Teaching Grammar Form: Direct instruction vs. contextual learning

Since you don't work in a school yet, how do you intend to adapt these approaches when you actually get to a classroom where students may also be different in their learning styles and needs?

What do you think-for what kind of students or for what situations-would one of these two approaches direct teaching and contextual learning-be more effective?

The question of whether to teach grammar forms directly or let them be learned in context is a matter of learning goals, language proficiency level, and the situation. Both methods have their advantages, and their combination is often the most effective strategy.
With advanced learners, a purely direct instruction approach sometimes does more harm than good. For example, teaching advanced phrasal verbs out of context-to a list that they should memorize-was very alienating for my students in one class. They were much more interested once I used authentic materials such as articles and videos where the phrasal verbs appeared in context and could be used meaningfully.

In short, direct instruction tends to be clearer and more accurate, especially for beginners, while contextual learning fosters fluency and usability. Combining the two approaches-starting with explicit teaching and then reinforcing through context-can be a highly effective strategy.

Do you think beginners can truly grasp complex grammar rules like the past perfect through direct instruction alone, or does this risk overwhelming them, resulting not knowing how to use the structure in context?

I agree and have one question.Do you think contextual learning is effective for all grammar forms, or are there structures where direct instruction might be more appropriate?

I liked your answer. I completely agree with you!!!