My teaching style broadly consists of two kinds: a method used for language-learning and a method used for history. Both are relatively straightforward. For language study I follow the usual method of most classicists, focus on syntax and clause structure--in particular I find that understanding the clause structure of any language, ancient or modern, analytic or synthetic, is crucial in intuitively understanding the meaning of a sentence. In history I try to help students understand the "historical method" as easily as possible through exposure to historical sources and understanding of their uses--I also frequently approach history from a so-called "bottom-up" or microhistorical approach, which I've found in teaching Roman Republican history can be very useful for students in understanding how a society functioned, which is crucial for their understanding of causality of events. These methods of approaching teaching in these particular subjects served me well during high school and now as I approach the end of my undergraduate education, and while I cannot of course guarantee particular results for any student, I've found that in my experiences volunteer teaching and elsewhere that my method has been generally well-received.