A Tale of Two Approaches

There are two prevailing metaphors that we, as teachers, use to approach our practice:

#1 - The teacher is a fountain of knowledge. Students enter the classroom as empty pitchers (perhaps of varying sizes). The teacher's job is to entice the students to the fountain, pour knowledge into the students' pitchers, and then ensure that there is no leakage.

#2 - The teacher is a expert in architecture. Students enter the classroom as prospective engineers, bringing with them whatever training or natural ability they possess. The teacher's job is to fill in whatever gaps exist in their training, give them with the necessary tools and schematics, and then provide them opportunities to build knowledge themselves.

The first metaphor describes what is known as the Transmission approach, because it focuses so much on the idea of knowledge as an constant, an object which the teacher holds and must transmit to the students. The second metaphor describes what is known as the Constructivist approach, because it sees knowledge as inconstant, as something which is formed uniquely in every human mind.

Teachers who believe in the Transmission approach often utilize lecture in their classrooms; they teach students that there is a clear right/wrong answer; and they usually use "objective" assessments (such as multiple-choice tests).

Constructivists generally prefer group discussion to lecture; they let their students know that "there is no 'right' answer;" and thus they allow for a lot more freedom in their assessments (perhaps using multimedia projects).

Both approaches have their strengths and their weaknesses, but which is more helpful to students? Which is more practical for teachers? Which is best for the school system as a whole? Which is best for society?

Which do you believe in?