When viewed like this a mental model of a nucleus with electrons 'orbiting' around it is entirely valid and literally drops the student in the early 20th century.
One of the problems with experts is that they try building a straight line from zero to expert that never needs a backtrack step.
Personally I like the opportunity for students to learn about the experimental evidence that _forces them_ to need a better theory than the one they've come in with. Cognitive dissonance is one of the most powerful forces students have for learning - a good teacher should be engineering these moments as part of their lesson design.
Which I still find more informative than the drawings on the original post page.
If the Bohmian interpretation of quantum mechanics is considered in
the case of the hydrogen atom, it leads to a prediction that "normal"
quantum mechanics does not make. That is the existence of a distance of
closest approach of the electron to the proton. This distance of two
hundred fermi is of the order of the Planck length, a region where the
"normal" laws of physics are thought to break down. If the probability
density of finding an electron inside this region could be experimentally
measured, that would thus be a definite test to differentiate between the
two interpretations of quantum mechanics.