Credibility of instruction

[Kruczek]

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.

I have never heard this before, but I think I will be quoting this regularly. Good thoughts.

[Tiger1962]

...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.

Wow! You hit the nail dead center on the head. I find this SO darn true...I know of a couple situations that fit this description.

...if you take off the belts of all the students, you cant tell who is advance, who is beginner.

Very true in some cases and not just for kids, in some adults as well!

[Traymond]

Hmmm Iron sifu you seem to be a very intelligent person, a man of not just martial skill I spose, but also a man of intellectual beauty.

[Kruczek]

Hmmm Iron sifu you seem to be a very intelligent person, a man of not just martial skill I spose, but also a man of intellectual beauty.

If only he were single...jk

Good points though!

[ps1]

Wow!!! This has had alot of responses! I appreciate that. However, I think many of you may be misinterpreting my question. I've seen many people talk about needing knowledge of the art and an ability to teach. That is a given (Since I started the thread, I can say that:)). I have trouble believing that anyone would agree someone without those things should be teaching. There are people out there that don't teach well or have the technical knowledge, but that's another issue all together.

The question was 2 part:

1) What qualifies a person to teach? Most everyone has answered this. It's a question that is answered with extrinsic factors. Black Belt, former fighter, certified and so on...

2) What makes their teaching credible? Not many have answered this question. This is an intrinsic question. Perhaps a better way to state it is: what must be necessary in that teachers training to make you happy with their instruction?

So far, I think ironsifu and joesteph have answered the question fully. Others have hinted at part 2, but not much.

I'll give my opinions on the subject in about a week. Until then, I really appreciate all the input so far.

[tallgeese]

I think creedability is most readily acheived by looking at their product. Are their students able to replicate movement properly in regard to their own body type. Can they eithera)be on a track to equal thier insturctor, b) be equal to him c) surpass him.

Acheive one of those and i think you're credable.

[Tiger1962]

The question was 2 part:

1) What qualifies a person to teach? Most everyone has answered this. It's a question that is answered with extrinsic factors. Black Belt, former fighter, certified and so on...

Thank you for clarifying...Ok, let's see, here goes:

My answer for the first question would be: certification, sufficient experience, trained under a highly qualified instructor/teacher, proven his/her capabilities in his knowledge and expertise.

2) What makes their teaching credible? Not many have answered this question. This is an intrinsic question. Perhaps a better way to state it is: what must be necessary in that teachers training to make you happy with their instruction?

My answer here covers a lot of different areas/topics: what would make me happy with their instruction?

Being a good motivator in class, able to hold my attention, fair in all aspects and not showing partiality to friends, family members, etc. that might belong to the school; being approachable and available for questioning regarding troublesome techniques; having separate classes for adults and children, knowing their material and being able to back that up. Plus, being a good business person in the mechanics of running the school - meaning, don't raise my tuition if the school is cold as a meatlocker in the winter and stifling like a sauna in the summer. You get the idea.....One must be a good business person in addition to being a good instructor. I mean, that's how you RETAIN students.

Also an instructor should continue to train with THEIR own teacher as often as possible to keep current and "fresh" with their training.

I could go on but that's the gist of it.

Edited January 12, 2009 by Tiger1962

[bushido_man96]

2) What makes their teaching credible? Not many have answered this question. This is an intrinsic question. Perhaps a better way to state it is: what must be necessary in that teachers training to make you happy with their instruction?

If you can compare your skill level with the newcomers to the class, and can notice a significant difference, and you can compare your skill levels to those of the instructor, and notice your improvement, then I think that is a step in the right direction, if that makes sense. Noticeable improvement in skill level and physical abilities, along with concepts of how to apply things.

[bushido_man96]

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.

Although I can't argue that this isn't a good point to take into consideration, I don't think it is something that is feasable for everyone to achieve. Not for 10 years, anyway. I did some competing, and I'm willing to admit that I wasn't ever that great at it. But I gave it a go, but not for 10 years. However, I still feel that I have the ability to pass on some important aspects of training for sparring, even if it is for point TKD sparring.

[tori]

I think that for someone to have credibility to teach, they should be active in their own training. If an instructor is no longer training with his/her own instructor, they give the impression that they have mastered their style and are unteachable. He/she should always see themselves as students and they should be able to learn from their students.

A good instructor should be able to keep you motivated to learn. If you are looking at the clock during your lesson to see when it will be over, you have lost your motivation.

At the end of a lesson, you would hope that you were shown something to make your technique better, leaving you excited to go home and practice what you learned.

A good instructor should never look at their own skill and feel that it is perfect.

I could go on and on with what I think a credible instructor should be. I am very happy with my own training and my instructor. He has been training for 24 years. He continues to train with his instructor. I still look forward to going to class everyday. I can leave class at times with the "wow, I didn't know that' mentalitiy.

I am a 3rd Dan and I still feel I have much to learn from him.