Hi kiaki The fellow had been training about four years and had his own club. Aikido was more of a "habit" with him. He always trained in his comfort zone.He had in fact "stopped a few years ago. Training without challenge is pointless. This is what he was shown and this is where he could not find the spirit to continue. Had the instruction be changed to suit his "requirements" then we would have been changing the art not the student.Another point being made was that you simply did not decide to start your own club and begin teaching. THAT HAD TO BE EARNED THROUGH RIGOROUS TRAINING. Regards koyo
Hi Rebel Last practice we chose a few techniques and studied the angle of entry.We did this against empty hand and dagger then studied the sword and stick applications.Near the end of the training I pointed out that everyone had been unconsiously adjusting the maai to the relevent attacks. So while they had been "concentrating " on entry their bodies had been "studying" maai. The main point of the training. Angle of entry and kiai
Good example Koyo. I should have said that what is learned is hopefully more than the stated purpose of an exercise. I believe that it isn't as important what is taught, but more important is what is learned.
Aikido had become a recreational activity to him. If it was not "fun" (his words) we were not training properly. To be frank many aikidoka ran for cover when Chiba shihan appeared preffering to say he was too hard than to admit they themselves did not have the commitment to serious training. He continued to teach for a few months afterwards then the club folded and the students could not addapt to the more serious training. Koyo
Due to my original instructor walking away from our club, as the senior grade I was forced to teach from 1st Kyu or close the club. After a year or so I realized that If I wanted to progress any futher in Aikido I would have to get of my backside and find teacher who would improve my Aikido. As a Tomiki stylist I decided to study under the instruction of Dr Lee ah Loi and Ken Broome. Dr Lee was and still is one of the best Tomiki Aikidoka in the world technically and Ken was one of the best competitive Aikidoka in the country. Sometimes twice weekly I would make the round trip from Benfleet in Essex to Wandsworth in London to practice. I also kept running my own club untill this present day 30 + years on. In the ideal world I think that sandan is around the level to open a club. Lower levels than that should have a regular visiting senior instructor. Looking at the house system that the UKA operate is the ideal model.
I have been told that sensei (one who has gone before) and sempai(one with more experience) are not teachers but examples of how kohei junior students should behave and train.This is a great responsibility and cannot be appraoched in any other way than with spirit commitment and humility I believe that aikido is aikido regardless what school if it is sincere and honest it is a worthy example. Koyo
I agree, but have also seen some sad examples of a good practitioner who was quite unable to teach - they may have 'gone before' but can't help others to follow for various reasons. Shudokan had a rigorous programme which ensured that those who wanted to instruct would be trained and regularly supported and assessed.. As a criticism, it did not really allow Dan grades to practice without teaching. Every 3rd Kyu would be expected to assist with beginners etc. At 1st Kyu this was recognised by the Sempei title, and by 1st Dan most were already used to leading a class, albeit under supervision. By 3rd Dan one was deemed to be a Sensei and could grade Kyu grades - hence the need for close supervision and instructor training to ensure standardisation. The NVQ system was eventually introduced but was not IMHO a good fit with MA practice. We know there are great benefits to one's own practice to be gained by teaching others, but I sometimes wish there was room for Dan grades who just practised and led by example in other ways rather than instruction. I'm sure we lose some good people by pushing them into being instructors and also lose some good students who are on the receiving end.
I've experienced that sort of senario as well. I would agree that while some students might understand what they are doing, they aren't too good at putting it across to others students. While it would be great to live in an ideal world where you could just practice the techniques and have beginners copy and understand, this doesn't happen in the real world. There are times where you have to stop what you're doing and correct a persistent mistake. Which sometimes requires verbal explanation. I'm also not too keen on written exams in Aikido or martial arts in general. It could be because I can still remember all my exams at high school, college then univerity. But I think to reduce a martial art to a paper based exam some how misses the point of a life long study.
Kiaki has hit it on the nail "teach" by example by simply allowing the student to observe your manner of training.By observing an excellent aikidoka the student must ask himself what makes an excellent aikidoka and the answers are commitment to training strong spirit and proper attitude to fellow students. Having seen thisthe student must find them in and for himself. Whether the "excellent" aikidoka was a good "teacher" or not matters not at all that he was a fine example does. regards koyo
Aha - at last we differ on something If there is only one instructor who is a wonderful performer of the art but simply can't organise or instruct well, then I do believe he lacks a set of skills we need in Western countries practising MA. I know of a Japanese student who was told to 'steal with the eyes' as she was only allowed to watch (Daito Ryu) - for a whole year! Most western students need much more 'spoonfeeding' IMHO and need to build 'commitment' and learn patience over time. Most would never come back if their first class comprised watching alone. We had one 1st Dan who was an excellent practitioner and a fine example for others to watch, train with and learn from as they went along. He was also a doorrman and was often able to show how Aikido was able to be applied to modern 'street' fights. Taking a beginner and showing him some ukemi was simply not his strength; but give him jiyuwaza, fast and fierce, and it was a joy and inspiration to behold. But we still need those who can take time to prepare interesting classes, manage groups, give time to break things down for a slow beginner etc., work through a grading curriculum and give support as and when needed. A club is lucky to have distinct examples of excellent practitioners and excellent instructors and I have no problem with a brilliant exponent of martial arts not instructing because they are simply no good at that, as long as there is somebody else keen to do it. To me, the worst case scenario is a bunch of higher grades who all instruct and are all mediocre at everything.
Aha I agree!! I agree that beginners must be taught in a safe and interesting manner being guided throught the basic principles. However I was speaking of the student who had been training in his own comfort zone for a number of years and when put under pressure decided to leave.This I feel is a bad example to students. We can only expect to be taken by the hand in the beginning true progress is down to our own commitment and honesty.I guess I was also reacting to the many "robots" who simply go through the motions with no reality in their training. Or the "teachers" who change the art and expect the students to become clones.If a student is shown the basics then told to seek out the truths of aikido himself with some guidance but no hinderance I feel that the art would be richer. Koyo
I've been made aware in the past of the dangers of becoming complacent in martial arts (e.g. becoming so comfortable in their martial arts that one does not believe it is necessary to challenge themselves or learn new things). At varioius stages in martial arts training, everyone can be subject to points of "cockiness" and belief that they know more than they actually do. One test of character is how one deals with "rude awakenings" when what they think they know doesn't work. It really comes down to testing out what you think you know in close to real situations. I think the mark of a good teacher is to load up students with required knowledge AND to give the students a means to test out this knowledge in close to real world situations appropriate to their level. This means that OTHER students are just as important as the teacher in creating a good learning environment. This could take years to accomplish the right learning environment as it might be very difficult to get a 98 lbs light-weight person to be in the right frame of mind to train with a 300 lbs sweaty guy rolling on the ground or hitting full contact (with appropriate control for safety and learning). People often need some "heads up" that this is what will happen, maybe it takes years to get there, but eventually it will happen or they will have to train somewhere else. So another mark of a good teacher to me is to be able to give people sufficient time to be mentally prepared for a good learning environment, to constantly challenge themselves... eventually so that they seek this out for themselves without the need for much coaching.
Hi Rebel Regarding the other students being as important as the teacher I could not agree more..Last night the boys came over to me and said that trying to throw Steve was like uprouting a tree. I asked Steve to attack and threw him. When asked how to do it I said "unbalance him first" Of course they all new this but had tended to fight him a little so back they went and soon they were training better. I had not told them how to unbalance him as they already knew but had not been concentrating enough in that area.So basically I gave them direction and left them to "teach" themselves.Similarly at the weekend we attended a ko budo course given by Julian Meade. He was teaching me advanced principles of the bo however I have little experience of the bo so I watched the kyu grades since shihan Meade's technique was too subtle for me and I learned from the "lower" grades how to manipulate the bo. So as you say the other students are as important as the sensei. Good lesson. Thank you. shihan Meade who with his students made us feel so welcome Regards koyo
SCENARIO Beginner relatively fit no previous experience in martial arts. First class.???(instruction) The first principle of aikido is DO NOT GET HIT the second principle is REMEMBER THE FIRST (demonstrate) This is basic aikido posture it is triangular giving the smallest target area to the attacker and having mobility in all directions allowing ATTACKS of your own.(instruction)Next principle move off of the line of attack.Never receive an attack when immobile(demonstrate) Technique is applied on advanced student powerfully but slow enough that the beginner may see the principles applied.(ikkyo from yodan tsuke) (practice) sempai attacks powerfully and accurately but slow enough that the beginner may escape to the side. (instruction) this is the correct body alignment at right angles to the line of attack.Strike the elbow and address the kuzushi.The beginner is shown the proper angle to execute the unbalancing sempai retains his balance until the proper angle is found.The beginner has executed his first technique. He must be told that all he has been shown was not to get hit get out of line and unbalance the attacker. He must now practice this time and again to learn the principles before the technique shall be at all effective. HE MUST NOT ATTEMPT TO EXECUTE A FLOWING TECHNIQUE AGAINST AN ACCOMODATING PARTNER. Koyo triangular kamae "open" to draw yodan tsuke
The should train the same as everyone else. Best way to learn. If they struggle the other students should pitch in an help but the class should not be tailored to beginners. I find they come on much quicker if you don't pamper them. The Bear.
If a beginner is given an experienced and compliant Uke their confidence will grow very quickly - and be shattered even more quickly when they realise that because their Uke was being 'kind' their own techniques simply do not work against a less compliant Uke. It's a fine balance between building confidence by ensuring a beginner feels successful and need for them to persevere again and again until they KNOW their techniques work.
The problem I find is that a great number of aikidoka teachers and students adopt a "superior" spiritual attitude to other martial arts without ever having their spirit tested by acurate and powerful attacks or add mysticism to the concept of ki training in a theoretical manner again in techniques that will not stand up against aggresive attack. One from the archives training in the seventies. Atemi before the technique is applied
Spirit-testing. This is a concept we have lost. I just find people so risk adverse these days, all insurance and risk assesment. Why don't they have spirit-testing in gradings? Too much Ghandi and not enough Genghis I fear. The Bear.
..I'm fairly sure I've said as much in another thread recently. Its a shame that apparently I don't have any credibility on this forum.. Oh well.
