Hey everyone, if you’ve ever sat in a language class going through random grammar rules, memorizing vocab lists that never feel tied together, and left feeling like you’ve wasted time but still can’t string a coherent sentence in real life—you’re not alone. I’ve been in this game for years, working as part of the team that develops the materials we call “By Structure” for language educators, and honestly? That frustration’s why our whole approach exists. Today I wanna break down what the principles of “By Structure” in language teaching actually are, skip the jargon, and be real about why this isn’t just another buzzword in the edtech space. By Structure
First off, let’s get one thing straight: “By Structure” isn’t just teaching grammar. That’s the mistake a lot of folks make when they hear “structure” and tune out. Grammar is a part of it, yeah, but structure in language teaching means way more. It’s about how every piece of language—words, tenses, phrases, even gestures—fits together like a puzzle, not like a random pile of pieces you have to guess how to assemble. And as a supplier of these resources, I’ve seen firsthand how when you center teaching around structure, it fixes so many of the pain points I saw in my own early language learning days.
Let’s start with the first core principle we live by: Structure is the foundation, not an afterthought. Wait, let me explain that. So many curricula today build lessons around topics—like “grocery shopping” or “talking about hobbies”—and then tuck in a few grammar rules to fit that topic. That’s backwards. When you use By Structure, you flip that: you pick a specific, functional language structure first, then build every lesson around how to use that structure in real, relatable situations. For example, instead of a lesson about “asking for directions” that throws in prepositions of place willy-nilly, you zero in on the structure “Can you tell me how to get to [location]?” or “Is [street] on your left or right?” Then you practice that structure with different locations, different scenarios—asking a barista for a subway stop, asking a local for a park—so students don’t just memorize a phrase, they internalize how the structure works for any context. I remember last year a high school teacher in Texas reached out saying that after switching to our materials, her students went from mixing up “I go” and “I went” all the time to actually using past and present tense correctly in conversations—because we separated the tense structure from random topics and let them master one at a time before moving on. That’s the magic here.
Second principle: Context drives structure, not the other way around. Oh, this is huge, and it’s why a lot of generic grammar textbooks fall flat. Like, think about how we actually use language in real life. If you’re running late to a friend’s birthday dinner, you don’t stop to list off the rules for “I am going to be late” before texting them—you just say it, because the context of being rushed makes that structure make sense. When we develop By Structure materials, we don’t teach a structure in a vacuum. We set up a tiny, relatable scenario first: maybe a student forgot their textbook and needs to ask a classmate for help, or they’re planning a weekend trip and need to book a hotel. Then we introduce the exact structure they need to pull that off. That way, students don’t just know the structure—they know when to use it. I once talked to a college ESL student from Mexico who told me he’d studied English for 6 years but could never hold a conversation until he started using our beginner modules. He said before, he could recite that “Present Continuous is for actions happening now” but when someone asked “What are you doing?” he’d freeze, because he never learned how that structure actually fits into a casual chat. That’s the gap By Structure closes: it ties structure to context so learners don’t just know rules, they know usage.
Third principle: Build incrementally, not all at once. Language isn’t something you cram, right? And By Structure respects that. We don’t throw 10 new structures at a student in one lesson, or jump from simple present tense to past perfect in a week. Instead, we layer structures like building a house. Start with the basics: structures for greetings, introducing yourself, ordering food. Once a student’s solid on that, you add a new structure that builds on what they already know—like moving from “I want coffee” to “I would like a large coffee” once they get the hang of requesting things. It’s like when you learn to ride a bike: you start with balance (the simplest structure of moving forward), then add pedaling, then turning, then stopping—you don’t try to do a wheelie on day one. As a supplier, this incremental approach is why our materials work for everyone, from absolute beginners to advanced learners. A lot of our customers are small language schools that have students coming in at all levels, and they love that they can pick modules that match where each student is, instead of forcing everyone through the same pace. Last quarter, a school in Seoul told me that their dropout rate for beginner ESL went down by 30% after they switched to our incremental structure-based lessons. Said students didn’t feel overwhelmed anymore because each new structure felt like a natural step, not a random curveball.
Fourth principle: Structure should be communicative, not just accurate. Wait, let’s clarify that. Accuracy is important, but if you only teach for perfect grammar, students get so scared of making mistakes they never actually talk. By Structure balances both. Each lesson centers on using the structure to do something real—like disagreeing with a classmate, making a suggestion, or asking for clarification. We build in low-stakes practice so students can mess up without feeling embarrassed, because the goal is communication first, accuracy second. For example, a lesson on the structure “I think that…” won’t just have students filling in blanks; it’ll have them discussing their favorite movies, their least favorite homework, whatever’s relevant, using “I think that…” to share their opinions. A student might say “I think that pizza is best than tacos” and that’s okay—they’re communicating, they’re using the structure, and later the teacher can gently correct the “best than” to “better than” without killing their confidence. I’ve heard so many teachers say that this is the biggest difference between our materials and traditional ones. One tutor in Canada told me she used to spend half her class time marking grammar mistakes, but now with our structure-based lessons, her students talk more in 20 minutes than they used to in a whole hour, and their accuracy actually gets better because they’re using the structure in meaningful ways. That’s the point of language, right? To connect, not to write a perfect essay.
Fifth principle: Meet learners where they are, structurally. This is something we stress a lot as a supplier, because we know not all learners have the same needs. A business professional learning English needs different structures than a teen learning for a trip abroad, right? So By Structure isn’t a one-size-fits-all set of rules. We tailor structures to the learner’s goals. For a nurse learning medical English, we have modules focused on structures like “Can you describe your symptoms?” or “Take this medication twice a day”—structures they’ll actually use at work. For a teen planning a backpacking trip, we have structures for asking about prices, understanding train schedules, and making small talk with locals. The core is still the same: structure as the foundation, context tied to use, incremental learning, communication over perfection—but we adjust the specific structures to match what the learner actually needs. I think that’s why our stuff stands out from other generic language tools. We don’t just make worksheets; we make resources that adapt to what the user is actually trying to do with the language.
Now, let’s be real for a second. No approach is perfect, and we’ve definitely had our share of feedback over the years. Some people say structure-based teaching is too rigid, that it limits creativity. But here’s the thing: By Structure is a framework, not a cage. Once learners master the core structures, they can mix and match them to create new phrases, new sentences, new ways to say what they want. That’s way better than starting with creativity and no foundation—most learners just end up saying nonsensical things because they don’t have the structure to build on. I’ve seen that so many times: a student who only memorizes random phrases can’t adapt when a situation is a little different, but a student who masters core structures can tweak them to fit any scenario. Like, if they know the structure “I would like [noun]”, they can use it to order coffee, buy a shirt, ask for a book—all different contexts, same structure, just swapped out the noun. That’s the real power here.
As someone who’s been on the supplier side, I also wanna talk about why we care so much about getting these principles right. We don’t just sell lesson plans or digital tools—we’re part of helping language educators do their jobs better, and helping learners actually feel successful when they’re trying to learn a new language. I’ve talked to learners who cried because they’d been studying for years and still couldn’t order food abroad, and that’s the stuff that drives us. When a teacher tells us their student just had a 5-minute conversation with a tourist and used the structure they learned in our module, that’s when we know we’re doing something right.
So if you’re a language teacher, a tutor, or someone running a language program, and you’re tired of curricula that feel outdated, overwhelming, or just not working for your students, this is what we’re all about. We’ve built our whole supply of By Structure resources around these five principles, and we’re always updating them based on what educators and learners tell us works.
If you’re looking to upgrade your language materials, train your staff on structure-based teaching, or just chat about how By Structure could fit your needs, we’re here to connect. Whether you’re a small private school, a big university, or a community center, we can work with you to find what fits. Reach out to us to start a conversation about how we can support your language teaching goals.
By Structure References
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2013). How Languages are Learned. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2019). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Pergamon Press.
Zhejiang Jigong Valve Co., Ltd.
Address: Dongou Industrial Park, Oubei Subdistrict, Yongjia County, Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province (within Zhejiang Yinhe Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd.)
E-mail: Sales@cnzjsk.com.cn
WebSite: https://www.ball-china.com/
