

Lesson Planning Models Comparison

Formulating Measurable SMART Objectives

Effective language objectives articulate observable student performance rather than teacher activity, using the SWBAT formula (Students Will Be Able To...) guided by SMART benchmarks:

• Specific: Identifies the precise language skill, communicative function, and context.
• Measurable: Specifies observable action verbs and criteria for success.
• Achievable: Calibrated to the learners' Zone of Proximal Development.
• Relevant: Aligned with authentic communicative needs.
• Time-Bound: Attainable within the instructional period.

Bloom's Taxonomy Verbs for Language Learning

Educators replace vague internal verbs (know, understand) with measurable action verbs adapted from Bloom's Revised Taxonomy:

• Remembering: Recall, identify (SWBAT identify five irregular past tense forms in an audio dialogue).
• Understanding: Paraphrase, summarize (SWBAT summarize an editorial in three sentences).
• Applying: Role-play, interview (SWBAT interview a peer about travel plans using the future continuous).
• Analyzing: Compare, contrast (SWBAT contrast the register of formal and informal email requests).
• Evaluating: Justify, critique (SWBAT critique a peer proposal using an established rubric).
• Creating: Compose, negotiate (SWBAT negotiate a group budget and present a consensus plan).

SMART Objective Formulation Guide

Lesson Pacing and Contingency Planning

Exemplary lesson preparation anticipates cognitive and logistical challenges:

• Time Boxing: Allocate realistic time estimates for each stage with flexible buffer tasks.
• Anticipated Problems: Identify predictable phonological issues, L1 transfer, or conceptual confusion, pairing each with pre-planned board models or concept checks.
• Extension Tasks: Design tiered activities for fast finishers (e.g., rewriting dialogues from an alternate perspective) to maintain engagement.
• Contingencies: Prepare non-digital alternatives for potential technology failures.