This paper attempts to "bridge the gap between the practical orientation of teachers and the theoretical concerns that should underlie practice," Discussed in turn are language, psychology, and pedagogical philosophy. An adequate knowledge of these areas is essential to good classroom practices; every bad practice is evidence of some weakness in understanding these areas. That linguists seem currently more concerned with formulating questions than with proposing answers indicates the likelihood of major new advance, rather than decay and dissolution. Regardless of the state of linguistics, however, there are still certain things students have to learn if they are to speak the second language. Classroom practices should follow some kind of "middle road" in which the natural contexts of language are used to prompt language use, with an awareness of the language structures to be mastered. A teacher cannot rely on any one single, narrow, pedagogical approach, but must respond to the different learning patterns of different students, and their different motives and inclinations. This involves the use of examples, variety, and context-oriented work. The student's gradual development as a person who controls a second language is more important than his apparent mastery of certain patterns. A discussion of the differences between approach, method, and technique concludes the paper. (AMM)