Requirement for Blackbelt = Teaching Ability?

Discussion in 'Hapkido' started by MaxG, Sep 8, 2005.

?

Should teaching capability be necessary for Black Belt?

  1. Yes

    23 vote(s)
    41.1%
  2. No

    33 vote(s)
    58.9%
  1. Kwajman

    Kwajman Penguin in paradise....


    What a great analogy!
     
  2. Topher

    Topher allo!

    I think one of the first things some need to overcome is to actually get used to giving commands to students. Sometimes where i train the mid-level belts or once or twice (high) beginners are allowed to take the warm-up. Occasionally we would also assist the instructor in basic forms and step sparring with the beginners.

    I already know our warm-up off by heart so don’t see why someone can’t get used to doing it.

    I think it's worth getting them used to supervising/teaching as soon as they show ability to do so, then when there at the higher ranks they can feel comfortable with giving instructions and minor teaching they can really focus on the actual instructing.

    Even though I know I don’t want to teach for a long time yet I don’t want to miss this opportunity to learn this stuff.

    To answer the question i dont think it should be a requirment, but should be made avaliable.
     
  3. MaxG

    MaxG Valued Member

    Very interesting results so far. At this moment 63% say that no it shouldn't be a requirement.

    So I guess if I went to all those schools that voted "no" then your Black Belts that you or your teacher have appointed aren't necessarily capable of teaching the lower rank techniques to the lower students?

    So what I am saying is that it's ok for a Black Belt in those schools to be able to do the technique but if he can't teach a white belt how to do simple breakaways then it's ok?

    Just clarifying.
     
  4. Brad Ellin

    Brad Ellin Baba

    Oh, they could effectively teach it, but it is not and should not be a requirement for attaining Black Belt. That was the question. Not whether they were capable of teaching, but if it should be a requirement. I still say that it shouldn't.
     
  5. American HKD

    American HKD New Member

    Greetings

    Your now changing your original question.

    Yes maybe they can help "Assist", it still has nothing to do with earning thier own BB.

    People here are mixing up Teach and Assist.

    The Qualified Master/Instr. "teaches" a BB or other student simply "Assists".

    A 1st dan is no Teacher in any art, they just got out of diapers! :bang:

    Many of you guys are seriously confused about who's who and who's qualified to be a teacher and it's in no way a 1st dan is. A 2nd dan is begining to understand, a 3rd alittle more and a 4th Dan and above is usually matured enough in a system to teach.

    But that does'nt automatically make them a Good Teacher.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2005
  6. TheCount

    TheCount Happiness is a mindset

    I personally think if someone is going fror their 3rd Dan (where in karate you start teaching) they should prove that they have teaching ability so avoid bad teaching and bad quality of it (ie. GKR)
     
  7. pgm316

    pgm316 lifting metal

    I agree, I hate being taught by people that have trained for far less time than I have myself. :eek:

    I don't understand the obsession with having people teach. :confused: Where else would this happen?

    It means people get substandard training, then they have teaching to look forward to when they should be learning :D
     
  8. Leo_E_49

    Leo_E_49 Valued Member

    Coaching courses

    In both my TKD and JJ experiences, teaching is separated from actual knowledge of the art or skill. If you want to be a teacher, you have to attain a certain rank (not even black belt, you can teach at brown in TKD and purple in JJ) but you have to attend a Coaching course. There are a number of levels of these courses which qualify you to teach increasing sizes of classes and increasing complexity, etc. If a BB does not have a coaching certification, no matter what the rank, they are NOT permitted to teach. (Assisting in a class is permitted) Teaching/coaching is a separate skillset from MA, just because you can kick well doesn't mean you're a good teacher/coach.
     
  9. American HKD

    American HKD New Member


    Greetings,

    That's the "Key" teaching ability.

    However you don't know if you can develope into a good teacher until you try.

    That's why one needs to be an "Assistant" under a qualified Instr. for a few years to see if they'll develope.

    But a black belts shouldn't go running around teaching or opening Dojang's IMO.
     
  10. Thomas

    Thomas Combat Hapkido/Taekwondo

    If we want them to be able to teach it, then we are obliged to teach them how to do so (i.e. "to teach").

    One of the main reasons that we have (limited) teaching requirements for black belt is to ensure that when other students go to any of our black belts (as they do and as we want them to), that our black belts have the basic philosophy, technqiues, and experience in "teaching" that we require. The basic reason is to make sure that the system is being taught right.
    However...
    I do agree with this. I think that 1st dans should have a basic level of competatnce in assisting and teaching the system but there is no way we should expect them to open a school or be a "master" of the art. For those who don't want to be "instructors", they still need the experience and practice in assisting and basic teaching because they will be asked to do so. Those who are committed to being "instructors" need more specialized and specific traniing and practice for the depth we require from them
     
  11. Jointlock

    Jointlock Valued Member

    You are correct that most of us do not agree on the definition of teaching. I would say that most of the people that voted for teaching as a requirement don't think that fresh 1st Dans should be considered teachers. However, anyone that convey's knowledge to someone else is in fact teaching. They may not be "Teachers" but anyone has the ability to teach. By your definition I think that almost all of us would vote for assist as opposed to teach.

    You seem to be very hung up on rank as some type of a scale that defines a martial artist. In my opinion rank is an illusion and can only be defined within your own school/organization. I have met 5th and 6th dans that weren't worth their weight in snot. I've also met 2nd and 3rd dans that I would much rather train with because they were much more dedicated to the martial arts. Being able to teach is something that anyone can do, even a yellow belt, but being a good teacher takes dedication, experience, knowledge, and more.

    Actually, when I was in college for computer programming there were several occasions where I was asked by other students to tutor them. I was a student and I hadn't graduated, but I would consider what I was doing as teaching. The tutoring didn't replace their regular lectures, but it helped them learn and it helped me understand the subject better.
     
  12. pgm316

    pgm316 lifting metal

    Help and assistance is one thing, but they didn't say "Jointlock! Take the class!"

    I don't think teaching ability should be a requirement, but an option you look into when blackbelt.
     
  13. MaxG

    MaxG Valued Member

    No I'm not changing my question. You just seem not to be understanding.

    You're arguing semantics now. The fact is if you assign a Black Belt in your school to "assist" ,as you call it, in the training of a lower belt, he is "teaching" that lower belt. Thus the question I asked: Should a person be able to teach to be assigned a Black Belt.

    Nothing in the original question suggested a 1st Dan opening up their own school as you insinuated.

    Using your analogy. If someone graduates from highschool and can't teach someone how to add 10 and 10 together should he have graduated from high school?

    This is the core of the issue at hand. Thank you Thomas for understanding.

    I think that everyone can agree that as a Black Belt in a particular school you are looked upon by the other students as someone to go to for help on a particular technique.

    Now if an instructor does not see this ability in a potential Black Belt should he withhold dan ranking until such a time as this particular person learns this ability and can be expected to teach a lower rank as is usually expected of a Black Belt?
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2005
  14. Davey Bones

    Davey Bones New Member

    I think at this point it's philosophical differences coming to the front. It's obvious that some people feel that a first dan is not qualified to teach under any circumstances, while others believe that you should be learnig to teach as soon as possible.

    But the fact still remians that students must be able to effectively communicate ideas and concepts to lower belts, and if they hit first dan and stil don't understand their first short form well enought o explain it to another student, you've got some serious problems as to whether or not they really understand the material.

    On a certain level, I think the BJJers have it right. They don't worry about ranks and colors as much as they worry about skill.
     
  15. Jointlock

    Jointlock Valued Member

    Good point, I guess my analogy wasn't the best. In most situations that I've been in, when someone learning to teach takes the class the instructor is there helping, correcting, and adding to whatever is being taught. Our requirements on teaching have more to do with what BaiKaiGuy just said. A student should know how to convey the basics in their own words to show understanding and comprehension of the material. This is usually done through assisting a low rank student one on one rather than throwing the student to the wolves and taking over the whole class.
     
  16. Utotin

    Utotin Valued Member

    It appears that this is a very complex issue. My take on it is pretty similar to that of most who have posted. I think that although a BB should not be required to automatically become an "official" instructor, I think that they should be required to not only understand the material well but have at least a minimum ability to teach so that they can assist in class if necessary and be able to step up and "help" their juniors with techniques.

    With this being said, I know that not everyone has natural teaching ability, but I think that at it can be taught to some extent. Durring hoshinsool practice I usually like to pair up juniors with a senior if possible (with the instruction to "help them out if they need it") so that the senior is put in a position where they are forced to try and explain things to their partner. I think this helps the senior student to really think through their techniques and eventually helps them develop a "strategy" for imparting their knowledge. Also in regard to the thread about student retaing old techniques, I think that this method also insures that student will remember techniques from previous belts and as we all agree, teaching a technique usually makes one improve their own technique considerably.

    I also think that requiring senior student to run warm ups and occaisionally lead the class through basics (punches or kicks) accomplishes a lot. I have noticed that students are terrified to come up to the front of class & do that in the beginning. Eventually their confidence increases to the point that they can do this not only effectively but sometimes even very well. This is a skill they the student may have not realized they had.

    Now on to becoming an actual "Instructor." I think that requiring students to aquire at least minimal teaching skills serves a few purposes in this regard. First of all like I mentioned, many people do not realize that they have any talent for this so it gives them an opportunity to realize these hiden skills. Secondly it gives the Head Instructor a chance to see who actually has talent and potential for becoming a good teacher so that they can be mentored and their natural teaching ability can be cultivated to its maximum potential and eventually allow that student to become an actual Instructor within the school and maybe even open up their very own school.

    Just my thoughts on the matter. This is the way things were done while I was coming up & it seems to have worked out pretty well.
     
  17. American HKD

    American HKD New Member


    Greetings,

    There's a big difference between a Master Instr. and a 1st dan. An assistant 1st dan doen't have the expertise that a Master does nor is he excepted to by anyone with any sense of reality.

    Assistings means he's teaching in some sense, but at what level of competance and real authority? None at all!

    A 1st dan can't promote anyone to any level even 1 gup, most Korean based MA require a minimum 4th dan to promote anyone to BB. That goes for Sin Moo, KHF, Kukkiwon, and many others.

    It's clear from most Associations that they expect a Full Instr. to be someone with 10-15yrs expirence, 4th dan in rank, many require instructors training camps so Instrs. know how to teach, understand the curriculum, etc.

    In the KHF you must be a 3rd dan to attend Instr. training. anyone under that is not considered expirienced enough to teach on thier own authority.

    But you still get a 1st, 2nd, 3rd dan without having to be qualified to teach.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2005
  18. Topher

    Topher allo!

    I have to say i disagree with that. My instructor is a 2nd Dan (was a 1st Dan when i joined) and i have to say is a great teacher.

    I dont think a 1st and 2nd Dan is just "beginning to understand" the system. I would think a solid 5 years of training would put someone in a better position that "just understanding". Sure they have a long way to go to master the training and techniques etc but rank is irrelevant in my eyes. Some people may not bother grading beyong 1st dan, but still progress to higher rank in skill. You've also got to take in teaching ability. Someone may be a brown belt, but learnt to teach from the beginning, and someone who is a 3rd dan who hasn't focused on teaching. Sure, the 3rd dan is better, but the brown belt is the better teacher, hence i would want to learn from the latter. I've also noted that in most styles all you really learn from 1st Dan and above is new forms.

    Also it depends on the style. I believe a BJJ purple belt is more than capable of teaching/taking classes (correct me if i'm wrong). And in Wing Chun there are 4 black sash levels, but off all the black level one instructors i've met, all say they will probably never grade again. On another note, green sashes are allowed to teach there own class (up to their level) with permission from Sifu.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2005
  19. Mufty

    Mufty New Member

    I think that its essential that a Dan grade should be able to teach otherwise why be a Dan grade ? Whats the point of learning such a skill like the Martial arts, that takes so much time and effort, from your instructors to get you where you are, without putting somthing back into the arts.

    If you are intending to achive a Dan grade do it because you love the martial arts enough to want to teach other wise just stick at training as a kyu grade.
     
  20. Davey Bones

    Davey Bones New Member

    Anbd they've shown to be quite capable as well. Hence why I pointed this out three or four posts ago... it's not about rank, it's about skill.
     

Share This Page