
The autocratic design of the
modern classroom (teacher in front lecturing dutiful pupils aligned in symmetrical rows) traces its roots back to 14th Century Heidelberg. This same format was adopted throughout Europe and then presented to America's 19th Century factory barons who resented losing their cheap child labor to education reform. The industrialists reluctantly agreed only after reformers sold them on the fact that the
"teaching" would actually be
training, readying these young huddled masses for future roles as factory workers. The classroom hierarchy and layout was carefully designed to both foster obedience to authority and mimic a factory orgchart. Note the layout: "foreman"
(teacher) up front and dutiful "workers"
(students) seated in neat rows of box-shaped desks. Educators sealed the deal by promising that school would be relegated exclusively to the colder months,
thereby freeing the kids up to labor during crunch time: planting and harvest season. Today's US educational system follows an identical structure. Business and the military imitated the public school system and so the
"modern" training hierarchy was born.
So much for the history lesson, now for
the bigger question: is this 600 year-old format really the most effective way to educate and
"train" the post-modern Nintendo Generation of
foodservice employees? Maybe its time to better train the trainer and let the learners lead.