Is it possible to teach something you don't know?
A great formula-1 driver, like Senna, can drive a car much better than your average physicist who knows all there is to know about mechanics and forces ...
In the plato's dialogues, Socrates describes himself as a mid-wife; for example in the Theaetetus:
my art of mid-wifery, is in general like theirs [real mid-wives]; the only difference is that my patients are men, not women; and that my concern is not with the body, but with the soul that is in travail of birth.
And the highest part of my art is to prove by every test whether the offspring of a young mans thought is a false phantom, or instinct with life and truth.
Actually, this is inline with Badious picture of philosophy, which is not a truth-procedure; but is allied with them.
It's one reason, why, Zizek calls B, perhaps a mite hyperbolically, a new Plato...
Sounds a bit like Searle's Chinese Room.
Certainly one can convey information without understanding it, for more than half of the "teaching" process is in the pupil. It is, according to Plato, coaxed out of memory.... or biology, deep grammar, the synthetic a priori, etc.
Similarly, one may teach by negative example. People simply observe me, whether I am aware of it or not, and learn any number of valuable lessons about what not to do.
In a like manner, the learning process in a Platonic dialogue progresses by means of what sequential interlocutors don't know.