There have been a few threads recently where the beleifs and practices of instructors/senior students have been questioned. I was wondering what people's opinions are on how the power structure of a class/group should be. Is it a case of the instructor is always right or is it a buyers market where the customer is always right? Does an instructor need to obey the will of the students or do the students need to obey the instructor? How much should people worry about getting on with eachother on a personal level? Should people approach it more professionally, your there to train and the rest is irrelevant? I have had some instructors who are very strict and others who were very relaxed, me personally I prefer the relaxed attitude but I think that requires a degree of maturity from everyone present for the class to still operate. Too relaxed and the work rate goes down hill and people stop listening/learning, at the end of the day the instructor knows best that's why they are teaching. I have never had an instructor I didn't get on well with, I don't know what it would be like learning from some one you didn't like. I'd be interested in hearing other people's experiences and opinions on how the class dynamic should be. As there is potential for a lot middle ground/grey area between the 2 ends of the spectrum id appreciate it if people could try to be specific. I know I didn't do a very good job of that my self.
Everybody has the ability to learn regardless of how experienced. Sometimes it's just in the way you present the change is the only thing getting in the way Ultimately it the guy taking the money that's in charge though, always!
I would say that the instructor is in charge of the way this his club is run, but the customers are in charge of whether they want to train there. If the instructor's a nutter, he'll simply run out of students willing to pay him for tuition.
I don't explicitly tell them this but I consider my instructors paid advisors. I'll nod and listen and apparently take their advice on board but it's ultimately up to me whether I act on it or REALLY take it on board. For example my old TKD instructor wanted me to turn more side on and protect my torso. But I knew that would open me up in Karate sparring (legs kicks and all that). So I made the right noises but quietly ignored him.
I think the great thing is that there is no definitive answer. Different instructors have different styles and different students respond differently to those styles. Find an instructor who's teaching style you respond to and stick with them. If you're in a class and you don't like how it's run, find a different class.
No, I don't believe the instructor is always right. Right on a lot of things, yes. From my experience, when you assume that the instructor is always right you run the risk of getting instructors who become lazy and feed off their egos, which usually ends up with them coming up with wild stories or rubbish reasons or logic. On that note, I'm of the view that if an instructor has to say "I'm the instructor, you do what I tell you!" then they've lost the respect and the voluntary control of their students and shouldn't be trusted. That said, I don't think the customer is right. They're not there to tell the instructor how they want to train. The only thing they're right about is deciding if an instructors' style suits them and whether or not they want to hand over their money to him. If they don't like their instructor, they can shop elsewhere. To a large degree, I believe the students need to obey the instructor more than the other way round. Yeah, there's times and places where a good instructor might need to change up what he's doing to accommodate his students (such as those with disabilities). But at the same time, if the students don't trust that their instructor is right and do what he wants them to do, then why are they there? Hmm, that's a tough one. Obviously it depends on the person as much as anything - some people are naturally hard to be friendly to. The absolute least I will do is ask my training partner if they're OK when we start training together or if there's any health issues I should be concerned about as a common courtesy. My personal preference though..the most I'd do is be FB friends with an instructor and maybe crack the odd joke with them after class, but that's about it. The one instructor I would have called a mate I ended up falling out with horribly and things got really messy which wouldn't have happened if I stayed more personal. So it does jade my own view of things. I wouldn't agree with that. I'd choose an instructor because they know more about their art than I do and because they can transmit that knowledge in a way that makes sense to me. But again, I've had instructors who fall into those categories who still ended up being awful. Not good. From my experience, you end up naturally finding yourself more suspicious of anything they say, more reluctant to listen or to take part in training sessions they recommend, more inclined to argue or be critical of your experiences with them and generally a bit more snarky. And nine times out of 10, they pick up on it as well, which doesn't help. In some cases you can even become a bit despondent about the training in general because of the fact you're going to have to learn under someone you don't like.
To be honest I consider MAP more reliable than individual instructors. There are still instructors that trot out the same old outdated nonsense that we in MAP have collectively been through and sorted out. I still get descriptions of technique application and training that I dismiss because of exposure to people like jwt, Iain Abernethy and people on here. Just watch any clips of Kanezawa explaining kata bunkai and you'll realise that high grade is no guarantee of getting good information from someone.
I agree with that completely. It allows people to look around and find the best fit. I run traditional and am ready to demonstrate why for any recalcitrants, but within that I am generous natured and tell mine it is their effort that will benefit them more than mine. Athletics is physically demanding, but many systems are more than athletics and I do not think a Kwoon is a reformatory.
The only real rule is that the instructor must be in control of the class. A vital part of the instructors job is ensuring safety. Students must follow instructions as directed otherwise accidents are likely to follow. BUT if your instructor asks you to do something that you are not happy with you should politely decline to do that exercise. The only time I was servery injured training was when an instructor made up a drill on the spot which in hindsight was plain stupidly dangerous. The accident was as much my fault as the instructors because I went along with it.
As a rule its the instructors club, his rules. If I don't like them I will train elsewhere or set up my own club, if qualified/experienced. I train at two dojo's, One (Kyokushin) is very strict and most talk (apart from a tidal wave of Osu's) is forbidden during training, The second (Jujitsu) is more relaxed and at times they will ask if there is anything we wish to work on but I would not dream of tell the instructor how to operate and run their class.. I prefer the more relaxed approach but that doesnt mean taking liberty and doing what I want, Rules and structure are there for obvious reasons especially when working with techniques that have the potential to cause harm. My Kyokushin class is stricter and I note because of that the workload is greater but stints the creativity I get off my Jujitsu Dojo, so in my eyes its a trade off. Good job I do both then
I belong to a large school that has 9 locations, that is part of an international Federation. It is very formal. The hierarchy goes like this, Instructors your personal instructor your Sifu from your school location our Master who founded and heads all nine schools our GM who runs the international federation. Technically, his one teacher who is still alive, but it never seems to get that far. One can question something, but it is expected to do it respectfully. For example: I use the supplemental video's in my training. Something is done differently from the video and what my instructor said. I will respectfully ask if the video is outdated or not. If my instructor does not know, she will ask Sifu. On the rare occassion Sifu does not know, he will check with our school founder or he may just tell us to E-mail our GM. Our GM is big on E-mail and responds quickly. But I don't go up to my instructor and say it in a challenging way liike "well the VIDEO shows it this way!" Sometimes the video is outdated, sometimes a thing or two is changed to tell who is learning only from a video, sometimes something in the transmission of the information is wrong and the video is correct. Also, if there is a discrpeancy between any instructor telling you something and what your instructor says, one is to bring it up and the instructors check with our Sifu and get back to us. Until then, one does it the way one's personal instructor showed us over what other instructors say. Our GM is constantly going through scripts, instructors at all levels still study and get corrections from their instructor. I like that things are not stagnant, but sometimes the information/ updates do not get across to everyone at the same time. And our instructors at all levels don't seem to let ego get involved. They encourage questions and have good communication with each other to get us the right answer. And, if wrong for any reason, have no issues admitting it. So, questioning is encouraged, but one should do it in a respectful manner. After all, if one thinks the instructor (s) don't have more knowledge than you, why bother studying from them? However, this doesn't mean one can't question something specifically. Just do it the right way. Instructors run the school and control of said learning invironment must be maintained or chaos and a less than ideal learning environment will ensue. I think this attitude is best in any teacher student environment- not just MA's.
Was thinking about this earlier. Normally I'm off the opinion that students are paying for a service and they have a right to choose where they put their money, and an instructor should cater to his students. Obviously there's still a complexity in that the instructor should be more knowledgable and therefore students might not really know what's best, but I still hold the last word is with the stidents. I feel different about my mma class though. I'm not sure if its the nature of the sport but there I have much more of an attitude of you're there to earn your spot. Like I have no problem with the idea an mma coach will prioritize his fight team possibly to the extent of flat out ignoring noobs which isn't something I condone with tma classes. At a guess I'd say its the difference between hobbyists and competitors. If you train as a bit of fun and to stay fit or whatever then I give you more control than I do for a fight team. Same way 5 a side footballers can play where they want and when they want, but pro's have to trust in their coaches.
The coach is in charge. Full stop. Each individual has the opportunity to ignore personal coaching, or opt out drills etc due to injuries etc but if you want to disrupt the class you should be getting kicked out straight away. Aside from that there should be no hierarchy.
