Carrot or Stick?

[jh5638]

Heya guys and gals, first post so far, so thought i would open up a debate ive been thinking of recently. In the last few months i have left my home dojo to go to a new one in a different city (due to starting uni). Having trained at my home dojo for 11 years (so maybe a bit biased) i find this new dojo to be in many ways the opposite do what i am used to.

So what i wanted to ask is peoples opinions on whether the carrot or stick method is better/produces better results in students? What are peoples views/experiences?

Many thanks

Jon

[Killer Miller]

??? I don't get it? Perhaps a little more explanation???

- Killer -

[jh5638]

Oh sorry i mean't some classes that you go to the philosophy is "train hard fight easy" that students are in effect beaten and conditioned and trained very hard.(stick) Wheras the opposite is the carrot method where the students train hard, but as my sensei taught, mindless violence to prove a point is in itself futile. I'm finding it a bit hard to define what i mean but i hope your getting the point. I think of the stick method as the style taught by the very old fashioned instructors.

Hope this clears it up?

Can go into more detail if neccessary.

Thanks Jon

[Killer Miller]

Well, you have to train hard with the visual that you are truly defending youself. Not to be beaten, but trained hard and strict so reaction and muscle memory are the same whether you are training or truly defending yourself. If this is the stick, or old method, I'm for it. If just intentionaly beaten without purpose, I'm against it.

If traied with a lot of discussion, and little physical training by comparison, and the instructor is "nicey nicey" for money and diplomatic reason, I'm against it. If this is what you mean by the carrot?

Too many people taking martial arts get into classes with false impressions as to what martial arts truly are. If it's too rough, they quit. So you have dojos that will teach students what they want, instead of what they need to learn the art, in order to retain a student and make bills for the high and fancy overhead.

I use to have parents complain to me that their son or daughter had to mop the floor before training. What they were really doing was running up and down the dojo floor, bent over with a rag in their hands, which not only cleaned up the bacteria from the floor for their bare feet, but also was a good warm up and strength builder for their legs. This was an old Japanese tradition that I firmly believed in doing. I explained this to the parents - they were not satisfied with my explanation. I told the parents that this was tradition, my training method, and they were welcome look for another Karate instructor for their children elsewhere. One did, one stayed.

My point is that there are arts or instructors that may have strict training methods with a good purpose. You don't get a lot of explanation as to why, but the results are for a life time. There's other instructors that are just strict and without purpose - not good and stay away from. There are schools that just teach you what "you" want and take your money in the process - not good, but might be a good social venue for you (which I not totally against if this is the reason for taking the class with that instructor). But any good instructor will never teach you what you want, or always explain what you want to hear, but recognize you needs and weaknesses to build you as a whole for the end result of the art. I use to explain things in my classes if I felt the explaination was beneficial for their understanding and development at that time. But if I felt that the explanation, at that point, would confuse them on the big picture, I will not explain, but develop more important factors of the development instead.

When I had my dojos, I was up to 80 and over 100 students at one point - sometimes classes of 30 to 50 in a class. The spirit energy of these classes were amazing. Oh, and I also don't believe in private lessons... Waste of time because you need the variety students and spirit of the class to truly learn the art.

Am I old school? Definately. Is that perceived as mean? Perhaps? But when my students went to a tournament of had to truly defend theirselves, they reacted naturally and appropriately and did very well. This makes me feel good that they truly learned something and my valuable time was not wasted...

- Killer -

[jh5638]

I see your point but (and partly for arguments sake) i don't believe this is complete. Looking at my old class i will admit that this was quite a "carrot" class, but without going into specifics it would be wrong to say that he was in it for the money, to please us and especially to say his teaching was ineffective.

If you want to look at competitions (which personally i think aren't at all worthwile in showing true effectiveness - that being another debate) Our class did very well in all competitions. But my main reason for bringing this up is that at my new class it is a very "stick" kind of class. Maybe it is just bias but even though this is a very good class i do feel in having taken this approach they have lost some aspects into what karate is and should be. To fully get my whole thougts across i believe i would be here typing all night but to give examples, it is true they do kata (of which i am a great fan) but i feel they don't gain as much as they should do, they practice and learn the bunkai but shouldn't the point be to understand yourself and the moves and realise and be able to use the combinations. Even with that point i am struggling to make clear what i mean but what i guess my point is boiling down to is that i feel only so much can be gained from hard (stick classes) they are very good and in themselves a very valuable tool but i don't believe they can deliver everythng by themeselves. I believe that they do train the body very well but without trying to sound cliched i feel that maybe theyre not training the mind in the best way. I'm not saying as in your point that the meanings of moves aren't explained but i feel that doing things like rote learning the "official bunkai" can only teach so much, and as in this example would it not be better at times to relax the setting and lets students discover the whole wealth of other meanings between every kata. I feel in this way that every grade can learn so much from even a beginner. What do you think?

Jon

[cathal]

I think it really all depends on what you want to get out of your training.

[jh5638]

Hmm well i don't quite agree, in both clubs i can see students who will never really get anywhere is this a lack of motivation or concentration? I don't really think the method of teaching changes the subject matter so all i can think of is that you must get out what you put in. We have all seen those students who turn up more for the social side and seem to have a complete revulsion to learning something new. There are also many students in my new class who may be ultra fit and know all the standard bunkai perfectly but put them to sparring and all technique flys out of the window. Yet i believe this goes further to saying because of this stick teaching method there are some things that they will never learn and so subsequently never be able to apply. Worse still i feel in a lot of cases it is giving a lot of false confidence which if we look at karate for self defense is pretty much the worst thing you could have. However i am really not putting this new class down, it is really nice to see another side to my style (however i am very glad to have some firm basis with my old club first) i am also loving the elements that my new sensei is bringing in from so many other styles.

Jon

[Meguro]

Are you talking about motivational approaches to martial arts instruction?The study of martial arts is pretty much a voluntary activity. There shouldn't be any need to use carrot or stick to motivate the adult student. Presumably, the adult student is paying to learn and is therefore already motivated.

If you're teaching children martial arts, the promise of a new colored belt should be all the motivation they need. The belts would qualify as "carrot". If you have to resort to violence (which is really what the stick represents in your analogy) you shouldn't be allowed near children.

If motivational approaches to instruction are not what you're talking about, lose the carrot and stick referrences and restate your question.

[Jay]

Carrot Its alot less painful i have had teachers that are both and i much perfer the carrot method although to be good you really need an appropriate mixture of the two at certain times you need to be more stick and others more carrot.

[jh5638]

yeh well i was talking mainly about teaching methods and the results they produce in students. I do accept that even the best teacher in the world could never get throught to some students so really it is up to us/them as well (learning methods?) Also i don't really think belts should ever be used as a reward. In this case i do prefer the thinking that they are merely some indicator to ability. Using a psychological argument involving self motivation then when they get older and the mystical draw of the next belt reduces then what now is the "intrinsic motivation"?(can quote studies if need be) In my class theyre may only have been a grading every few years, whenever our sensei deemed fit. In fact occasionally we were failed to test spirit, so yes many friends got there black belts in different styles many years ago (wheras i am happily still working to mine) does that make them better though? Thanks Jon