Credibility of instruction

[bushido_man96]

My question is this? What do you feel qualifies a person to instruct and what makes their instruction credible?

I think that you have to look at this on a per-style basis; not all styles are going to have the same goal. That said, here goes....

1. Knowledge of curriculum of the system. You have to know math, to teach math. At the same time, you need to know the forms, self-defense techniques, etc., and what makes them work, to be able to relay them to students.

2. Teaching ability. This may seem like a no-brainer, but one can have the knowledge listed above, but not know how to relate that knowledge to others in a way conducive to teaching. The "school of hard knocks" is not always the best school to attend.

3. Good technique. Having good technique makes teaching easier, especially when you can physcially demonstrate what you are talking about. It doesn't have to be the best technique in the world, but it should meet a standard of what is considered acceptable. Now, this has nothing to do with being a superior athlete, although being in good physical condition will help.

4. Be an adult. This should probably be farther up the list, but I am not necessarily going by order of importance here. An adult will have a higher level of understanding, and can better demonstrate the authority needed to teach.

I've been offline a few days, and haven't read the other posts here yet. So, the above was typed straight from my mind. Now, I'll enjoy everyone elses posts.

[bushido_man96]

The wild card in this is the age of the students. Someone can be a fine instructor of a certain age group, and yet a dud with another. Being able to teach different ages equally well is not common in the field of education. Is it the same with martial arts instuctors, who are, after all, teachers?

This can be an issue in the MAs. However, I think that it is one that can be overcome. You can "learn" to teach kids, like you do adults. With that said, there are some instructors that are better with kids than others. With kids, things like attention span comes into play. So, if you have something specific that you want to drill on, you may have to come up with 3 different ways to drill it, over 15 minute periods each, to get the number of reps you would out of an adult class where you might just use one drill.

[bushido_man96]

Should we all agree to make it a "Given" that the person who is the instructor does possess the knowledge?

Ahh,but isn't this the point, how do you qualify this.

Yes, there are good teachers and bad out there, and to extent I buy into the "you can teach or you can't" way of thinking, but I don't think it stops there.

Good teaching is down to good communication and classroom management, thats a given. True in depth technical knowledge is something else. imo.

This is perhaps why we have a lot of very enthusiastic ma clubs around the uk who are taught by "effervescent" teachers who nurture very keen students, but at the end of the day "technically" they are rubbish.

Understanding of technique/purpose is king. The rest is down to how you get it across.

I can see what both are saying here. I think WNM has the edge, though, as in many MAs, upon becoming a black belt, may be asked to help some students. They can very quickly find out then that the way they learned a technique may not be the way the person they are helping is able to pick it up. So, you have to be able to change tack, and help in a different way, to get the same results. Not everyone can do this.

At the risk of "double quoting," I'd like to point out this statemtent:

This is perhaps why we have a lot of very enthusiastic ma clubs around the uk who are taught by "effervescent" teachers who nurture very keen students, but at the end of the day "technically" they are rubbish.

What I think WNM is saying here (and please jump in an correct me if I am wrong....) is that it is easy to teach the talented students. I take the most pride in helping those that are not as talented, or blessed with some natural attribute, and seeing that light bulb come on, and their face light up and say "oh yeah!"

[ironsifu]

I will answer you this way. Not all Black Belts can teach! Either you can or you can't! Proof is on the floor! It takes more than platitudes and a black belt around ones waist to teach!

this is very true. i think anybody who can make a weak student strong, and teach a strong student control and make him better is qualified.

there's a lot who will disagree and talk about certificates, exams, blah blah blah. but lets look at boxing. who certifies boxing teachers, besides the money making organization? no one. you open a place, no matter if you was a good fighter when you were young, and if your guys go to a competition and they suck, you will probably go out of business (or switch to LA boxing or something). but if your guys are the beast in the ring, you are celebrated as a great fighter.

look at many fighters who were so-so in the ring, who became great GREAT teachers. cus d'amato, teddy atlas, and some other ones. but then you have ex-champion fighters who never made another champ from the ground up, like sugar ray leonard (i use to box in his gym in maryland) and joe fraizer (any body remember his son? embarassing). then, you have some guys who never fought in the ring, i think lou duva maybe?, but had some champions. some of the best teachers around today, where good but not great fighters when they were young. look at roger maywether, buddy migurt, freddy roach.

i think the old days, many of the people we know today as "grandmasters" and "founder", would not be considered "qualified" today. they study with their teachers only a few years. they had no black belt or certificates. many of them only had a little of this and a little of that. but the reputation of the art, stands on the performance of the students and the quality they can create, and if another teacher questions if this style is good, there is a way for him to find out.

today, they call this a tournament

but now a days, anyone can open a school and teach people. if he is good and his art is real, he will hang around, if not good, he will teach "tiny tigers" and have afterschool karate lol.

[ironsifu]

My question is this? What do you feel qualifies a person to instruct and what makes their instruction credible?

I think that you have to look at this on a per-style basis; not all styles are going to have the same goal. That said, here goes....

1. Knowledge of curriculum of the system. You have to know math, to teach math. At the same time, you need to know the forms, self-defense techniques, etc., and what makes them work, to be able to relay them to students.

2. Teaching ability. This may seem like a no-brainer, but one can have the knowledge listed above, but not know how to relate that knowledge to others in a way conducive to teaching. The "school of hard knocks" is not always the best school to attend.

3. Good technique. Having good technique makes teaching easier, especially when you can physcially demonstrate what you are talking about. It doesn't have to be the best technique in the world, but it should meet a standard of what is considered acceptable. Now, this has nothing to do with being a superior athlete, although being in good physical condition will help.

4. Be an adult. This should probably be farther up the list, but I am not necessarily going by order of importance here. An adult will have a higher level of understanding, and can better demonstrate the authority needed to teach.

I've been offline a few days, and haven't read the other posts here yet. So, the above was typed straight from my mind. Now, I'll enjoy everyone elses posts.

oops, yes, this is right. very basic and very true. i think to add experience (fighting experience). if we are teaching self defense, we are actually teaching a life-or-death skill, that, someone can loose his life, if i am not teaching the real thing. so a qualified teacher has to have his own experiences. so my example, would be, would you have heart surgery from a doctor who learned online? or if he learned from a teacher who never done the surgery himself?

everyone has very good answers here.

[Tiger1962]

Ah, but it is not necessarily a "given" - many assume that because someone is a teacher, they automatically "know" or possess the knowledge to teach. I can honestly say this is not always the case because I have seen a few individuals that are certified instructors or certified assistant instructors and A) can NOT teach for the life of them and B) do NOT remember or know their curriculum.

I have actually seen instructors / assistant instructors demonstrate an INCORRECT way to perform a technique or hyung. (for real!)

So, it is most certainly NOT always a "given".

[joesteph]

. . . if not good, he will teach "tiny tigers" and have afterschool karate lol.

I agreed with a great deal of your posting, Ironsifu, especially since you were able to give names of individuals as examples. However, I don't follow this last reference. I may be misunderstanding you.

I believe it takes a person of special talent to teach the very young. I teach social studies in a college-prep academy, but I couldn't for the life of me teach a social studies class for seven year olds--and I have two of my own.

I really think that individuals who teach the little ones, and who are there teaching the young after school, are providing a wonderful service in terms of imparting values such as respect and self-discipline, and laying an at-the-student's-level foundation in the martial arts.

[BlackTiger]

In order to be qualified to teach one must have the knowledge to teach.Example: Is a 5th grade teacher qualified to teach the first year in colledge ?

Credible teaching is seen in the performance of the teachers students.

Some people are born with a natural abiltiy to teach, They are " people persons", give them knowledge and they pass it on with ease and no ego. A " people person" is liked by most everyone.

The longer we train in M/A the better we become at teaching all ages. Children, adults, and old people are still people and should be treated as such.

If we love people and teaching we belong in it.

M/A teachers are faced with a task quite different then most, we teach all ages, we have to deal with all ages and my hat is off to those of us that succeed.

[ironsifu]

. . . if not good, he will teach "tiny tigers" and have afterschool karate lol.

I agreed with a great deal of your posting, Ironsifu, especially since you were able to give names of individuals as examples. However, I don't follow this last reference. I may be misunderstanding you...

i didnt mean to offend the ones who teach those classes. but what i was trying to say, is that many teachers who do not have enough knowledge to run a strong adult program, end up running a kids program because they cannot keep serious adults. the thing about a kids program is that most kids class does not have a serious art, its more of a choice over soccer. kids running around in uniforms, testing every three months even if they are not ready, stuff like that. in many of those classes, if you take off the belts of all the students, you cant tell who is advance, who is beginner.

but it is true, that there's not many people who can teach a young kid. this is a special skill that is hard to teach even experience teachers. in my school, the youngest students i have is my own kids, who are 8 and 9, but after that my kids class is for teenagers. some teachers do not have the skill to teach a small kid, some (like me) do not like to teach small kids. with my own children, i can demand the kind of attention needed for practice, that i cannot do with somebody else's kids.

and i believe there are two kinds of teachers in business, 1. money first skill second, and 2. skill first money second. in the first kind of teacher you will find 200 students, $50 for testing, black belt in 3 years, and a lot of black belts who are not qualified, but they say this is for "retention" and "self esteem". in the second kind of teacher, you will find 6 years to black belt, blood and bruises on tests, mostly adults, high skill level, and the teacher (lots of times, not always) this guys got a second job.

back to the original question, one of my teachers told me about the path to mastership in the martial arts:

- 10 years of study

- 10 years of teaching while you compete

- 10 years of teaching what you learned while you competed, and during this time, you are considered a "young" master.

you cannot skip part 2. without the competing (any kind, even if its sparring with a group of fighters from different schools), you will not have your own experience to say, that you have "mastered" the art. in the second 10 years, is where you change what you learned because of the sparring. there is too many teachers who skip part 2, and start to make the own style while looking at panther DVDs and watching youtube or attending seminar. this is how we end up with untested, weak style and art, and guys who are brave enough to hang up a sign when he is unqualified.... he never had to prove his skill.

in other arts and skills, they have a "final exam" or "bar exam". in a mechanic school, you fix a car for your test (i am guessing, so dont beat me up). in medical school you do an operation while your master watches. in law school you compete in a moat court against another law student. and so on. but in the martial arts, you should have a match or a couple matches. in my school we have 3 days of matches. when i was in the philippines, one of my teachers was very patient with the black belt, so you had to ask him. when i asked him, he put me against other black belts to prove if i am ready. i pretty much got my BUTT SORRY kicked, but guess what he gave it to me. this is the one i am proud of the most (i have 5 black belts).

i was reading a book online called "ultimate black belt test", and i agree, it is a great way to test the black belt student on his skill and his heart. BUT i still dont believe this should say who is qualified to teach.

[ironsifu]

In order to be qualified to teach one must have the knowledge to teach.Example: Is a 5th grade teacher qualified to teach the first year in colledge ?

The longer we train in M/A the better we become at teaching all ages. Children, adults, and old people are still people and should be treated as such.

M/A teachers are faced with a task quite different then most, we teach all ages, we have to deal with all ages and my hat is off to those of us that succeed.

also, the art you give a 10 year should be different than what you give to a grown man. when a boy gets a black belt, his black belt should not be equal to the adult one. i think too many teachers do not tell the difference.