Author(s)

Fengjunzi Wang ¹

Affiliation(s)

¹ Department of Foreign Languages, Hubei Business College, Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China

Corresponding Author

Fengjunzi Wang

ABSTRACT

Against the exam-oriented, teacher-dominated ESL context of Chinese universities with large non-English-major classes, this paper explores student-centered English teaching by examining classroom interaction dynamics and the PPP model. It analyzes the balanced allocation of Teacher Talking Time and Student Talking Time, the organization of individual, pair and group work, and flexible seating arrangements to boost student participation and communicative practice. The study elaborates the PPP teaching sequence and its flexible alternatives, advocating adaptive lesson sequencing instead of rigid linear procedures. It further integrates interactive strategies into different teaching stages to enhance classroom dynamics and learner autonomy. This conceptual research calls for teachers to act as facilitators and promoters to build inclusive, interactive English classrooms.

KEYWORDS

Student-centered ESL teaching; classroom interaction; PPP model; teacher talking time; student talking time; communicative language teaching

CITE THIS PAPER

Fengjunzi Wang. Student-Centered Teaching in College ESL Classrooms: PPP Model Implementation and Classroom Interaction Dynamics. Adult and Higher Education (2026). Vol. 8, No. 1, 117-123. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/aduhe.2026.080115.

REFERENCES

[1] Chan, K. N. (1981). Education for Chinese and Indochinese. Theory into Practice, 20(1), 35–44.
[2] Doe, J. (2020). The impact of instructional sequencing on student learning. Journal of Educational Theory, 45(2), 123–134.
[3] Gibran, K. (1991). The Prophet. Pan.
[4] Hall, G. (2011). Exploring English Language Teaching. Routledge.
[5] Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching (4th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.
[6] Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge University Press.
[7] Johnson, A., & Johnson, B. (2018). Aligning instructional sequences with cognitive development. Cognitive Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 205–218.
[8] Lightbown, M. P., & Spada, N. (1999). How Languages Are Learned (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
[9] Liu, J., & Jackson, J. (2023). Student engagement and motivation in language learning: A student-centered perspective. Modern Language Journal, 107(1), 10–29.
[10] Liu, M., & Jackson, J. (2008). An exploration of Chinese EFL learners' unwillingness to communicate and foreign language anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 92(1), 71–86.
[11] Obukhova, L. F., & Korepanova, I. A. (2009). The zone of proximal development: A spatiotemporal model. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 47(6), 25–47. https://doi.org/10.2753/RPO1061-0405470602
[12] Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge University Press.
[13] Rivers, W. (1987). Interaction as the key to teaching language for communication. In W. Rivers (Ed.), Interactive Language Teaching (pp. 3–16). Cambridge University Press.
[14] Scrivener, J. (2005). Learning Teaching (2nd ed.). Macmillan Education.
[15] Spack, R. (1998). Cultural backgrounds: What should we know about multilingual students? The author responds to Carson. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 740–746.

Sponsors, Associates, and Links

---

• Advances in Educational Technology and Psychology
  
  
• Curriculum and Teaching Methodology
  
  
• Transactions on Comparative Education
  
  
• Applied & Educational Psychology
  
  
• Advances in Vocational and Technical Education