Guide or Gawk?

After savoring some time (and sandwiches) in two local sandwich shops, the impact of interior design and architecture became increasingly apparent. As I entered each retail space and analyzed how design affected my experience, I was most intrigued by the effect on my eyes - guide versus gawk.

In Subway, I found that my eyes were guided along a fairly defined line. Consistent with the lines of a Subway system (as seen on maps mounted on the shop’s walls), my sight and subsequently my movement were controlled. Certainly this was something sensed subconsciously in previous visits, which made the realization that much more remarkable. I was amazed at how customers are “compelled” to conform.

In Potbelly, my eyes moved in a more manic manner, gawking at all the artifacts on the walls. Cultivated by the quirky curios, my curiosity “compelled” me to connect with the cuisine. As I moved through this museum, my mouth watered and my mind wondered, but I still wandered in the way that was intended.

In thinking about these different designs and their ability to direct the eye and actions of individuals, I started to think about how a similar phenomenon manifests in the classroom. While not always a matter of manipulating eye movement, visual, verbal, and intellectual guiding and gawking occur. The question is, which is more constructive, and ultimately most compelling?

Inevitably, educators guide students through a step-by-step study of subjects in an effort to meet standards set out by states or school districts. Ought this be the case? Teachers and students are “compelled to conform,” but is the educational experience compelling? Is it memorable? Is it meaningful? It is more than merely a means to an educational (not edible) end?

There are those teachers, though, who not only allow but also encourage students to gawk. Ideas are introduced, investigations are launched, and inquiring minds engage in discussion and debate. Diversity is deemed “delicious,” and the interests of individuals are ingested. As students feast on facts (and fiction), the interactions between the individuals and ideas provide substantive sustenance. Students are compelled to consume and construct and question and continue on. Neither the path nor the product is predictable, but the flavor of the experience is full and the quality unquestionable. Does this constitute compelling?

Ought we guide students or encourage them to gawk?