I agree whole heartedly with Sir Ken Robinson's notion that knowledge is not about what you know but about you don't and your willingness to find out.  This is a notion that's common in Eastern thought.  The Tao te Ching's 48th verse says "In the pursuit of knowledge, every day something is learned.  In pursuit of the Tao, every day something is dropped."  Robinson's statement also reminded me of the first tenet of the Zen Peacemakers: Not-knowing.  The Zen Peacemakers were formed by Bernie Glassman, a Jewish clown and Zen master who held meditation retreats at the sites of former Nazi death camps and wrote a book with Jeff Bridges called The Dude and the Zen Master about how The Big Lebowski is essentially a long comedic film version of a Zen parable.  Here's what he had to say about Not-knowing:

 "As soon as we know something, we prevent something else from happening. When we live in a state of knowing, rather than unknowing, we're living in a fixed state of being where we can't experience the endless unfolding of life, one thing after another. Things happen anyway — nothing ever remains the same — but our notions of what should happen block us from seeing what actually does happen. We get upset because our expectations aren't met. When we can let go of them we are in accord with things as they arise.

We like to use the phrase 'let it be.' The truth is, we have no choice. No matter what we think, we are never in control and things will happen as they happen. But in a state of unknowing we actually live without attachment to preconceived ideas. There is no expectation of gain, no expectation of loss. There's just what's here right now."

In other words, once you nail something down and define it, you close your accounts with reality and become that much less receptive to input from the outside world, that much more dedicated to the symbolic map in your head.  It's difficult to be comfortable with not knowing, but it's the way to remain truly in touch with your experience with other people and life in general.

I don't know about teachers who learn along with the class necessarily, but I have had teachers who are willing to learn, modify their approaches and tolerate alternative points of view.  Just last semester I had an English teacher at UIS who emailed me to say she felt she was having to defend the entire enterprise of literary criticism from my weekly attacks on the discussion board.  What resulted was a long and engaging conversation where we both articulated our overall points of view, came to an understanding, and I'd venture to say became friends.  I didn't stop pushing back against assumptions I think need to be questioned, and I don't know that she changed her point of view too much, but the ability to lay aside preconceived notions and have a discussion was intensely refreshing in our current socio-political environment.  

I hadn't had academic teachers of any kind for a very long time until this year, so it's hard for me to generalize about how they need to change.  I did have a teacher last semester who was the opposite of the one mentioned above: aloof, nonresponsive, when I'd raise concerns about lack of clarity in the feedback on my papers or test questions, I'd get a brush-off answer that didn't explain anything or take what I'd said into account, like he was trying to get it over with as quickly as possible without actually addressing what was being said.  Based on that experience alone, I'd say teachers need to pay their students enough respect to willingly listen to their concerns, engage in dialogue and dialectic to reach greater understanding, question their own assumptions and accept (even encourage) it when their students do the same.  I'm not saying they should be pushovers, just that they should be responsive, open and present.

P.S.--It might work better for you if you give me word limits rather than minimums.