I am a big proponent of experimenting with methods and different approaches. But I noticed that one can use just one approach or method but the principles and procedures will be diverse for every teacher. Furthermore, students should know the method you teach them by: "Students should understand the rationale of the methods by which they are being taught" (Wilga Rivers).

Moreover, approaches and methods are so closely intertwined that sometimes it's a challenge to decipher for a teacher which method or approach you use in accord with the Principle of the Integrated Whole (Brown, 1994). Surely, you bear in mind the specific one in your planning, but the classroom is so dynamic you will never be able to predict the sequence of a lesson. You always have to be alert and invent something new if you feel changes "on the basis of the sense of plausibility" (Prabhu, 1990). This is where the teacher's decision-making competency is essential.

Two ideas I want to mention here as well, is the role of lesson planning which we know changes in execution, but nevertheless essential, and also the importance of objectives that guide the lesson and provide a better sense to be able to predict the sequence of a lesson.

Earl Stevick in his book Helping People Learn English: A manual for Teachers of English as ESL mentioned two rules:

a) Don't follow anything slavishly.

Experiment! Experiment!

b) Don't experiment too often.

Give your students time to get used to one routine before swithcing to another".

What is your "sense of plausibility"? How do you orchestrate the learning process?