Investigating the Efficacy of the Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) Teaching Model in Virtual Classrooms: Perspectives from Saudi University Instructors

Authors

  • Abdulghani Eissa Tour Mohammed

    Department of English Language & Literature, College of Languages & Humanities, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia
  • Mohammed AbdAlgane

    Department of English Language & Literature, College of Languages & Humanities, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia
  • Khalid Othman

    Department of English Language & Literature, College of Languages & Humanities, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia
  • Mohammed A. Saleh

    Department of Cybersecurity, College of Computer, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia
  • Mohamed Kamal Mustafa Alhaj

    Humanities Department, Ranyah University College, Taif University, Al Hawiyah P.O. Box: 11099, Saudi Arabia
  • Faris Salim Allehyani

    Department of Languages and Translation, University College of Umluj, University of Tabuk, Tabuk 71491, Saudi Arabia
  • Intisar Zakariya Ahmed Ibrahim

    Department of English Language & Literature, College of Languages & Humanities, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i11.11990
Received: 8 September 2025 | Revised: 28 September 2025 | Accepted: 29 September 2025 | Published Online: 30 October 2025

Abstract

The Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) model is the most popular approach for teaching English as a foreign language, with a focus on developing speaking skills, in particular. However, its structural sequence is widely known to be effective under normal classroom circumstances. It seems as if little empirical research has been conducted to test its effectiveness in virtual situations. The study attempts to identify the perception of Saudi university instructors toward the effectiveness of the PPP model in enhancing students’ engagement, confidence, and collaborative learning within online learning environments. An exploratory sequential mixed-method was used in an exploratory survey questionnaire that was sent out to 36 instructors who had tried using PPP in face-to-face, hybrid, and fully online classes. Results revealed that 91.6% had tried some modality of the PPP Model application, with the practice phase being considered the most problematic area for online implementation due to issues with interaction sustainability and technical barriers. However, teachers said that PPP makes students more engaged, facilitates peer support, and increases their willingness to speak English. Therefore, the study suggested several procedures for the overall improvement of English language skills. For instance, the study recommended customized training for teachers, interactive digital tools, diversified practice activities, and institutional endorsement of PPP as a method to be applied in its best scope in a virtual EFL classroom.

Keywords:

Presentation; Practice; Production (PPP); Virtual Classrooms; EFL Speaking Instruction; Student Engagement; Saudi University Instructors; E-Learning; Effective Approaches; Learning Techniques

References

[1] Harmer, J., 2015. The Practice of English Language Teaching, 5th ed. Pearson Education ESL: Harlow, UK.

[2] Nopiyadi, D., Apriani, R., Hamzah, A., et al., 2023. Exploring EFL Young Learners in Vocabulary Mastery Based on PPP Approach. Journal on Education. 5(4), 15003–15010.

[3] Shintani, N., 2011. Task-Based Language Teaching Versus Traditional Production-Based Instruction: Do They Result in Different Classroom Processes? University of Sydney Papers in TESOL. 6, 97–119.

[4] Dörnyei, Z., 1994. Teaching Conversational Skills Intensively: Course Content and Rationale. ELT Journal. 48(1), 40–49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/48.1.40

[5] Dörnyei, Z., 1995. On the Teachability of Communication Strategies. TESOL Quarterly. 29(1), 55–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3587805

[6] Jones, C., 2021. Conversation Strategies and Communicative Competence. Candlin & Mynard ePublishing Limited: Hong Kong. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47908/19

[7] Talandis, Jr., G., Stout, M., 2015. Getting EFL Students to Speak: An Action Research Approach. ELT Journal. 69(1), 11–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu037

[8] Kostoulas, A., 2012. Presentation, Practice and Production (PPP). Available from: https://achilleaskostoulas.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/ppp.pdf (cited 1 September 2025).

[9] McCarthy, M., McCarten, J., 2018. Now You're Talking! Practising Conversation in Second Language Learning. In: Jones, C. (ed.). Practice in Second Language Learning. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 7–29.

[10] Timmis, I., 2012. Spoken Language Research and ELT: Where Are We Now? ELT Journal. 66(4), 514–522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs042

[11] Nation, P., 2013. What Should Every EFL Teacher Know? Compass Publishing: Seoul, South Korea.

[12] Budiyanto, D., 2019. Using PPP (Presentation, Practice and Production) Strategy on Speaking Achievement. Journal of Language Education and Development (JLED). 1(2), 81–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52060/jled.v1i2.133

[13] Baker, J., Westrup, H., 2003. Essential Speaking Skills. Continuum International Publishing Group: London, UK.

[14] Shofiroh, N., Noviyanti, M., 2024. The Effectiveness of Presentation Practice Production (PPP) Model in Teaching Speaking to 8th Graders. Nusantara Educational Review. 2(2), 92–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55732/ner.v2i2.1438

[15] Purnomo, R., Giyoto, G., Rahmawan, G.A., et al., 2023. Fostering Collaborative Learning Through Presentation, Practice, and Production: Innovative Techniques for Teaching Grammar. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan (JIIP). 6(11), 9381–9385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54371/jiip.v6i11.3259

[16] Oryza, F., Asad, F., Soraya, I., 2022. Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP): Elicitation Technique Used by the English Teacher to Teach Grammar. FOSTER. 3(3), 149–159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24256/foster-jelt.v3i3.104

[17] Naranjo-Loaiza, M., Rodríguez-Arcila, M.A., Henao-Gil, A.C., 2019. Reinforcing Writing in EFL Through the Implementation of PPP [B.Sc. Thesis]. Universidad Católica de Oriente: Rionegro, Colombia.

[18] Widyantoro, A., 2019. Teaching Conditional Sentence Using Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) Technique in Vocational School. Culture, Literature, Linguistics, English Teaching Journal (CLLiENT). 1(2), 147–164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32699/CLLIENT.V1I02.952

[19] La'biran, R., 2022. Model of Teaching English Speaking Practiced for English Department Students at IAIN Palopo. Al-Ishlah. 14(2), 1839–1852. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v14i2.1085

[20] Wiyanah, S., Irawan, R., Kurniawan, J., 2021. Using PPP Method in the Process of Online Training and Strengthening EFL Teachers' Pedagogic Competence. In Proceedings of the Second UPY International Conference on Applied Science and Education (2nd UPINCASE) 2020, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 3–4 November 2020; pp. 1–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1823/1/012010

[21] Bui, T.L.D., Newton, J., 2021. PPP in Action: Insights From Primary EFL Lessons in Vietnam. Language Teaching for Young Learners. 3(1), 93–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/LTYL.19015.BUI

[22] Pratista, G.Y., 2023. Presentation Practice Production vs Task-Based Language Teaching: A Comparison of Two Teaching Templates. Edupedia. 7(1), 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24269/ed.v7i1.1726

[23] Ernati E. 2009. Improving Speaking Ability Through the "Triple P" Model. Lingua Didaktika: Jurnal Bahasa dan Pembelajaran Bahasa. 2(2), 32–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24036/ld.v2i2.3525

[24] Sari, A.S.P., Sembiring, R.K.B., 2019. Improving Students' Speaking Skill Through the Combination of Presentation, Practice, and Production (PPP) Method and Talking Stick Method. Jurnal Liner (Language Intelligence and Educational Research). 2(3), 68–76.

[25] Lasmiatun, I., Munir, S., 2019. Potential Future of PPP Paradigm on EFL Grammar Teaching: An Annotated Survey. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Education 2018 Teachers in the Digital Age, Sumatra, Indonesia, 12–13 September 2018; pp. 151–158.

[26] Maftoon, P., Sarem, S.N., 2015. A Critical Look at the Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) Approach: Challenges and Promises for ELT. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience. 3(4), 31–36.

[27] Zhao, Y., 2024. Exploring the Balance Between Fluency and Accuracy in Language Teaching Methodologies: A Comparative Analysis of PPP, TBL, CLT, and GTM. Journal of Education and Educational Research. 8(1), 127–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54097/19jkmq18

[28] Ye, H., 2008. Analysis of the Teaching of "Word Meaning Interpretation in Oral Communication" Under the PPP Model. Journal of Jinhua Vocational and Technical University. 8(3), 80–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-3699.2008.03.021 (in Chinese)

[29] Puren, C., 2024. A Critical Analysis of the Conception of Methodological Models in International English Didactics: The Example of the "PPP Model". Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado. 99(38.3), 29–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47553/rifop.v99i38.3.109208

[30] Zhaoyang, Y., 2010. A Study of PPP in the EFL Class and Some Indications on Its Applications. Foreign Language World. 2(23), 666–667. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-9960.2010.23.527 (in Chinese)

[31] Sato, R., 2010. Reconsidering the Effectiveness and Suitability of PPP and TBLT in the Japanese EFL Classroom. JALT Journal. 32(2), 189–201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTJJ32.2-4

[32] Jones, C., Carter, R., 2014. Teaching Spoken Discourse Markers Explicitly: A Comparison of III and PPP. International Journal of English Studies. 14(1), 37–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/IJES/14/1/161001

[33] Teoh, S.H., Joseph, J.B.Z.H., Shamsudin, N.M., et al., 2025. Students' Engagement in a Hybrid Classroom: A Comparison Between Face-to-Face and Virtual Environments. Cogent Education. 12(1), 2451497. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2451497

[34] Yu, H., Shi, G., Li, J., et al., 2022. Analyzing the Differences of Interaction and Engagement in a Smart Classroom and a Traditional Classroom. Sustainability. 14(13), 8184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138184

[35] Ashokkumar, N., Venkatramana, P., Arun, V., et al., 2024. A Comparative Study on Student Engagement and Achievement in Online Versus Traditional Classroom Instruction. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations. 38(2), 34–46.

[36] Sundar, S., 2023. Student Engagement and Achievement in Online Versus Traditional Classroom Instruction: An Analysis. International Journal of Advanced Research. 11(9), 1012–1027.

[37] Pourabedin, Z., Biglari, V., 2024. Student Engagement in the Post-Pandemic Virtual Classroom. In: Carbonara, D.D., Tomei, L.A. (eds.). Instructional Technology Theory in the Post-Pandemic Era. IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA. pp. 148–171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-7645-4.ch006

[38] Ladia, A.M., Landman, D., Peri, M., 2023. Reimagining the Virtual Classroom: Enhancing Engagement and Student-Teacher Interaction in the Digital Age. In Proceedings of the C&C '23: Creativity and Cognition, Virtual, 19–21 June 2023; pp. 384–386. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3591196.3596617

[39] Jin, K.H., 2022. Student Engagement During Virtual vs. Face-to-Face Active Learning Activities in Three IT Courses. In Proceedings of the SIGITE '22: The 23rd Annual Conference on Information Technology Education, Chicago, IL, USA, 21–24 September 2022; pp. 150–156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3537674.3554752

[40] Hassan, S., 2021. Student Engagement in Virtual Classrooms. Asian Journal of Allied Health Sciences. 5(2), 1–2.

[41] Parsons, C.S., 2024. Erasing the Line Between Students and Instructors: The Influence of Classrooms and Online Learning Spaces on Student Engagement. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 24(4), 22–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v24i4.35301

[42] Sarker, P.C., Nur-E-Alam Siddique, M., Sultana, S., et al., 2023. Comparison Between Traditional Classroom and Flipped Classroom on Student's Engagement and Satisfaction. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research. 4(2), 624–635. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.02.29

[43] Owen, H., 2014. Putting the PLE Into PLD: Virtual Professional Learning and Development. Journal of Educators Online. 11(2), 1–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2014.2.1

[44] Owen, H., 2011. Changing Minds and Transforming Professional Development...Virtually. In Proceedings of the 2011: ASCILITE 2011 Conference Proceedings: Changing Demands, Changing Directions, Tasmania, Australia, 4–7 December 2011; pp. 958–962. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14742/apubs.2011.1816

[45] Henderson, M., 2004. Sustaining the Professional Development of Teachers Through a Virtual Learning Environment: Promoting Effective Teaching With ICT. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2004, Lugano, Switzerland, 21–26 June 2004; pp. 3061–3066.

[46] Anderson, N., Henderson, M., 2004. e-PD: Blended Models of Sustaining Teacher Professional Development in Digital Literacies. E-Learning and Digital Media. 1(3), 383–394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2304/ELEA.2004.1.3.4

[47] Mintii, I.S., 2023. Blended Learning for Teacher Training: Benefits, Challenges, and Recommendations. Education Dimension. 9, 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31812/ed.581

[48] Arellano, R.M., Méndez, R.M., Velázquez, C.C., et al., 2016. Impact of Teacher Training in Virtual Learning Environments as a Catalytic Strategy for Technological Inclusion in the Classroom. Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnología en Educación y Educación en Tecnología. 17, 86–94. (in Spanish)

[49] Al Fraidan, A.A., 2024. The Enhanced Adaptive PPP Model: A Novel Framework for Revolutionizing Test-Taking Strategies in Language Assessment. Forum for Linguistic Studies. 7(1), 298–312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i1.7918

[50] Kostolanyova, K., 2016. Adaptation of Personalized Education in E-Learning Environment. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium, SETE 2016, Held in Conjunction with ICWL 2016, Rome, Italy, 26–29 October 2016; pp. 433–442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52836-6_46

[51] Villegas-Ch, W., García-Ortiz, J., Sánchez-Viteri, S., 2024. Personalization of Learning: Machine Learning Models for Adapting Educational Content to Individual Learning Styles. IEEE Access. 12, 121114–121130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2024.3452592

[52] Er-Radi, H., Aammou, S., Jdidou, A., 2023. Personalized Learning Through Adaptive Content Modification. Conhecimento & Diversidade. 15(39), 263–275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18316/rcd.v15i39.11153

[53] Falconer, L., Frutos-Pérez, M., 2007. Accommodating Multiple Learning Styles and Abilities in a Large-Scale Online Learning Resource. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference of the Association for Learning Technology (ALT-C 2007): Beyond Contro 2007, Nottingham, UK, 4–6 September 2007; pp. 47–60.

[54] Vanegas, C.V., Puerta, J.E.A., Ceballos, M.N., et al., 2024. Personalized Learning: An Adaptive Approach Based on the VARK Model to Improve Distance Education. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental. 18(12), e010257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n12-046

[55] Surur, A.M., Ulfa, S., Soepriyanto, Y., et al., 2024. Personalized Learning in a Digital Environment. Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research. 2(1), 79–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30762/ijomer.v2i1.2737

[56] Idowu, E., 2024. Personalized Learning: Tailoring Instruction to Individual Student Needs. Preprints.org. preprints202411.0863.v1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202411.0863.v1

Downloads

How to Cite

Tour Mohammed, A. E., AbdAlgane, M., Othman, K., Saleh , M. A., Mustafa Alhaj, M. K., Allehyani, F. S., & Ahmed Ibrahim, I. Z. (2025). Investigating the Efficacy of the Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) Teaching Model in Virtual Classrooms: Perspectives from Saudi University Instructors. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(11), 1550–1569. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i11.11990

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 11 (November 2025)

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 Abdulghani Eissa Tour Mohammed, Mohammed AbdAlgane, Khalid Othman, Mohammed A. Saleh , Mohamed Kamal Mustafa Alhaj, Faris Salim Allehyani, Intisar Zakariya Ahmed Ibrahim

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.