The speaker discusses two methods of teaching. He describes the data transmission system with its use of technology (computer assistance, audio-tutoring, etc.) as merely an updating of the traditional attempt by the teacher to impart a body of subject matter and by the student to absorb and store it for future retrieval. Opposed to this transmission and storage of data is the method of acquisition and assimilation of information. The three main differences are: (1) source of initiative in the educational process, (2) primary criterion for the organization of data, and (3) predominant behavioral outcome. In the traditional system, the teacher takes the initiative, the main criterion is relating bits of information to other bits, and the resulting behavior is mainly manipulative. In the acquisition method, the student does the initiating, the main criterion is the accumulated experience and present understanding of the learner, and the dominant resulting behavior is associative. The speaker feels both models are valid and should be used, but that machines do a better job of transmitting data than a teacher can, while the teacher who performs as a motivator, counselor, consultant will never become obsolete. In summary, the student in a traditional system is a manipulator, adapting all things to himself; in the acquisition system, he more likely relates all things with himself--the distinction being between adapting to and relating with. The speaker illustrates his point from his own teaching experience. (HH)