Dichotomy: Knowledge and Understanding

I think Mason's dichotomy of knowledge and understanding is very interesting; can one have knowledge without understanding? Or vice versa?

I think it is entirely possible to have knowledge without understanding; one can know that the freeway is busy at 5 p.m. simply by word of mouth, but can not understand the implications unless one has experienced it. Knowledge is, to me (as a working definition), a statement that one takes to be at least tentatively true, and can respond reflexively to other truth statements without being modified. Understanding is much deeper, one must be aware of the underlying axioms from which the item is derived, and how other statements may be logically deduced from it.