Are the production lines running?


Lately I’m a little troubled by the word ‘production’.  The longer I teach and the more I read, the less sure I become about even the simplest terms in ELT.  When exactly does production start?  What is the difference between practice and production?  Can true beginners ever truly engage in production?  When I began working in ELT 13 years ago, I was a pretty big fan of Krashen.  I bought into the idea that mere repetition, or parroting, wasn’t production.  Now I’m not so sure.  And I get less sure the more I work with the lowest level students at my school.

Regardless of methodology, production often seems to be linked with autonomy.  But for Penny Ur (1991, p. 19), practice is, “the rehearsal of certain behaviors with the objective of consolidating learning and improving performance,” even when carried out completely autonomously.  So the line between practice and production might have less to do with what the students are doing, and more to do with the goals of the activity.

Or maybe I’m just getting lost in a maze of semantics here. Still, I think there is something crucial about understanding what and what does not constitute production.  I believe that my students need a chance to engage in production activities and that these activities can help them to notice and reorder their interlanguage at the phonological, semantic, and pragmatic levels.  But recently, when I reflect on what my students said and wrote in class, especially in my beginner classes, I’m like a boarder guard who has suddenly forgotten how to read the visa stamps from neighboring countries.

In my first year classes, I have a set text with readings that usually consist of 50 words or so.  I try and get students to interact with the text as often as possible.  I’ve written about some of the exercises I use in class, including simple listening activities, reading with a thin strip of paper set down the middle of the text to create a cloze activity, and shadowing of key words while listening to a partner read.  I’ve also had students start reading out the text for a set amount of time and marking where in the text they could reach after 1 minute, again after 45 seconds and again after 30 seconds (thanks to Rachel Roberts for the basis of this activity).  I am also pretty hep on having students convert declarative sentences from the text into interrogatory statements and then ask the question form of the sentence to a partner who has to find the correct response from the text and reply appropriately.

So does the declarative/interrogative exercise count as a production activity?  Is it really any different from the gap grammar exercises which have been so routinely bashed as artificial and disconnected from real language use?  Does simply placing the exercise within an interactional framework somehow change the essential nature of what the students are doing and drag it onto the land of production?

And how about those reading aloud activities?  Is that really production?  When I wander around the classroom and help students with their pronunciation, I think it does qualify as production.  And when students are aware enough of their own reading to reread sentences which give them trouble the first time around, I feel like that also would qualify as production as well.  But what about the student who reads aloud to themselves, but is merely going through the motions, just mechanically reproducing what’s in the text?

I was twittering back and forth with Ceri Jones (@cerirhiannon) the other day and she mentioned that perhaps the threshold of production depends on the type of guidance provided by the teacher, the number of choices open to a student, and a sense of “need to produce.”

Which got me thinking about my Drama classes.  In one sense, students’ choices are extremely limited when they are rehearsing lines for a play.  The language used is set down for them.  On the other hand, they have choice in the gestures they use, the tone of voice, the pacing of their lines and a whole host of other areas.  If they are actually paying attention to any one of these things as the work to deliver their lines, then I would have no problem seeing their scene practice as a form of production.  In fact, most of the activities I use in my class, including controlled dialogues, dictogloss, simple surveys, and any activity during which the students are actively focused on pronunciation are considered production by Paul Nation (2009).  But, regardless of the activity type, if the students are merely saying the words, it certainly doesn’t feel like production to me.

And perhaps the word, ‘feel’ is what trips me up.  Like so many other things in language teaching, production seems to depend on the consciousness of the student, the black box of the students’ thoughts, intent, and level of awareness.  Perhaps that’s one of our more important roles as a teacher, to feel out if a student is truly producing language, and if not, to find a way to nudge them in such a way that what they say becomes something more than just the sum of their words.


Nation, I.S.P. and Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL Listening and Speaking. New York: Rutledge.

Ur, P. (1991). A Course in Language Teaching: practice and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


7 thoughts on “Are the production lines running?

  1. A semantic maze indeed, but also a good question – we all need to be able to define our aims for the students. Basically, for my money, there are two kinds of “production”. One is physiological: production is simply when the mouth opens and sounds/words come out. The other is a teaching term ELTs use, stemming from the old PPP lesson shape. In this context we think of "practice" as controlled, targeting a particular language aspect, maybe teacher-led, and "production" as something freer, where students get to make their own meaning using whatever language resources they have available. If you use this definition, reading aloud, oral grammar-based information exchange, or dramatic reading is still “practice” of pronunciation/grammar/intonation etc (ELT perspective) even though the sts are “producing” language (physiological perspective). But even if we stick with the ELT perspective, it’s still important to see practice-production as a cline, not just as one or the other. Some tasks eg a grammar gapfill in the workbook are clearly at one end, but when you adapt tasks to make them more interactive and give students room to interpret and add some personal elements, you are heading towards the production side of the cline. Perhaps it would help to think of practice as a subset of production, just more restricted, and which contributes to more successful production. Mmm. Thanks for helping me procrastinate today 🙂


  2. Sophia,If this is your idea of procrastrination, I think you just snatched the crown away from one M.G. Thank you for helping to bring some clarity to my scrammbled thoughts. I think you really got at what this post was all about, mainly some anxiety about my, "aims for the students." Lately I'm feeling a little sheepish about the lack of class exercises/activities on the more productiony side of the cline. But part of me knows that the work students are doing on the physiological side of production and the more practicey side of the cline are pretty crucial to their language development.Thanks again for helping me to frame my worries. I know it will let me do a better job of evaluating what is going on in my classroom.Kevin


  3. Great food for thought. I love these kinds of questions. I think Sophia has hit the nail on the head by describing it as a cline. And sometimes the same activity might be further along the production cline (production line?!) for one student than for another, depending on how much it represents a real attempt to make their own meaning.


  4. Hi Rachel,Glad you stopped in. And I'm happily walking away with the idea that different students can be at different points in the cline during the same activity. It's an idea really worth tucking into my pocket for my next class. Should help me make more room for students who are attempting to make their own meaning.Kevin


  5. Reblogged this on ELT Rants, Reviews, and Reflections and commented:
    Here is a (June 2012) post from recent WordPress immigrant Kevin Stein. You can check out all of this stuff at and I highly recommend doing so. I chose this specific post to reblog (and by doing so welcome Kevin to the WordPress cartel) because I think he raises some great questions and points and also because I found the comments to be helpful and insightful. Enjoy!


    • Mike,

      Thanks for the re-blog. It’s nice to have an older post dusted off. And I remember after I posted this and Sophia and Rachel replied, how much clearer everything suddenly seemed. I think this was one of the posts that convinced me of the power that blogging had for helping me get involved in real and ongoing conversations.

      And thanks for the support as I switched over to WP (without even once saying anything along the lines of I-told-you-so).



  6. Hmmmm interesting.
    I tend to agree with Sophia. If viewed from the ELT – specifically from PPP – perspective, then production is not as controlled as the practice stage. By this standard, some of the activities you mention, such the declarative/interrogative exercise, will not qualify as production. It is controlled practice.

    Clearly, Nation uses the word “production” – according to Sophia’s distinction – in the physiological sense. Another word for production in this sense can be output which also includes written output/production. I guess Nation doesn’t mention it because, judging by the reference, the article is about listening and speaking.

    One final note about memorising lines when rehearsing from a play. Another vocabulary researcher, Paul Meara, for example, considers memorising whole texts a perfectly legitimate vocabulary learning activity. I think learning dialogues or whole scenes from a movie by heart is extremely beneficial for promoting both fluency, vocabulary and grammar. Now whether it constitutes practice or production – that’s for another comment or even a whole blog post! 🙂

    Thank you for making us all think with this entry!
    Sad to see you leave Blogger though…



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s