Garrow, Alan J.P. "Chapter Seven: The Modifying Teacher Layer: 1.5a-6; 7.1b, d, 2-3, 4b; 8.1-2a, 2a-3; 9.5b; 11.1-2; 11.10-11; 13.1-15.2." The Gospel of Matthew's Dependence on the Didache. New York: T&T Clark International, 2004, 113-128.
In Garrow's understanding of the redaction of the Didache, 11.10-11 may well be present because 11.9 could be misunderstood (Garrow 2004, 113). He notes that in this passage, the emphasis is on what the prophet does and teaches, showing his truth, while in the surrounding material, the emphasis is on the spirit working in the prophet. This suggests to Garrow that the passage was an interpolaion.
In essence, Didache 11.10-11 defends the lifestyle of prophets and urges care for their needs, while 11.9 puts limits on the care (Garrow 2004, 115). Garrow sees it as a sufficient departure from the other material that it should be treated as coming from a different author.
Didache 13.1-7 speaks of specific provisions for prophets. Garrow identifies at least two layers of tradition here, signalled by a change from plural to singular and the presence of teachers early in the passage, but not later (Garrow 2004, 116). As with 11.10-11, the passage seems to clarify and moderate other statements (Garrow 2004, 117). The porphets are to be cared for very much as were the Old Testament priesthood.
The material which Garrow ascribes to "the modifying teacher" regularly treats prophets and teachers together as one functional category (Garrow 2004, 118). This is a common New Testament connection as well. If the person responsible for these texts was a teacher or a prophet, he may well have been troubled by the relatively restrictive statements about care for prophets and teachers, so would seek to moderate the stance (Garrow 2004, 119). Garrow considers 11.1-2 to serve as an attempt to claim legitimacy for an opinion that may have been rejected y the community.
The pattern of an affirmation of prior teaching followed by a moderating view also occurs at 1.5b-6 (Garrow 2004, 120). Here the giving of alms is praised. Then there is a caution to the recipient, and a justification from a quoted saying. Garrow sees this as the same pattern of 11.1-2, 10-11; 13.1-7 (Garrow 2004, 121).
The same pattern occurs, on a larger scale, in 14.1-15.2. Garrow finds it as a very clear element in 14.1-3 (Garrow 2004, 121). The same parallelism, vocabulary, and imagery are used through 15.2. This leads Garrow to ascribe the passage to his modifying teacher.
Garrow makes a rather intricatecut to identify the modifying teacher in "7.1(c) d, 2-3, 4b," daling with baptism (Garrow 2004, 122). Of significant value to Garrow's argument is the shift from refference to baptism "in the name of the Lord" to the trinitarian formula. He takes the less specific formula to be from an early, possibly pre-Christian, period, but the trinitarian formula to be a distinctively Christian interpolation (Garrow 2004, 123). There is, additionally, an external tradition cited.
Didache 8 is often taken as a later interpolation. Garrow finds in 8.1-2a, 2c-3 a suggestion of the modifying teacher, though there is no affirmation, modification, or appeal to external authority (Garrow 2004, 124). However, here there is a substantial difference articulated between Jews and Christians. The last days and prayers are set apart, in a way reminiscent of what Garrow has previously identified in the modifying teacher.
The brief quotation in Didache 9.5b strikes Garrow as a likely contribution of the modifying teacher, explaining the difference between Jews and Christians (Garrow 2004, 125). Garrow also considers there may have been attempts at clarification at 7.1b, and at 5.2b, though all these passages are so brief he does not consider them very practical for analysis (Garrow 2004, 126).
Garrow is fairly certain that he has rightly analyzed the presence of another redactor, one concerned with explanation, the need to care for teachers, and the distinction between Christianity and Judaism (Garrow 2004, 127).