Remodeling the Transmission Model of Teaching

Teaching in public school has become beyond exhausting for many. Some teachers have opted for different futures under unimaginable threats to their physical and mental health. There are slowdowns in the pipeline, threats to silence credential programs, and privatization of public funds has begun to restrict the oxygen to public schools where they are geographically and economically needed most.

Public schools take all comers at no charge.

Yet we still have teachers willing to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune for their own private reasons, and some likely will be around twenty years from now still on the job. In 2045 a report card will be filed in history’s data center evaluating how successful teachers were in 2025 in learning to defend human epistemology and creativity from the erosion of not learned helplessness, but its opposite, learned-help-yourself. Under the yoke of NCLB tyranny, in 2005 public schools were deer in the headlights, terrorized by promises of reconstitution. In 2045?

*****

A model serves as a conceptual framework to support and scaffold teachers as they refine their classroom practices. In teaching, models provide structured templates for designing learning activities, including how to facilitate learning effectively. We know, for example, that learners using English as a foreign language, need instruction, modeling, and practice with academic language—terms which denote academic modes of thinking and being like hypothesis, consequence, narrative, and disciplinary concepts like valence, rhetoric, correlation.

The constructivist model of teaching posits that learners actively build knowledge through experience and reflection rather than passively receiving information. This model guides teachers in designing interactive learning experiences and scaffolding student discovery.

The consistent application of a constructivist teaching model, while valuable, can impose several significant pragmatic constraints on learners that warrant careful consideration. We aren’t the first to linger at Larry Cuban’s discovery of ‘teaching dilemmas.’ Time demands pose a fundamental challenge. This model asks learners to discover and construct knowledge through personal experience and reflection, which inherently takes longer than direct instruction.

The assumption underlying the premise "students need to master content quickly" reveals a key tension in education. Why? The pressure for rapid content mastery typically stems from external system constraints rather than authentic learning needs. A rush for quick mastery originates from institutional requirements like standardized testing schedules, predetermined curriculum pacing guides, and administrative benchmarks. However, these constraints imposed by educational systems can be changed. Limitations inherent to the learning processes can be minimized.

At least in theory.

To what degree can a public high school teacher subscribe to the constructivist model now, today? Are constraints attributable to an institutional premise of “accelerated coverage” to be judged ‘worth it’ by a teacher convinced of the validity of the constructivist model, enough to abandon the model? If one bends the model?

It gets worse.

Prior knowledge gaps become more problematic under this model. Since constructivist learning builds upon existing understanding, students with weaker foundational knowledge may struggle disproportionately. Without direct instruction to fill these gaps, some learners may construct incomplete or incorrect understanding of concepts. With direct instruction, these same learners are guaranteed nothing.

Cognitive load presents another significant constraint. The requirement to simultaneously explore, experiment, reflect, and construct knowledge can overwhelm students' working memory, especially on a fast track. This is particularly challenging for novice learners who haven't yet developed robust epistemological frameworks in the subject area.

The model's core rests on individual knowledge construction. While personal discovery is valuable, learners might miss out on efficient transmission of well-validated knowledge and proven problem-solving approaches. In the end, students may net more functional knowledge through transmission than through a poorly funded, chronically stressed constructivist model.

Assessment challenges emerge when learning outcomes vary significantly between students based on their individual construction of knowledge. In consequence, standardized evaluation calendars and the timing of specific competency benchmarks are logically impossible..

Resource requirements would likely exceed those of traditional transmission instruction. The need for hands-on materials, technology tools, and extensive guidance time can limit access to quality constructivist learning experiences, particularly in resource-constrained environments.

*****

The transmission model of teaching rests on several powerful premises. First, there exists a body of validated, structured knowledge that represents humanity's best understanding across disciplines. This knowledge has been refined and vetted over generations. It is a scarce and valuable commodity in the economy. Moreover, society needs a limited number of elite quality experts, far fewer than would justify the social cost of investing heavily in public education.

Teachers, as subject matter experts, can efficiently transmit this knowledge to students through clear explanation, demonstration, and guided practice, and direct instruction offers salient advantages. Expert teachers can present complex concepts in carefully sequenced, digestible portions. They can anticipate common misconceptions, provide precise corrections, and ensure students grasp concepts before moving to advanced material. This systematic approach proves especially valuable for students learning academic language and discipline-specific concepts.

When teachers directly present well-established knowledge and proven problem-solving methods, they can ensure students receive accurate, complete information. In today’s post-truth world, reducing the risk of students developing misconceptions that could impede future learning is imperative

Direct instruction can help level the playing field for students who enter with knowledge gaps or limited academic resources at home. All students receive the same high-quality explanations and examples, rather than being left to construct potentially flawed understanding on their own.

In today's resource-constrained public education system, direct instruction offers a reliable, scalable approach. It requires fewer specialized materials and can accommodate larger class sizes while maintaining consistent quality. This efficiency makes it particularly viable for schools facing budget and time pressures. The transmission model aligns well with current assessment systems. Teachers can ensure students master specific standards and benchmarks, preparing them for standardized tests and subsequent academic challenges.

While constructivist approaches offer valuable benefits, the pragmatic reality of modern public education often necessitates significant reliance on direct instruction. Teachers might best serve their students by thoughtfully incorporating constructivist elements within a primarily transmission-based framework, rather than attempting to fully implement a constructivist model under constraints that could compromise its effectiveness.

*****

The transmission model of education is crumbling before our eyes. To make matters worse, an institution operating in accordance with a well-scheduled, deeply embedded sociocultural and socioeconomic infrastructure is being forced kicking and screaming to reconsider its fundamental premise: “All students must acquire knowledge on a shared schedule according to efficiency experts.” Unfortunately, this phenomenon coexists with the political time bomb of privatization. You can almost hear the foundations cracking as AI systems surge into our students' daily lives. The old certainties? Gone. The comfortable assumptions? Shattered.

Consider the teacher as knowledge gatekeeper. Today's students pull out their phones and summon AI, the more intelligent and knowledgeable the learner, the better the AI tool works. These digital guides explain quantum mechanics at 3 AM, explore Renaissance art over breakfast, and help parse complex literature during lunch break. The traditional classroom's monopoly on knowledge transmission has evaporated like morning dew.

And here's the truly bittersweet part: Standardization, that holy grail of industrial-age education, now looks hopelessly outdated. While Mrs. Johnson valiantly delivers her carefully crafted lesson on polynomial functions to thirty diverse learners, each student could be engaging with an AI system that adapts perfectly to their learning style, pace, and prior knowledge. The one-size-fits-all approach isn't just inefficient anymore. It just isn’t very good.

Can we still call an educational model efficient when it produces graduates who are essentially inferior versions of ChatGPT? When it fails to develop the very human capabilities that will matter most in an AI-augmented world? The game has changed. The pieces have scattered. It's time to stop pretending we can put them back in their old familiar places.

*****

In Ms. Arnold's Advanced Physics class, students grapple with quantum mechanics through an approach that blends direct instruction, AI assistance, and hands-on exploration. Rather than simply memorizing Schrödinger's equation, students use simulation software and AI tools to visualize and manipulate quantum systems.

During a unit on wave-particle duality, students encounter the famous double-slit experiment. They begin with their own predictions about particle behavior, document their reasoning, and then use AI to explore historical perspectives on this phenomenon. The AI helps clarify complex mathematical frameworks, but Ms. Arnold ensures students understand why these frameworks emerged and how they challenged classical physics.

"Physics isn't just about knowing the right equations," Ms. Arnold explains. "It's about understanding how we came to these models and why they work." Students learn to question AI explanations, comparing them with experimental data and peer-reviewed sources. When the AI provides a particularly elegant explanation of wave function collapse, students must still demonstrate they can explain the concept in their own words and connect it to real-world applications.

Assessment focuses on students' ability to move between mathematical representation, conceptual understanding, and practical application. Their final projects often combine computational modeling with original analysis, showing how quantum principles might apply to emerging technologies like quantum computing or cryptography.

*****

In Dr. Wilson's AP English classroom, students encounter "Beloved" through an innovative blend of traditional close reading and AI-assisted analysis. Rather than imposing rigid rules about when students can consult AI tools, she focuses on teaching them to make strategic choices about their reading process.

During a typical class session, students might initially struggle with Morrison's complex narrative structure. Dr. Wilson encourages them to develop their own toolkit of reading strategies. Some might choose to read a passage multiple times independently before seeking outside the text while others might consult AI for quick context about historical references that could otherwise derail or block their comprehension.

"The goal isn't to avoid using AI," Dr. Wilson explains to her students. "It's to understand when AI can enhance your reading experience and when it might interfere with your own meaning-making process." She demonstrates this goal by sharing her own reading practices, including moments when she finds AI consultation valuable and times when she prefers to sit with the text's ambiguities.

She explains the wisdom of the Greeks. The Temple of Apollo was where the Oracle of Delphi made her prophecies, and pilgrims would come from across the ancient world to seek divine guidance. A familiar phrase was one of several maxims inscribed at the temple entrance, serving as a reminder to visitors that humility and one other quality were prerequisites for seeking divine wisdom: Know Thyself.

Assessment in her class focuses on students' ability to engage deeply with the text rather than following prescribed reading procedures. Students document their reading process through annotations and reflective notes, demonstrating how they've used various resources, including AI, to develop complex, original interpretations. Their final analyses must show original insight and careful consideration of the text's complexities, regardless of how they arrived at their understanding.

This approach acknowledges that reading is a highly individual process. Some students might benefit from discussing character relationships with AI before tackling difficult passages, while others might prefer to work through the text independently and use AI to test their interpretations afterward. The emphasis remains on developing thoughtful, well-supported analyses that demonstrate genuine engagement with Morrison's work.

*****

The Oracle at Delphi offered timeless advice: "Know Thyself" may be the most crucial wisdom for education in an AI-augmented world. As public schools face mounting pressures and AI tools reshape how students access knowledge, neither pure constructivism nor traditional transmission models quite fit the reality on the ground. Dr. Wilson's approach with her AP English students points toward a more nuanced path: helping students understand their own learning process while thoughtfully incorporating AI tools.

The success of public education in 2045 won't be measured by how well schools preserved old models or even how thoroughly they adopted AI. Instead, it will depend on how effectively teachers helped students develop the uniquely human capabilities that matter most—critical thinking, creativity, literacy, scientific epistemology, mathematics, integrative learning, ethical reasoning, civic engagement, and the ability to construct meaning from experience. The rules of the road have changed. But perhaps that's exactly the opportunity education needs to evolve beyond the constraints that have held it back.

The question of resources is pivotal. Without adequate funding, even the most innovative teaching models will falter under the weight of overcrowded classrooms, overburdened teachers, and outdated infrastructure. Local forums must advocate for equitable distribution of resources to underserved schools, while state and federal governments must commit to long-term investments in public education.

We are living during a challenging time in American political history for public education. For the next two years, public education will do well to save itself from collapse in many states. Nonetheless, teachers and educators must continue to keep this AI issue in the forefront. Already we see political pressure brought to bear in Indiana to increase resources for public school even as it implements a voucher law from 2023 during budget negotiations. Word is getting out that everyone in a democracy receives social benefits from public education. Individual teachers working in partnership with local universities can continue to research strategies for integrating AI into a system stuck in the transmission model as we navigate these political waters.

The window for meaningful adaptation is closing, but not as rapidly as I expected. As AI continues to disrupt traditional learning paradigms, public education must evolve to prepare students for an AI-augmented future while preserving the uniquely human skills—critical thinking, creativity, and ethical reasoning—that machines cannot replicate. The time to act is now; failure to do so risks leaving an entire generation unprepared for the complexities of the world ahead.