We are all consumers of various goods and services. And, like all reasonable consumers, we want to receive guaranteed quality goods and services for our hard-earned money. If in most areas the issue of guarantees has, one way or another, been resolved, or ways have been found to regulate these guarantee obligations, then in the situation of education, namely in relation to language teaching, everything is quite complicated. There is a guarantee that you will learn and use the knowledge in everyday life, practically no one can give, and, in fact, no one wants to. A reasonable question arises: “Why?” The most obvious reasons for this lie in the fact that there are very, very few authors and developers of their own methods, who have gone through all the material through themselves, over many years of research, and are ready to give a guarantee of knowledge. And what we currently have is a huge number of teachers who work using these methods, offering their own interpretation, which, over time, goes quite far from the original. As a result, we have teachers who teach classes using some methodology, which they often do not know deeply enough, operating exclusively on basic principles. In fact, the uniqueness of any technique lies in the important details that, as a rule, are missed by interpretive teachers. And what do we have in the end? Authors and developers struggle with every detail of their methodology, bringing it to perfection, through daily research and practice, regularly experiencing and comprehending the correctness of their methodology. Accordingly, the author’s methods are improving every day, but they are improving only for the author. Interpretive teachers distort these methods beyond recognition; other elements are woven into them, often not connected in any way, and sometimes even contradicting the original method. All this usually ends with a return to the classical teaching methodology, because... original techniques, being inaccurately used, insufficiently studied, or incorrectly interpreted, do not produce results. Many may disagree with me, there are results, and sometimes they are not even bad. And then try to ask yourself a question and answer honestly: “Are we having a substitution of concepts?” As a rule, a person leaving a course is euphoric from the atmosphere of friendliness, from the ease of communication in classes, from a cheerful and smart teacher, from a huge number of games and colorful material. And it seems that everything was learned and remembered perfectly. But in reality it turns out to be completely different. The result of courses, trainings, seminars is the ability to use the acquired knowledge in two weeks, and this will be an indicator. Why doesn’t this happen in 80% of cases? The answer is essentially the same: the author-researcher, with every word spoken by the student, with every letter written, with every misunderstood detail, tests the strength of his own methodology, the correctness of his ideas. The motivation of such a teacher is many times higher than that of a teacher who just needs to lecture the program. And here one clear fact emerges: for the author-researcher, each lesson is like a small challenge, and for the teacher-interpreter, “just another lesson.” The bottom line is that the former defends the reputation of his methodology, scientific theory, and is worried about every failure, thereby regularly improving your methodology, because with each question asked, the number of incomprehensible moments in the original method decreases. Purely scientific and practical interest. Now let's turn to the teacher-interpreter. He worries about his reputation as a teacher. And, as a rule, in classes he behaves in such a way as to please the audience, an excellent sense of humor, a festive atmosphere in classes, a certain program, a certain number of exercises. As a result, as mentioned above, in such courses, what I like is not the scientific methodology of teaching English, but just everything else that in our time