PPP, ESA & TBLT
Three Lesson Frameworks
Three of the most-discussed lesson structures in ELT. They emerged at different times from different theoretical traditions, but all answer the same question: how do you shape sixty minutes so students leave knowing more than they came in with? Pick a framework, or compare all three.
Pick a framework — the page below adapts
No. 01 — Definition
What is it?
Task-Based Language Teaching structures lessons around meaningful tasks — real or pedagogic — that students complete using whatever language they have. Language emerges from the demands of the task, not from a pre-planned target. Originated with Prabhu’s Bangalore Project (1980s) and developed by Willis, Ellis and Long.
“A task is an activity in which meaning is primary, learners are not given other people’s meanings to regurgitate, and the assessment is in terms of outcome.”— David Nunan
Canonical cycle (Willis 1996): Pre-task → Task → Planning → Report → Language focus → Practice. The form-focused work comes after students have wrestled with meaning.
Presentation, Practice, Production is a three-stage lesson structure that has been the default model of CELTA training since the 1970s. The teacher introduces a target item, gives students controlled practice, then opens up to freer production.
“PPP is a model of teaching, not of learning.”— Scott Thornbury (a sympathetic critique)
The three stages: Presentation — introduce the target language in context, check meaning, drill form. Practice — controlled exercises (gap-fills, transformations, drills). Production — freer communicative tasks where students use the target.
Engage, Study, Activate is Jeremy Harmer’s reframing of PPP — same elements, much more flexible sequencing. Three phases that can be combined in three different orderings depending on the lesson goal.
“ESA isn’t a different methodology. It’s a more honest description of how good lessons actually flow.”— Adapted from Harmer (2007)
The three elements: Engage — activate emotion, curiosity, interest. Study — focus on form and meaning. Activate — use the language in unconstrained communication. Three sequences: Straight Arrow (E→S→A, ? PPP), Boomerang (E→A→S→A, try-fail-learn-retry), Patchwork (mix as needed).
TBLTTask-led
Lessons built around meaningful tasks. Language emerges from the task; form-focus comes after.
Cycle: Pre-task → Task → Plan → Report → Language focus → Practice (Willis).
PPPForm-led
Three-stage lesson: introduce target language, controlled practice, freer production. The CELTA default.
Stages: Presentation → Practice → Production.
ESAFlexible
Harmer’s reframing: same elements as PPP but freely sequenced. Three orderings: Straight Arrow, Boomerang, Patchwork.
Elements: Engage — Study — Activate.
No. 02 — Prerequisites
What you need before you start.
Teacher
- Comfortable with emergent language
- Reactive teaching skills (diagnose during the report)
- Willing to abandon a lesson plan mid-flight
- Strong classroom management for small-group work
Students
- Generally B1+ for full tasks; A2 with heavy scaffolding
- Tolerance for ambiguity and “messy” English
- Willingness to risk inaccuracy in pursuit of meaning
- Mixed-level groups can work — tasks self-differentiate
Materials
- Tasks (not exercises) — gaps, problems, decisions
- Authentic input texts where possible
- Audio/video for pre-task contextualisation
- Optional language reference for post-task focus
Time
- Minimum 60 minutes for a full cycle
- Tasks need uninterrupted task-time (15-20 min)
- Don’t try TBLT in 30-minute slots
- Plan 2-3× longer than a PPP equivalent
Teacher
- Clear concept-checking ability (CCQs)
- Comfort presenting and modelling
- Strong elicitation skills
- Boardwork — timelines, charts, form tables
Students
- Works at all levels — A1 upwards
- Students who like clear structure
- Useful in monolingual L1 classes
- Predictable for exam-prep cohorts
Materials
- A clear, pre-decided target language item
- Coursebook usually structured this way
- Practice exercises (gap fills, drills)
- A communicative production prompt
Time
- Works in 45-60 minute slots
- Standard CELTA lesson timing
- Each stage can fill 15-20 min
- Don’t let presentation eat the lesson
Teacher
- Flexible — willing to switch plan mid-lesson
- Diagnostic ear for student errors
- Comfortable in non-linear lessons
- Confident with multiple sequences
Students
- Open to varied lesson shapes
- Engaged enough to handle Activate-first sequences
- Tolerant of being “thrown in”
- Useful in any level if sequence is chosen well
Materials
- Adaptable, not one-shape-only
- Multiple Engage hooks ready
- Study materials chunked into mini-modules
- A repertoire of Activate tasks
Time
- Straight Arrow ? PPP timing (45-60 min)
- Boomerang needs 60+ min
- Patchwork suits 90+ min lessons
- Don’t use Patchwork in short slots
TBLT
- B1+ ideal; A2 with scaffolding
- 60+ min lessons
- Reactive teacher
- Tasks not exercises
PPP
- Any level, A1+
- 45-60 min works
- Pre-decided target
- Coursebook-friendly
ESA
- Any level (sequence-dependent)
- Variable timing
- Flexible teacher
- Adaptable materials
No. 03 — Ideas
Where the lessons come from.
Information-gap tasks
Each student has different information; they must talk to share and complete a whole. Maps, schedules, profiles.
Decision-making
Rank, choose, plan. “Pick the best holiday for this couple from these three options.”
Problem-solving
Logic puzzles, escape-room style problems, ethical dilemmas.
Comparison
Spot the difference, two photos to compare, find what’s changed.
Listing
Brainstorm, categorise, prioritise. Low-pressure entry into TBLT.
Personal experience
Share a story, narrate an event, recommend something based on personal taste.
Discrete grammar
“Today: second conditional.” A single grammar point gets the full PPP treatment.
Vocabulary sets
Themed lexis (food, weather, transport) introduced visually, practised, then deployed in role-play.
Functions
Apologising, complaining, giving advice. Strong for service English and exam speaking parts.
Pronunciation features
Word stress, weak forms, intonation patterns. PPP works particularly well here.
Lexical chunks
“On the other hand”, “what’s more”, “if I were you”. Present, drill, then deploy.
Skills micro-points
Skimming a text, polite interruption, signposting in a presentation.
Straight Arrow ? PPP
Engage with a hook, study a target, activate in a freer task. Default lesson shape.
Boomerang lessons
Try a task, identify gaps, teach those gaps, retry the task. Ideal for review or diagnostic lessons.
Patchwork lessons
Long lessons (90+ min) that mix elements as needs arise. Best for mixed-skill projects.
Engage hooks
Image, controversial statement, song clip, thought experiment, personal anecdote.
Study chunks
Mini-grammar inputs (10 min), focused vocab inputs, pronunciation drills, error correction stops.
Activate tasks
Discussion, role-play, debate, presentation, written response, creative production.
TBLT
Task types: info-gap, decision-making, problem-solving, comparison, listing, personal experience.
The lesson is the task.
PPP
Topic types: discrete grammar, vocab sets, functions, pronunciation, lexical chunks.
The target is the lesson.
ESA
Lesson shapes: Straight Arrow, Boomerang, Patchwork.
The sequence is the lesson.
No. 04 — Examples
One worked lesson, dissected.
Topic: Planning a 3-day trip to London — B1 group, 75 minutes.
Pre-task (10 min)
Show photos of London landmarks. Students discuss what they already know. Brainstorm vocabulary on the board (no pre-teaching).
Task (20 min)
Pairs receive a budget, traveller profile, and tourist info. They plan a 3-day itinerary. Teacher monitors but doesn’t correct.
Planning (10 min)
Pairs prepare to present their plan to the class — rehearse, polish.
Report (15 min)
Each pair presents. Class votes on best itinerary. Teacher writes useful and inaccurate language on the board.
Language focus (15 min)
Mini-lesson on the most common error (e.g. “I will going to…”) + useful chunks (“we’d recommend”, “if you have time”). Practice drills.
Practice (5 min)
Quick drill or repeat task with the corrected language.
The class survey
Each student gets a different question to ask: “Who in class is most likely to travel solo?”, “Who would survive a week without their phone?”, “Who would make the best teacher?” Students mingle, ask everyone, then groups compare data and write a 60-word class profile. The report stage is the profile being read aloud.
The detective task
Pairs receive a one-page “case file” — a fictional crime, four suspect statements (each contradictory in places), a timeline, and a map. They must agree on the culprit and justify their choice. The report is a courtroom-style closing argument.
Topic: Present Perfect for life experiences — B1 group, 60 minutes.
Presentation (20 min)
Photo of a famous traveller. “Has she been to Antarctica?” Elicit form. Build a timeline on the board. CCQ: “Is she there now? Do we know when?” Drill the form.
Practice (20 min)
Gap fill: “She ___ (visit) seven continents.” Transformations: “I went to Paris last year → I have been to Paris.” Pair drill: students ask each other “Have you ever…?”
Production (20 min)
“Find someone who…” mingle: students walk around asking “Have you ever ridden a horse / been to Asia / eaten sushi?” Then groups discuss: “Who has had the most interesting life?”
The same target (Present Perfect) gets three different levels of support. By production, the form should be automatic enough to deploy in real-time conversation.
Weather vocabulary
Twelve weather words built from images. Students label, match, then predict tomorrow’s weather for three cities. The production is a 30-second TV-style weather forecast for their hometown, recorded on phones for self-review.
Polite requests
Functional structures: “Could you…?”, “Would you mind…?”, “Do you think you could…?” Practice via a role-play card swap (each student has a request to make and a response role). Production is a real classroom request task: students ask classmates for items and get a stamp on a card.
Topic: Past Simple via Boomerang — B1 group, 75 minutes.
Engage (10 min)
Show 3 dramatic news photos from last week. “What happened?” Students predict in pairs.
Activate 1 (15 min)
Pairs tell each other “the most interesting thing that happened to me last weekend.” Teacher monitors and notes errors.
Study (20 min)
Teacher diagnoses: most common error is irregular past forms. Mini-presentation of a 12-verb list, drilling, gap-fill in pairs.
Activate 2 (20 min)
Re-tell weekend story to a different partner. Listener counts irregular pasts used correctly. Class shares the most-used verb.
Engage close (10 min)
Show one of the original news photos again. Pairs write a 4-sentence caption using the new verbs.
Travel vocabulary via Straight Arrow
A standard ESA Straight Arrow lesson on travel vocabulary. Engage with a personal travel story, study the 15 target words via image-matching, activate by planning a fictional weekend break in pairs.
News reading via Patchwork
A Patchwork lesson on a current-affairs article. Multiple cycles of E-S-A as the lesson responds to what students need: discuss the headline, read for gist, study unfamiliar lexis as it surfaces, discuss the issue, return for a closer reading, write a brief response.
TBLT
Lesson: 3-day London trip plan.
Shape: Pre-task → Task → Plan → Report → Language focus → Practice.
Language target: emerges from student errors during the task.
PPP
Lesson: Present Perfect for life experiences.
Shape: Presentation → Practice → Production.
Language target: set in advance — Present Perfect.
ESA (Boomerang)
Lesson: Past Simple via weekend stories.
Shape: Engage → Activate → Study → Activate → Engage.
Language target: diagnosed mid-lesson.
No. 05 — Dos & don’ts
What good practice looks like.
✓Do
- Let language emerge. Don’t pre-teach the target.
- Use planning time — it raises the quality of the report dramatically.
- Save form-focus for the end. Diagnose what students actually needed.
- Use real outcomes (a vote, a chosen plan, a solved puzzle) so the task has a point.
- Monitor without interrupting. Note errors silently.
×Don’t
- Don’t pre-teach the “target language” — it short-circuits the whole approach.
- Don’t over-correct during the task. Save it for language focus.
- Don’t confuse a fun activity with a task. Task = real outcome.
- Don’t skip the report. Without it, students never feel accountable.
- Don’t try TBLT in 30-min slots. The cycle needs space.
✓Do
- Use clear context for presentation, not isolated rules.
- CCQ (concept-check) before drilling form. “Is it now? Does it continue?”
- Make production genuinely communicative — not just unprompted controlled practice.
- Build in personalisation. The production should feel real.
- Plan a backup activity if production collapses early.
×Don’t
- Don’t spend 80% on presentation. Cut it brutally.
- Don’t skip production. The lesson is incomplete without it.
- Don’t treat practice as the goal — it’s a stepping stone.
- Don’t use PPP for skills lessons. It’s a language-item structure.
- Don’t pretend it’s “communicative” if production is just gap-fill in disguise.
✓Do
- Label your sequence. Know if you’re running Straight Arrow, Boomerang or Patchwork.
- Use Boomerang when you don’t know the gap. It diagnoses for you.
- Mix sequences across the week for variety.
- Engage emotionally, not just intellectually. The hook matters.
- Reuse Engage at the close for narrative closure.
×Don’t
- Don’t treat ESA as just “PPP renamed”. Embrace flexible sequencing.
- Don’t skip Engage. Without buy-in, Study and Activate flop.
- Don’t use Patchwork in short lessons. It needs 90+ min.
- Don’t confuse Patchwork with chaos. There’s still a plan.
- Don’t expect novice teachers to start with Boomerang. Train Straight Arrow first.
TBLT
- Don’t pre-teach
- Plan time before report
- Real outcomes
- Form-focus last
PPP
- CCQ before drilling
- Cut presentation
- Make production real
- Don’t skip production
ESA
- Label your sequence
- Engage emotionally
- Boomerang for review
- Patchwork needs time
No. 06 — What ifs
The tricky moments.
TBLT
- L1 use? Build accountability.
- Task collapses? Have rescue sub-task.
- PPP coursebook? Reverse the sequence.
- Low level? Visual scaffolding.
PPP
- They know it? Switch to TTT.
- Silent production? Add scaffolding.
- Won’t sit still? Elicit, don’t explain.
- Doesn’t fit? Switch frameworks.
ESA
- Which sequence? Default Straight Arrow.
- Engage flop? Have a backup.
- Study too long? Cut it.
- Patchwork chaos? Pre-map modules.
No. 07 — Variations
Branches and cousins.
Strong TBLTno pre-teaching
Long & Crookes’ version — tasks are the entire syllabus. Form-focus only when triggered by error. Hardest to implement.
Weak TBLTlight pre-teaching
Willis-style. Some pre-task vocabulary or input scaffolding allowed; tasks remain the core.
Task-Supported Language Teachingtasks added to PPP
Use tasks as Production stage in an otherwise PPP lesson. Common compromise in coursebook-driven schools.
Project-Based Learningextended TBLT
Tasks scaled up to multi-lesson projects. Outcomes are real-world artefacts — podcasts, posters, presentations.
TTT — Test, Teach, Test
What it is. A diagnostic-led variation of PPP. Instead of presenting a target language item up front, the teacher opens with a task that tests whether students can already do it. The teacher diagnoses gaps from the result, teaches the gap-relevant language, and students re-test with a parallel task. The lesson shape is back-loaded with what PPP front-loads.
When to use it. Three scenarios make TTT the right call: (1) you suspect students already know the target language and a presentation would waste time; (2) you’re teaching a review lesson and need to find the gaps before you fill them; (3) you have a mixed-level class and want to discover what each student actually needs before committing to a presentation.
Worked example. Modal verbs of speculation (B2). Test: students look at three crime-scene photos and write what they think happened. Teach: teacher boards three sentences from student writing — one with a strong modal (“must”), one with weak (“might”), one missing the modal entirely — elicits the difference, drills the form. Re-test: three new photos, students write again, then compare with their first attempt. The improvement is visible to the student.
Dos: design the two test tasks to be genuinely parallel (same difficulty, same skill demand). Make the diagnosis explicit (“I noticed everyone used maybe — let’s look at modals.”) The visible improvement between Test 1 and Test 2 is the lesson’s payoff.
Don’ts: don’t make Test 1 so easy that everyone passes (you’ll have nothing to teach). Don’t skip the second Test — the comparison is the point. Don’t use TTT when there isn’t really anything to diagnose; sometimes a clean PPP is honest.
Other PPP variations
ESAEngage-Study-Activate
Harmer’s flexible reframing of PPP. Same elements, freely sequenced. See its tab.
PPP+Padd Personalisation
Add a final personalisation stage where students apply the target to their own lives. Helps retention and reduces the “production-collapses” problem.
Modified PPPSkehan’s three phases
Pre-task → Task → Post-task. Functionally similar to TBLT but presented as PPP-friendly — meets traditional planning expectations while reversing the form-focus order.
OHEObserve-Hypothesise-Experiment
An inductive cousin: students observe input, hypothesise rules, experiment with output. Closer to TBLT in spirit but retains a teacher-led structure.
Straight ArrowE → S → A
Linear, like PPP. The default for new content. Comfortable for both teacher and students.
BoomerangE → A → S → A
Try-fail-learn-retry. Teacher diagnoses needs from the first Activate, then teaches, then students retry. Strong for review.
Patchworkmultiple ESA cycles
Long lessons mixing elements as needs arise. Closest to “real classroom” feel. Needs careful pre-planning.
ESA + Reflectmodern adaptation
Add a Reflect element at the end — metacognitive awareness, what was learned, what’s next.
TBLT
- Strong TBLT (Long)
- Weak TBLT (Willis)
- Task-Supported (compromise)
- Project-Based (scaled up)
PPP
- TTT (diagnostic-led)
- ESA (flexible reframe)
- PPP+P (add personalisation)
- Skehan’s modified PPP
ESA
- Straight Arrow (? PPP)
- Boomerang (? TTT)
- Patchwork (mixed)
- + Reflect (modern)
No. 08 — Critical view
The honest caveats.
Fluency at the expense of accuracy
Skehan’s “trade-off hypothesis”: when learners focus on meaning, accuracy and complexity suffer. Without disciplined post-task focus, TBLT can produce confident but inaccurate speakers.
Hard to assess
Outcomes are messy. There’s no clean “students learnt the second conditional today” tickbox — which makes TBLT unpopular with administrators and exam-driven schools.
See: Swan (2005) critique
Unsuitable for low levels?
Critics argue A1-A2 students lack the language to even attempt meaningful tasks. Defenders point to scaffolding and very narrow tasks. The truth is in between.
Coursebooks haven’t caught up
Most major coursebooks remain PPP-shaped. Pure TBLT teachers must adapt or build their own materials — a significant workload barrier.
The balanced view
TBLT works well for B1+ in well-resourced settings with confident teachers. It’s strongest as weak TBLT — some pre-teaching, real tasks, principled language focus. Pure strong TBLT is rare in practice and probably should be.
Behaviourist roots
PPP assumes language is learnt through habit formation — present, drill, deploy. Modern SLA research (Krashen, Long, Ellis) suggests learners don’t acquire language this neatly.
The “production” myth
The hidden assumption: that controlled practice will transfer cleanly to spontaneous production. Often it doesn’t. Students nail the gap fill and freeze in the role-play.
“A model of teaching, not learning”
Thornbury’s critique: PPP organises the teacher’s behaviour, not the learner’s process. Students don’t acquire language in three neat stages.
Thornbury (1999, 2017)
Reliable enough to survive
Yet PPP remains the CELTA default. Why? Because it’s predictable: novice teachers can plan it, students can follow it, observers can grade it. Predictability has value.
The balanced view
PPP is a teaching scaffold, not a learning theory. It works for novice teachers and discrete grammar points; it’s weak for skills, complex meaning, and advanced students. Use it with awareness of its limits, and graduate to ESA or TBLT as you mature.
“PPP rebranded”
The most common critique: ESA is just PPP with new labels and an option to reorder. Defenders say the reordering option is the whole point — and it changes everything.
Not empirically validated
Harmer’s framework is intuitive and battle-tested in the classroom but lacks the SLA research base of, say, TBLT. It’s a craft framework, not a research one.
Patchwork can degenerate
Without discipline, Patchwork lessons turn into “anything goes” — an excuse for under-planning. The flexibility cuts both ways.
Confusing for novices
Three sequences with overlapping logic is harder for trainees to internalise than the linear PPP. ESA shines for experienced teachers; novices need PPP first.
The balanced view
ESA is the framework most teachers actually use after a few years — whether they call it that or not. The flexibility matches real classroom dynamics. Treat it as a graduation, not an alternative: master Straight Arrow, then earn the right to Boomerang and Patchwork.
TBLT
Strengths: meaning-first, real tasks, evidence-based.
Weaknesses: messy assessment, hard for low levels, coursebook gap.
PPP
Strengths: predictable, trainable, fits coursebooks.
Weaknesses: behaviourist, production often fails, weak for skills.
ESA
Strengths: flexible, real-classroom feel, scales with experience.
Weaknesses: not research-grounded, can degenerate, hard for novices.
No framework is the answer. The good teacher knows three of them, picks deliberately, and changes mid-course when the evidence in the room demands it. The framework is a tool. The lesson is the goal.