Former ATA students and instructors

[MartialArthur]

in my humble opinion when a rank is decided by the amount of money you have brought to the organisation instead of skill there is a problem.

Yes, there is a problem, and it's a problem we will all face sooner or later. We will all reach a point in our training when are physical skills can no longer improve. I'm hoping to put that off as long as possible, but at 45 I suspect I'm approaching that point.

It's not uncommon for martial arts organizations to consider teaching and leadership contributions made to the art and the organization for the very high ranks. When a 60 year old man makes seventh degree BB, I doubt that he would be expected to be more physically skilled than he was at 35 when and going for his 3rd degree.

[Balrog]

in my humble opinion when a rank is decided by the amount of money you have brought to the organisation instead of skill there is a problem.

I agree with that. However, that is not a consideration for promotion within ATA.

[MasterH]

in my humble opinion when a rank is decided by the amount of money you have brought to the organisation instead of skill there is a problem.

I agree with that. However, that is not a consideration for promotion within ATA.

You mean, not any more.......and you still need a certian number of active students but become a Master.

[Balrog]

in my humble opinion when a rank is decided by the amount of money you have brought to the organisation instead of skill there is a problem.

I agree with that. However, that is not a consideration for promotion within ATA.

You mean, not any more.......and you still need a certian number of active students but become a Master.

It never was a consideration.

The whole concept of Mastership was tied directly to leadership. The only way ATA had to quantify leadership in a manner that made it objective instead of subjective was to look at the number of students in your lineage.

[MasterH]

Are we reading from the same rules? To be concidered to test for 5th not 5 years ago you had to have 200 active students. I know it has changed, but it was a concideration at some point.

[Mr. Mike]

after what I just read in this thread, I will NEVER go to an ATA school. How in the world can they base a dan ranking on how many students attend the person's school? And what is the bbig deal with all the titles? Why in the world would anyone want to be addressed as Master, or Chief Master? Sounds like a huge money pyramid scheme to me. McDojo anyone?

In Martial Arts World(or Professional, I can;t remember which...is is the one woth red griffin studios on the cover) there is an article about the ATA getting to the 1 million mark...why is that so important? Great, now you have 1mil people pushed through the system so you can have a number to brag about.

Sorry, McDojo written all over this organization. There's nothing wrong with making money from your passion, in fact, MA is my paycheck too, but when it comes to some of the policies and tactics of the ATA, forget about it.

It makes me wonder about the quality of the curriculum...not to mention the instructors.

end of report.

[MartialArthur]

Mr. Mike, while I'm no fan of the ATA, I am a big fan of success. The ATA is doing what every business should do: set goals and strive to reach them. If they are as bad as some people say (total Mcdojos), they would have never been able to achieve the success they have. A scam can only work for so long.

Since the higher dan ranks consider teaching and contributions to the art as requirements to advance, what better objective measure than the number of students you have taught? If you're a lousy teacher, you won't have many students and probably don't deserve the title of "Master".

Right now I have 125 students. A year from now, I plan to have 200 students, and I will be both a better instructor and more successful. That does not make my school a "McDojo".

[Mr. Mike]

you are right. We also strive for improvement and enlargement of the student body at our school, and we have our goals. I understand business perhaps better than the next guy, but that isn't where my quarrel is. I take issue with placing a price tag on a ranking.

My instructor will be going for his 5th degree in June of '06. The number of students in our school will have no determining factor in his requirements for 5th dan.

He will be tested on his knowledge of the system, plain and simple. Business is one thing, performance is another. I have my quotas to make as an enrollment director, but my rank will NEVER be held from me if I don't perform adequately.

I know what the ATA is doing, and why they are doing it, I just don't agree with it...furthermore, I don't think anybody should get caught up in the race for titles... master, chief master, etc. Who cares?

Warriorship is what it is; business is what it is; the two can be mixed successfully, but don't confuse yourself on where the lines are. I'm not more of a warrior because I signed 7 more students this week. I'm more of a warrior because of the time spent in perfection of my art, and of myself.

I certainly wouldn't want my potential clients to know that I need X number of them to sign so I can get to my 5th degree. Scam, no. Just poor business ethics.

[MartialArthur]

Warriorship is what it is; business is what it is; the two can be mixed successfully

At some point high up in the rankings it is not just about your own skill level. That would preclude 60 year old masters from advancing. It also should includes teaching and improving the art. It should not be measured in $$, but measuring it in # of students is a reasonable measure of teaching and business prowess.

[Mr. Mike]

so if I live in a low population area, or an economically depressed area, I may never reach a higher dan ranking according to this?