According to the model, it emphasizes these three concepts, since approach deals with the basic structure in which the assumption and beliefs of language and language learning are specified. Methods, on the other hand, are more theoretical. in this level, a theory is being explored so that it can be put into practice and make choices about the content to be taught and the particular skills that are to be taught. How the content is being presented also plays a crucial role in method and the technique is specifically designed to describe the procedure that is meant for the classroom to follow (Richards and Rogers, 2001). This model provides a useful way in distinguishing between different degrees of abstraction and specificity found in different language teaching proposals (Richards and Rogers, 2001). Therefore, this model helps to underline key differences between method and approach. However, this model has some drawbacks since the following faults were found: This model fails to address the level of approach and it does not specifically determine how student/teacher interaction is supposed to take place in a classroom setting. Hence this model cannot serve as a basis for a comprehensive analysis of methods and approaches (Richards and Rogers, 2001). It does not elaborate on the different roles that teachers and students have to undertake in the method level. It also fundamentally fails to show how the approach is related to a method and further on to technique. There seems to be a missing link of how these three concepts are related to each other and this model does not explain in detail how they function in relation to one another.