Over the past twenty years a rather common critique of teaching has emerged in many research publications and policy documents. Again and again we hear that so called ‘traditional’ teaching –where the teacher speaks and students are supposed to listen and absorb information – is bad and outdated, and where something allegedly more modern, focused on the facilitation of students’ learning is seen as good, desirable and ‘of the future.’ While the opposition between ‘traditional’ and ‘contemporary’ is itself already a bit stale, we should also not forget how traditional the critique of traditional teaching itself actually is. John Dewey already made the point, as did many educators in many countries around the world before and after him. The critique of traditional teaching is also not entirely valid, because even in classrooms where teachers speak, and students sit quietly, a lot of things are actually happening. In this regard I agree with Virginia Richardson’s observation that “students also make meaning from activities encountered in a transmission model of teaching” (Richardson, 2003, p. 1628)