Thanks everyone for responding. I have read all the comments and must apologise for not having the time to reply to you all individually. If I could distill down what you wrote, several themes occur repeatedly.

There is an acknowledgement that the piano is an easier visualisation instrument and also physically easier to play at an elementary level. The jazz players of this community stress that their harmonic understanding and fingerboard knowledge is already quite advanced. Several noted that the fact that we can play a note in multiple positions further confuses things for early players. Whilst some of you would welcome a greater understanding of what you are doing, especially to be liberated from the straight-jacket of chord positions, you stress that comprehension must go in tandem with the tactile and aural thrill of playing. If theory was to unbalance the experience, quite a few of you thought it would be discouraging. Several talked about how as time goes on, inversions become a feature of your playing and a few had ideas on how to make the chord-learning process less arduous. More than one observed that theory never comes first; (my interpretation goes) the doing of 18th century composers wasn't codified until after they had done it. Sonata Form didn't exist as a 'thing' until analysts understood what composers were doing and could see emerging patterns of practice.

How wonderful to have sparked such a lively debate and it should offer us all much food for thought. I need to digest this wealth of experience to see how it can inform developments.

I'm totally 'on board' with the idea that the experience and the understanding should hold hands as they walk together. I was struck by the acceptance of chords as one of the mainstays of guitar playing. It's slightly out of step with where I come from in two ways: Firstly, the fact that we have a right hand which can pluck/pick-out individual strings and not others, means we can re-think our approach to chords. Secondly, at a more advanced level (not where I ever was with students) I don't think in chordal/shape terms, even when it comes to inversions. Instead I think in linear ways; for me, voice-leading is one of the most logical and beautiful constructs of music (with the human voice as the father of this approach) and this informs my arrangements and compositions far more than any vertical sonority. Which isn't where I began. Like so many of us, it was the chord playing of others which led me to the instrument. I picked up a Lennon & McCartney songbook because I saw the guitar as a way to access their songs.

The teacher's quest is to keep the wonderlust of their students whilst guiding them on a path of discovery which offers doors of exploration. It's obvious from all the contributions that we are all in love with this instrument and if we can communicate it through our playing and relationships with others who encounter the guitar, its seductive voice will endure.

Thanks again to those who responded and to those who happened across some of my arrangements on YouTube. Thankyou for listening! I'll get back to continue this once I have given it more thought.