Martial Arts Changes Young Lives
BarnesKenpo
brings certain trolls and flamers scuttling from the woodwork like so many
cockroaches. Jim_Storey, with his written sneers and derisive laughter at
concepts such as "Little Dragons" classes, is perhaps the most vociferous, if
not also the most ill-informed of the lot.
Like it or not, children form the backbone of nearly every MA school in
this country; they are here to stay with or without your approval.
Jim, what kind of man are you that you are so insecure as to be threatened
by the presence of a child? Is your ego really so terribly fragile and easily
damaged?
Perhaps you have simply lost sight of the fact that fighting skills are
but one of a multitude of benefits of training in the arts. While the ability
to fight is unquestionablt important, I will be the first to admit that it is
undeniably difficult -- if not outright impossible -- to create a "warrior
child" who is able to physically overcome a violent, determined adult. I
suspect it has always been this way. But that's not the point.
Barring that, why then bother to even teach them at all?
Why not?
There is a much higher purpose to teaching children MA than just making
money, although certainly w/o kids to pay the bills many schools would be
forced to shut their doors. Part of our purpose is understanding how we can use
our skills and abilities to help solve the problems of others, help maximize
the options, and finding ways to do it. This could be in the area of
self-defense, or confidence building, or developing self-discipline, or any
number of other percieved limitations.
Furthermore, unless one understands that higher purpose, one cannot take
advantage of their own human potential.
We can and do have an impact. We can produce a positive result. A positive
response. We can and do enhance children's lives in ways like no other
activity. We, more than others can literally take a frightened child and,
through our guidance, cause them to develop strong, confident characters.
I, for one, enjoy teaching children. As a MA teacher I am as much an
educator as their Math or Science teacher. The difference is that while they
only teach academics, I teach skills and attitudes for life. Which is why I
find it personally rewarding to be involved in the lives of children w/
learning disorders, ADD, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and Down's Syndrome to name
but a few. In other words, those students that other MA schools don't want.
Perhaps these kids will never be tournament champions or Terminator-like
fighting machines, but nothing will ever replace the look in such a child's
eyes when they nail a kick, or kata, or combination. That is true victory. I
also find it personally rewarding that more than one parent has said that my
school has made more difference in their child's life, and in a shorter time,
than any previous doctor, therapist, or physical activity. That is priceless,
and the true reward of teaching. .
It is also something that I fear Jim_Storey, with his miserable attitude
will never understand, let alone experience. He will be so much the poorer for
it.
As MA instructors, we must be keenly aware that parents have entrusted us
with their most precious possessions. That is both an honor to be so considered
and a tremendous responsibility. For some kids we are the only positive
influence in their lives. Do we shirk that duty? They are the next link in the
chain of our history. And history is full of great Masters who began their
training as youngsters.
So, while Jim_Storey and other such small-minded and severely
vision-limited people show their scorn and disdain for children's MA programs,
they will fade away soon enough into the fog of memory; and so much the better
off are we all that they be forgotten, relegated to the darkness. Tens of
thousands of other dedicated teachers -- and I am both proud and fortunate to
be among them -- touch the future and leave our legacy in our younger students.
Because, in the end, a Martial Artist, like any true artist, is only as good as
that which he produces.
Gary R. Barnes
BARNES KENPO KARATE
Don Wagner
> I've noticed that the mention of children in the Martial Arts in this NG
>brings certain trolls and flamers scuttling from the woodwork like so many
>cockroaches. Jim_Storey, with his written sneers and derisive laughter at
>concepts such as "Little Dragons" classes, is perhaps the most vociferous, if
>not also the most ill-informed of the lot.
I'd like to be placed on Jims side of the fence on this one. Maybe
one in 500 kids currently in the martial arts has the mindset and
maturity needed to train and learn properly. Kids are the breadbasket
of overly commercialized schools (80% of income according to certain
MA rags).
> Jim, what kind of man are you that you are so insecure as to be threatened
>by the presence of a child? Is your ego really so terribly fragile and easily
>damaged?
No, it's just kind of a drag when kids suck up valuable time and
energy from a serious activity geared towards adults.
> Barring that, why then bother to even teach them at all?
Yes, why bother? I don't and won't. I won't even suggest it to
friends who have children.
> There is a much higher purpose to teaching children MA than just making
>money, although certainly w/o kids to pay the bills many schools would be
>forced to shut their doors.
Good. Shut those doors and maybe the quality of MA teaching will
improve. It's easy to fake kids and their uninformed parents out.
Just add a few more promotions a year.
<snip>
>Furthermore, unless one understands that higher purpose, one cannot take
>advantage of their own human potential.
You do realize that you haven't mentioned specifically what you
believe these higher purposes to be. Regardless of that, I'll bet
that there are groups and orgs that can do a better job then a MA
school can in teaching kids "higher purposes".
> We can and do enhance children's lives in ways like no other
>activity.
Bull.
> We, more than others can literally take a frightened child and,
>through our guidance, cause them to develop strong, confident characters.
What is this? A version of the Bionic Urchin?
> I, for one, enjoy teaching children.
I'd rather gargle bees and eat rusty razor blades.
> As a MA teacher I am as much an
>educator as their Math or Science teacher. The difference is that while they
>only teach academics, I teach skills and attitudes for life.
And the fact that they are certified to teach, require ongoing classes
to improve their teaching, are monitored by orgs designed to protect
the kids, etc.
Any youth group advisor (church, community, social) has a greater
impact on kids then the MA instructor does due to the fact that the
activities are being done from the heart and not the wallet. The life
lessons learned are more practical as well. Good social skills are
developed that don't involve the dumbing-down of a violent activity
such as the martial arts.
--Don--
Let me show you how the guards used to do it...
BarnesKenpo
>believe these higher purposes to be.
The rest of the post detailed those higher purposes. Did you read it?
>And the fact that they are certified to teach, require ongoing classes
>to improve their teaching, are monitored by orgs designed to protect
>the kids, etc.
There are those organizations among us who are striving to certify MA
instructors in a method that is unbiased of style. They -- and I -- would like
to see some kind of certification on par with those of other educators. That
certification would be for teaching methodology only and not for WHAT to teach.
We need that in MA (in my opinion) to keep us professional and the quality
high. And to weed out the money-oriented charlatans. Yet when teacher
certification is mentioned, very often the voices who protest against "money
machine" MA schools are the same ones who rail against such progressive
concepts, preferring to to do things because that's the way they've always been
done; it was "good enough for my teacher so it's good enough for me". Time
moves on and we should embrace the advances in our industry.
>Any youth group advisor (church, community, social) has a greater
>impact on kids then the MA instructor does due to the fact that the
>activities are being done from the heart and not the wallet.
I can only speak for myself, but I teach from the heart, and with genuine
concern for my students. I think I made that patently clear. Yes, the arts are,
or at least can be, an extremely violent activity, but they are more. Several
of my young students have used their skills to avoid trouble, or to escape it
once it began. Their physical skills are in no way diminished by other mental
lessons. And the material has not been "dumbed down" but presented in an
age-specific manner.
As for your assertion that maybe "1 in 500 kids currently in the MA has
the mindset and maturity need to train and learn properly.", I have several
questions: What is training properly? As I see it we all -- adults AND kids --
come to the arts for a variety of reasons. And where does the 1 in 500 figure
come from? Is it arbitrary or based on research? I look forward to hearing from
you.
Gary R. Barnes
Don Wagner
>>You do realize that you haven't mentioned specifically what you
>>believe these higher purposes to be.
>
> The rest of the post detailed those higher purposes. Did you read it?
"Touching lives" isn't a defined higher purpose. It's a marketing
ploy to make parents think its a higher purpose. Name a benefit that
MA lessons provide kids that a scouting org for instance can't do
better, with greater control and without a high price tag.
> There are those organizations among us who are striving to certify MA
>instructors in a method that is unbiased of style.
Name them and what are the fees associated with them. It's another
marketing ploy by overly commercialized schools.
> They -- and I -- would like
>to see some kind of certification on par with those of other educators. That
>certification would be for teaching methodology only and not for WHAT to teach.
...and the people that didn't wish to belong to the org and shell out
big bucks would get screwed, right? I'm from NJ...I know all about
the proposals to license MA schools and teachers. All the proposals
are style based and sponsed by large commercial schools that make
their money off of kids.
> >Any youth group advisor (church, community, social) has a greater
>>impact on kids then the MA instructor does due to the fact that the
>>activities are being done from the heart and not the wallet.
> I can only speak for myself, but I teach from the heart, and with genuine
>concern for my students.
What do you charge a month for a 8yr old kid. How many classes and
how many hours a week. Are they taught by you or a junior teacher.
> And the material has not been "dumbed down" but presented in an
>age-specific manner.
Translated as dumbed down.
>What is training properly?
Keeping realism in training. Making the lesson count and be useful in
martial sense. Being honest in the worth of the lesson and testing
the lesson in as real a method as possible without ending up crippled
(often).
> And where does the 1 in 500 figure
>come from? Is it arbitrary or based on research? I look forward to hearing from
>you.
How many kids stay with their MA training for more than 3yrs? How
many continue their MA training into their teens and early adulthood?
How many adults continue their training at this point?
I'm being _way_ liberal with 1 in 500 and you know it.
BarnesKenpo
>ploy to make parents think its a higher purpose.
confident members of their schools and community; I have seen and helped
children with Down's Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, and epilepsy to realize greater
potential in their lives through the physical and mental benefits of martial
arts training. I know that what I am doing is more than "marketing". Can scouts
do this? Possibly -- but I am not a scout leader; I am a Martial Arts teacher
and I have a responsibility to guide my students in the best way I know how. It
is a way that has been tested in our community, is successful in areas of both
self-defense and personal development. If schools were simply to shut their
doors to children and others such as old people we would be left teaching only
those that are athletically inclined to "realism" -- this is ripping off the
people who truly need our instruction, the weak, the disenfranchised. I taught
a woman who was a rape victim, painfully withdrawn as a result of her
experience, and before she moved away she said that the greatest lesson she
learned in training was that she was stronger than she thought, both physically
and mentally. I have also taught children that were victims of abuse, and
watched as they regained alot of what was taken from them by their abuser. This
is my proof that this method of teaching works. I see the results day after
day. It is not marketing; it is reality.
>Name them and what are the fees associated with them. It's another
>marketing ploy by overly commercialized schools.
The ACMA is probably the largest one that comes to mind. They are non
style-specific and focus only on accrediting teachers in the manner of most
other professional educational organizations. They are not out to license but
to certify teachers so that the material is being presented in as safe a manner
as possible.
>What do you charge a month for a 8yr old kid. How many classes and
>how many hours a week. Are they taught by you or a junior teacher.
Not that my fees are any of your concern, but I charge $60/month which
allows the student to train in up to six one hour classes per week and extra,
private lessons, if they need them are currently no charge. All classes are
taught by me personally, however I have assistant instructors on the floor to
monitor the group.
>> And the material has not been "dumbed down" but presented in an
>>age-specific manner.
>
>Translated as dumbed down.
I disagree: would someone have to "dumb down" trigonometry or calculus if
you failed to understand it? Or would they instead present it in an alternative
manner? One that would enable you to see the situation more clearly. Whether I
present a side kick to an adult or a child, the principle behind the kick, its
execution and use never changes, only the manner in which it made
understandable.
>How many kids stay with their MA training for more than 3yrs?
I would not presume to speak for all kids; the majority of those I teach,
however, have already been with me longer than 3 years. How long have you
trained? Do you plan on continuing? Why is your motivation different than
anyone else's who pursues a goal? I've been training for 18+ years and I
would like to think I will be doing this until the day I die, but who is to
say? Shit happens, as they say -- people move away, become injured, go to
school, discontinue their lessons for any number of reasons. There is
absolutely no indication that this situation would change in a school that
stressed "realism" (and that term itself is open to debate; I bring to my
teaching several years of working as security in a bar -- I'd say that's pretty
real) in training -- in fact I think the dropout rate would tend to be even
higher. And then we are back to those gifted few who would excel no matter what
sport they chose. All others be damned, I suppose.
The length of time is less important IMHO than the quality of what was
taught and the retention of those lessons.
Gary R. Barnes
Don Wagner
> I have personally seen and assisted chronically shy children blossom into
>confident members of their schools and community;
Shy is a state of mind usually outgrown with time. How long did you
teach these "chronically shy" kids? A few months? A few years?
> I have seen and helped
>children with Down's Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, and epilepsy to realize greater
>potential in their lives through the physical and mental benefits of martial
>arts training. I know that what I am doing is more than "marketing".
What was the greater potential they realized that their mentors could
show them?
> Can scouts
>do this? Possibly -- but I am not a scout leader; I am a Martial Arts teacher
>and I have a responsibility to guide my students in the best way I know how.
Then maybe you should be learning better methods to accomplish this
goal of teaching "higher purpose" and "realized potential" to kids
instead of forcing a square peg into a round hole through the use of
watered down martial arts practice.
> If schools were simply to shut their
>doors to children and others such as old people we would be left teaching only
>those that are athletically inclined to "realism" -- this is ripping off the
>people who truly need our instruction, the weak, the disenfranchised.
Bull. You're trying to justify getting a salary from teaching kids
and not addressing one of the prime functions of MA training which is
do-able realism.
>>Name them and what are the fees associated with them. It's another
>>marketing ploy by overly commercialized schools.
> The ACMA is probably the largest one that comes to mind. They are non
>style-specific and focus only on accrediting teachers in the manner of most
>other professional educational organizations. They are not out to license but
>to certify teachers so that the material is being presented in as safe a manner
>as possible.
And how do they determine the material to be taught? Are there
experts in all styles or just the governing body doing the tests?
This is the The American Council On Martial Arts (ACMA) that we are
talking about, correct? John Graden is involved I believe and has
expressed his distaste for hardcore training in the past. A general
dumbing-down of material is what they are offering.
> Not that my fees are any of your concern,
Oh, but they are! You see it's important to establish a baseline to
determine where you are coming from.
Now, how many kids do you teach? Lets say, under 13yrs or age. What
is the youngest age of a kid you'd teach?
> I disagree: would someone have to "dumb down" trigonometry or calculus if
>you failed to understand it?
The fact that your kid students fail to understand the material sort
of says that they are not mature enough to learn a martial art
_without_ dumbing down the material.
> I would not presume to speak for all kids; the majority of those I teach,
>however, have already been with me longer than 3 years.
What numbers? Unless you are teaching very small groups, the example
you just gave contradicts all commercial schools.
> How long have you
>trained?
27yrs.
> Do you plan on continuing?
Yes.
> Why is your motivation different than
>anyone else's who pursues a goal?
Because I'm brutally honest with myself and I've learned to listen to
my own advice.
> There is
>absolutely no indication that this situation would change in a school that
>stressed "realism"
The serious people stay. The wall-flowers leave. The serious people
can _do_ what they say they can do, question their training, question
their teachers, and dare I say it, maybe have field tested their
knowledge.
> (and that term itself is open to debate; I bring to my
>teaching several years of working as security in a bar -- I'd say that's pretty
>real) in training -- in fact I think the dropout rate would tend to be even
>higher.
I think it's must higher when realism is stressed...but I'm not
looking for a cast of thousands nor am I paying my mortgage with kids
lunch money.
> And then we are back to those gifted few who would excel no matter what
>sport they chose. All others be damned, I suppose.
I've seen many natural atheletes that just don't get the martial arts.
They can physically do things, but lack the mindset and maturity to be
good martial artists. I'd rather teach a person with less physical
gifts and a stronger will to train.
Erik Harris
>maturity needed to train and learn properly. Kids are the breadbasket
>of overly commercialized schools (80% of income according to certain
>MA rags).
They are also oftne the lifeline for many noncommercial schools who are trying
to pay the rent without charging their otherwise small student body an arm and
a leg for tuition.
>No, it's just kind of a drag when kids suck up valuable time and
>energy from a serious activity geared towards adults.
What about kids who are serious about their training? I started training at
6. I trained for a year and a half and quit. I started again at 11, and have
continued training for the last ten years. I was never in a children's
program, and the expectations of me were essentially the same as the
expectations of the other adults, except for obvious issues of durability.
And I'm not all that unique.. Although both schools were predominantly adult,
both had some other people who were around my age, within a few years at
least.
>> Barring that, why then bother to even teach them at all?
>Yes, why bother? I don't and won't. I won't even suggest it to
Well, for one thing, generally speaking, kids who study martial arts have more
potential to become skilled adult martial artists than people who start
training as adults. My initial year and a half of training aided me
tremendously when I started studying again 4 years later. I picked up on
stuff a lot quicker than other beginners at my school.
>> There is a much higher purpose to teaching children MA than just making
>>money, although certainly w/o kids to pay the bills many schools would be
>>forced to shut their doors.
>Good. Shut those doors and maybe the quality of MA teaching will
>improve. It's easy to fake kids and their uninformed parents out.
Or perhaps the smaller schools that aren't run for profit will be forced to
shut down because they can't pay the rent. And perhaps the larger, more
commercial schools with better marketing that teach watered down basics
(often catering to people who want to say "I know martial arts" without
putting in the effort) will thrive.
>believe these higher purposes to be. Regardless of that, I'll bet
>that there are groups and orgs that can do a better job then a MA
>school can in teaching kids "higher purposes".
I never much cared for those groups. For me, MA did it better because it
interested me. Dressing up in a kiddie military-esque uniform and carving
widgets out of wood for merit badges never interested me, and I wouldn't have
stuck with it. I mean no disrespect to scouts.. It just wasn't for me.
Different strokes for different folks..
>> As a MA teacher I am as much an educator as their Math or Science teacher.
>> The difference is that while they only teach academics, I teach skills and
>> attitudes for life.
>And the fact that they are certified to teach, require ongoing classes
>to improve their teaching, are monitored by orgs designed to protect
>the kids, etc.
My poekoelan and gung fu teachers were far better at every aspect of teaching
than a good 70% of the teachers I had in grade school and high school, and I
grew up in an area that had above-average public education. Childhood
academic teaching standards aren't all that high.
>Any youth group advisor (church, community, social) has a greater
>impact on kids then the MA instructor does due to the fact that the
>activities are being done from the heart and not the wallet.
Wow, that's quite a sweeping generalization.. Quite a false one, too. Not
all MA teachers teach for profit. Not all MA teachers who teach children
teach for profit, either.
Erik Harris esh7@c_rnell.edu
http://w3.to/erik ICQ: 2610172
Chinese Martial Arts Assoc @ Cornell: http://w3.to/CMAAC/
To avoid Spam-bots, my address at the top is INCORRECT.
Change the underscore to an "o".
storys
"BarnesKenpo" <barne...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000221105959...@ng-cs1.aol.com...
> I've noticed that the mention of children in the Martial Arts in this
NG
> brings certain trolls and flamers scuttling from the woodwork like so many
> cockroaches. Jim_Storey, with his written sneers and derisive laughter at
> concepts such as "Little Dragons" classes, is perhaps the most vociferous,
if
> not also the most ill-informed of the lot
I've just read the whole of this thread to date ( 00/02/20 18:13 ) I guess
I'm not at either extreme. If you like teaching children ( I did for several
years and loved it. I am/was a qualified elementary school teacher with
qualifications that enabled me to supply teach and teach from a readiness
one level to grade thirteen physics, chemistry, math and English ) The go
ahead and do it. You will indeed touch young lives and in a positive manner.
You can help teach them a proper morality esp. as such applies to the
Martial Arts and such situations. You can aid them in a realisation of a
proper healthy self esteem and in many other areas. If however, you feel
like Don then do not do it!! You can only do harm. There are problems with
teaching children that virtually disappear with a proper attitude on the
part of the instructor. These problems cripple others. If a name like
"Little Dragons" helps the kids in their quest then so be it. Call the class
"Little dragons". If a kid demonstrates that by virtue of size attitude etc
that he is ready for an adult class then fine. However this should be a
privilege that can be withdrawn at the discretion of the instructor. Kids
are the lifeblood of ANY organisation. Ignore the kids at your peril.
Without them you die. Perhaps one individual instructor can but not an
organisation. At the dojo I attend the kids classes are earlier in the
evening. They are on as I type. Now in a half hour or so I will get up and
leave. My class is a senior class for adult advanced students. The youngest
will be about 15 and the oldest will probably be 52 ( ME!) There is one
other student older but he is unwell right now so that leaves me. Both of us
are Shodans. The class involves students from green up to a Nidan. Some
classes are open to all. Thus on Friday sometimes there are a couple of
students who would rather play. This is more a function of their upbringing
than anything else. Yes it's frustrating but since when is life always
smooth?
........Tom........
BarnesKenpo
>teach these "chronically shy" kids? A few months? A few years?
On average, the children have been with me for between 3-4 years, and they
are still training, some longer than that but that is average. Often shyness
isn't simply grown out of, but becomes debilitating and limiting. Even if it is
one day grown out of, why should the child suffer for it until then, when we
have the ability to speed the process
>What was the greater potential they realized that their mentors could
>show them?
Confidence, belief in themselves, the ability to see a task through to the
end. In many cases these are kids that were rejected by other civic and
athletic organizations as well as martial arts schools, and, in some
situations, they came expecting me to turn them away as well. But I do not turn
them away -- not because of dollar signs but because of the results we achieve.
To suggest otherwise slanders me and the work I have done over the years, not
to mention demonstrates what I feel is a serious lack of caring.
>Then maybe you should be learning better methods to accomplish this
>goal of teaching "higher purpose" and "realized potential" to kids
>instead of forcing a square peg into a round hole through the use of
>watered down martial arts practice.
>
Because my program is age accessible does not mean it is watered down.
>The fact that your kid students fail to understand the material sort
>of says that they are not mature enough to learn a martial art
>_without_ dumbing down the material.
Very many, if not most, adults who come to a martial arts class for the
first time readily understand the material until it is appropriately explained
and taught to them. Children are no different. If they immediately understood
it, what would they need a teacher for?
>And how do they determine the material to be taught?
The ACMA does not determine the material to be taught -- that is left to
the individual instructor. What the ACMA does, however, is provide the most
modern teaching methods to allow an instructor to be more effective in teaching
the traditional techniques of their system. It provides a universal teaching
reference for all martial arts instructors, regardless of style. Courses can
then be made not only age-specific, but skill specific; that is, an instructor
can take a 300 # out of shape fat man and teach him in a manner that delivers
benefits while he works to get in better shape; rather than simply stating
"that fat slob doesn't deserve to be here". Instead of deciding that he is an
unfit representative of the arts we can encourage him to develop his body and
mind and still give him results based on sound teaching methodology.
You are correct that John Graden is involved, and I don't know where you
heard of his supposed distaste for hardcore training but I have seen film of
his old training classes in Texas and nothing could be further from the truth.
In addition, Joe Lewis, a martial arts legend in his own right, sits on the
board of directors of the ACMA, and I doubt there is a Martial Artist worth his
salt that would claim Mr. Lewis has an aversion to hard training. The rest of
the board is made up of a variety of Ph.D.'s from the fields of medicine,
sports science, exercise physiology, the legal profession, psychology, and
education. All of them possess current rankings (mostly black belt and above)
in a variety of martial disciplines. I hardly think these people are motivated
to dumb down anything.
>What numbers? Unless you are teaching very small groups, the example
>you just gave contradicts all commercial schools.
>Now, how many kids do you teach? Lets say, under 13yrs or age. What
>is the youngest age of a kid you'd teach?
I currently have an active enrollment of 120-130 students; the majority
of the kids are between the ages of 7-14. The youngest age I have opted to
teach is 4 years old, although I have none of that age enrolled. The youngest
student I have is 5. Do I expect him to grasp the material in the same fashion
as you or I? Absolutely not. Tha's ludicrous to even consider the idea. But has
he gained anything from his training? Yes he has: greater awareness of personal
safety (which at that age/skill level is the main thing we can hope for anyway)
do's and don't's of safety, how to break and run if threatened. I refer you to
the work of Gavin DeBecker, author of THE GIFT OF FEAR and PROTECTING THE GIFT,
for further methods on keeping our kids safe, methods which I have incorporated
into their training. This too is self-defense.
>Bull. You're trying to justify getting a salary from teaching kids
>and not addressing one of the prime functions of MA training which is
>do-able realism.
Finally, I don't have the need to justify anything to you or anyone. My
tuition is fair and figures out to only a couple dollars/class if the students
take all available classes, thus making it affordable to anyone who wishes to
train. As far as "do-able realism", I already explained the realism that I
bring from my background. Several of my students -- definitely not the
majority, but enough that the evidence speaks for itself -- have successfully
defended themselves in violent encounters. One of my younger students used
lessons he learned to avoid being pulled into a moving car. How much more real
do you want? Or maybe it's just not real unless someone ends up hospitalized or
dead?
I certainly am not trying to change your mind, only to let you see the
other side of the coin, and that your way is not the only way.
We will have to agree to disagree on this matter. I know the results I see
each day. And I am proud of them.
Don Wagner
>To suggest otherwise slanders me and the work I have done over the years, not
>to mention demonstrates what I feel is a serious lack of caring.
To suggest otherwise is to do just that...suggest otherwise. As to a
lack of caring how would you really know?
> Because my program is age accessible does not mean it is watered down.
It's everything to everyone then? Really now...take an honest look at
how you are teaching and put yourself in the position of the student.
> Very many, if not most, adults who come to a martial arts class for the
>first time readily understand the material until it is appropriately explained
>and taught to them. Children are no different. If they immediately understood
>it, what would they need a teacher for?
I wouldn't want a child to understand certain things until they are
ready for the experience. Why put a happy face on a subject that is
harsh by nature?
> It provides a universal teaching
>reference for all martial arts instructors, regardless of style.
Universal anything is a crock. Different people require different
teaching/learning styles. Universal doens't cut it.
> You are correct that John Graden is involved, and I don't know where you
>heard of his supposed distaste for hardcore training but I have seen film of
>his old training classes in Texas and nothing could be further from the truth.
I believe that his old training is exactly where he developed the
anti-hardcore attitude.
>In addition, Joe Lewis, a martial arts legend in his own right, sits on the
>board of directors of the ACMA, and I doubt there is a Martial Artist worth his
>salt that would claim Mr. Lewis has an aversion to hard training.
Mr. Lewis was an excellent competitor and is an OK teacher when
putting on a demo. I imagine that he was asked by a friend or friends
to have his name put on the BOD. I'd be surprised if he had strong
feelings either way for a universal method of teaching.
> I hardly think these people are motivated
>to dumb down anything.
Actions and intentions are two different things. Joining a group and
putting forth a handful of teaching ideas is all well and good.
Seeing these tools become a generic norm isn't.
> I currently have an active enrollment of 120-130 students; the majority
>of the kids are between the ages of 7-14.
Roughly $90,000/yr based off of kids then, correct? How can your
motives not be called into question? It's to your advantage to create
the most parentally soothing and feel good atmosphere you possibly
can. I'd do the exact same thing if I were in your shoes. The
licensing of MA instructors, certification using a universal set of
tools under one governing body, etc. is exactly the politics that
absolutely sucks the life out of MA orgs.
> This too is self-defense.
SD is almost all area and situational awareness. Physical condition
matters very little and doesn't require MA training. It needs a
concerned and intelligent parent that can honestly and openly speak
with their children.
> Finally, I don't have the need to justify anything to you or anyone. My
>tuition is fair and figures out to only a couple dollars/class if the students
>take all available classes, thus making it affordable to anyone who wishes to
>train.
Do you charge additional fees for promotion and how many promotions
does the average kid have a year. How many kids fail these test.
> As far as "do-able realism", I already explained the realism that I
>bring from my background.
Bar security is nebulous at best. A fern-bar security employee might
be responsible for seeing that coats and cars aren't stolen. If you
said you played rugby I'd feel better.
> How much more real
>do you want? Or maybe it's just not real unless someone ends up hospitalized or
>dead?
That would do maybe.
--Don--
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
Don Wagner
>In article <38b168ab....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, dawa...@ix.netcom.com (Don Wagner) wrote:
>>maturity needed to train and learn properly. Kids are the breadbasket
>>of overly commercialized schools (80% of income according to certain
>>MA rags).
>They are also oftne the lifeline for many noncommercial schools who are trying
>to pay the rent without charging their otherwise small student body an arm and
>a leg for tuition.
Same deal with slightly better morals.
>What about kids who are serious about their training?
You mean kids that train since diapers in a MA family or kids that are
involved in 6 different activities in which MA is one of them?
> I started training at
>6. I trained for a year and a half and quit.
You weren't ready or serious at this age.
> I started again at 11, and have
>continued training for the last ten years. I was never in a children's
>program, and the expectations of me were essentially the same as the
>expectations of the other adults, except for obvious issues of durability.
And performance against adults. In other words learning without
preforming with equal intensity as the adults.
>Or perhaps the smaller schools that aren't run for profit will be forced to
>shut down because they can't pay the rent.
Private groups, parks, co-ops...all are do-able methods of MA training
that do not require huge rents to be paid.
> And perhaps the larger, more
>commercial schools with better marketing that teach watered down basics
>(often catering to people who want to say "I know martial arts" without
>putting in the effort) will thrive.
Thats called using kids are cash-cows. I have a problem with that.
>Wow, that's quite a sweeping generalization.. Quite a false one, too.
If I paid your salary you'd see it my way. Whats the difference if
its a bushelfull of kids instead of one person?
> Not
>all MA teachers teach for profit. Not all MA teachers who teach children
>teach for profit, either.
Not every person on death row is guilty.
BarnesKenpo
posts you have written and can say they have always given me much to consider.
I enjoy speaking to educators in any field, and I agree, ignore the kids at
your peril. I think Martial Arts teachers are sometimes the last hope for some
children ... that's why I do my best to see that every child through my door
gets a piece of my attention every time they set foot on the mat. Maybe it
should be "Ignore the kids at society's peril."
BarnesKenpo
go for good.
First,
>It's everything to everyone then? Really now...take an honest look at
>how you are teaching and put yourself in the position of the student.
No, it's not everything to everyone. I teach different programs to
different age groups; not everyone trains at the same time, in the same class;
perhaps I failed to make that clear. I thought that was what age/skill specific
meant. I also use a different approach to teach handicapped children, such as
the cerebral palsy student I previously mentioned. He is 9 years old and nearly
wheel chair bound. I teach differently to the sixty-three year old grandmother
with arthritis, too. Tell me seriously these two need to field test their
lessons and test them under harsh conditions. I tailor the art to the
individual, rather than forcing them to fit themselves to a method that may not
be workable for them.
Second,
>Roughly $90,000/yr based off of kids then, correct? How can your
>motives not be called into question?
This is nearly laughable. If I was making $90,000/year I sure wouldn't be
here talking to you. I'd be in some warm climate, enjoying a tropical drink on
a white beach while some half-naked island girl strummed her ukelele and danced
the hula! Seriously, my motives are as driven as yours to provide not only the
best atmosphere in which to teach, but to provide my students with more than
just "feel good" karate. I have done that and continue to do that. I sleep well
at night knowing that I not only give my students effective techniques that
may one day save their lives, but I have given them a piece of my heart as
well. If you don't see the value in this ... fine. I only have to live my life
and be concerned for the lives of those in my care, including my students. I
know it would tear me apart if something happened to a student who claimed the
training let them down. So I give them the training they need and deserve.
Just out of curiousity, though, what income level is appropriate before
one is considered to be selling out and doing it only for the money? What is
the earnings cap? I know Martial Arts teachers who make 2-3 times what I do,
but you'd never know it by their lifestyles; and I also know those who make
less that think they're Donald Trump. Money, while a strong motivator to do
anything, will never be allowed to replace sincere, honest, and effective
teaching in my school. I pay the bills, and I feed my family.
I respect your opinion, sir, though I disagree with it. As I said this was
never intended to change anyone's mind ... just to provide a different POV.
Whether you choose to see it, agree or disagree, is entirely your choice. I
have welcomed and enjoyed this opportunity to discuss this with you.
Gary R. Barnes
Erik Harris
>>What about kids who are serious about their training?
>You mean kids that train since diapers in a MA family or kids that are
>involved in 6 different activities in which MA is one of them?
Either or neither. I was neither. I chose to miss out on a lot of activities
because of my martial arts training as a kid.
>> I started training at 6. I trained for a year and a half and quit.
>You weren't ready or serious at this age.
You don't know that.
Was I as serious as I am now? No, definitely not. But it was certainly
beneficial in my over all training, and gave me a huge jumpstart on people who
start later in life. And I was more serious than most of the kids I see in
kids' programs today, and many of the adults I see training martial arts.
>>I was never in a children's program, and the expectations of me were
>>essentially the same as the expectations of the other adults, except
>>for obvious issues of durability.
>And performance against adults.
You also don't know that.
When I trained as a child, the kids weren't separated from the adults. I
thought I made that clear by saying that I was never in a children's program,
but I'll come right out and explicitly say it, just to be clear. :) In a
school with 2-5 kids, it's simply not possible to separate the kids from the
adults. When it came to technique work or sparring, I frequently worked with
people many times my age and more than twice my size. And I sometimes got
tossed (literally) by a kick I failed to evade or knocked on my ass by a
strike that I walked into.
You seem to assume a lot about the people you're talking to in this thread.
/>>Or perhaps the smaller schools that aren't run for profit will be forced to
>>shut down because they can't pay the rent.
>Private groups, parks, co-ops...all are do-able methods of MA training
>that do not require huge rents to be paid.
Private groups still require space, and in many areas, space isn't free or
even cheap. Parks are only seasonally useful in many areas, and the length of
the useful season can be pretty short in many areas. Co-ops? As in, have
everyone chip in to cooperatively pay for a place? That's what a non-profit
school does.
>>And perhaps the larger, more commercial schools with better marketing that
>>teach watered down basics (often catering to people who want to say "I
>>know martial arts" without putting in the effort) will thrive.
>Thats called using kids are cash-cows. I have a problem with that.
No, that's called using STUDENTS as cash cows.. We were talking about the
hypothetical situation where kids' programs were shut down. The commercial
schools will continue to do just fine, since there are plenty of adolescents
and adults that will gladly go train at their local McDojo, and many very good
teachers who don't teach for profit who might not be able to conitnue to teach
publicly without their kids' programs to help pay the rent and utilities.
>>Wow, that's quite a sweeping generalization.. Quite a false one, too.
>If I paid your salary you'd see it my way. Whats the difference if
>its a bushelfull of kids instead of one person?
If you paid my salary? What are you talking about? Or is this another
baseless assumption of some sort?
If you paid my salary, I would not necessarily share your opinion. I'm not
for sale, and my salary has no relevance to this discussion.
Don Wagner
> Tell me seriously these two need to field test their
>lessons and test them under harsh conditions. I tailor the art to the
>individual, rather than forcing them to fit themselves to a method that may not
>be workable for them.
Then I believe that what you are teaching these people isn't what the
art you teach to the able-bodied is. If the technique is do-able by a
person, and that technique is a part of the style then you are
teaching the style. If it is not and you are teaching something
watered down or highly modified _and_ the modified practice is never
tested (maybe even can't be tested?), then why call it a martial art?
Is it Barnes "Kenpo" just because that is the style you trained under?
> Second,
>
>>Roughly $90,000/yr based off of kids then, correct? How can your
>>motives not be called into question?
> This is nearly laughable. If I was making $90,000/year I sure wouldn't be
>here talking to you.
Maybe my math skills escape me....
(130 students x $60/month)= $7,800/month
(12 months in a yr. x $7,800)= Dammmmm! $93,600 before tax, rent and
insurance. Would you feel better if I said $45,000 per yr.?
> Just out of curiousity, though, what income level is appropriate before
>one is considered to be selling out and doing it only for the money? What is
>the earnings cap?
You tell me, I'm not up on the current pricing schema for having
children pay my salary. I guess at a certain point a lot of
prostitutes stop caring if they sold out too.
My opinion is that adults should be able to make their own choices and
as such they take on the risks and rewards of MA training. Kids on
the other hand do not have the experience and maturity to deal with
certain realistic MA material and shouldn't be exploited for their
weakness.
Don Wagner
>You don't know that.
You just said "and I quit", not "I had to move away", "we couldn't
afford it anymore", etc. "I quit".
>You also don't know that.
11yr old can't match adults with equal time in training. Or are you a
hyperthyroid monster weighing in at 16stone and have fists like
hamhocks?
;-)
>You seem to assume a lot about the people you're talking to in this thread.
Yeah, and?
>Private groups still require space, and in many areas, space isn't free or
>even cheap. Parks are only seasonally useful in many areas, and the length of
>the useful season can be pretty short in many areas. Co-ops? As in, have
>everyone chip in to cooperatively pay for a place? That's what a non-profit
>school does.
Then there's your answer.
>No, that's called using STUDENTS as cash cows.. We were talking about the
>hypothetical situation where kids' programs were shut down.
Once again, thats the topic. Kids as cashcows is the issue, not
generic adult students. If the majority of cash comes from kids (and
it does) they are the issue in this moral-war.
>If you paid my salary, I would not necessarily share your opinion. I'm not
>for sale, and my salary has no relevance to this discussion.
You may not be for sale but you seem very willing to exploit kids for
their parents money. For the best intentions, of course.
;-)
Erik Harris
>esh7@c_rnell.edu (Erik Harris) wrote:
>>You don't know that.
>You just said "and I quit", not "I had to move away", "we couldn't
>afford it anymore", etc. "I quit".
I quit because of an unrelated medical problem that was preventing me from
attending classes.
>>You also don't know that.
>11yr old can't match adults with equal time in training. Or are you a
>hyperthyroid monster weighing in at 16stone and have fists like
>hamhocks?
Size isn't a measure of ability or dedication. No, I couldn't match everyone
in the class, or even most of them. Considering that most of them had been
training for years, and I had only a year and a half of training that was 4
years in the past to draw on, that's not surprising. You don't need to be the
biggest, toughest guy in the school to benefit from martial arts training.
And who said anything about equal time in training? I trained more than all
but a few people in the school. It's one of the advantages of being a kid.
Fewer responsibilities to take up your training times.
>>You seem to assume a lot about the people you're talking to in this thread.
>Yeah, and?
And you don't see anything wrong with making often insulting assumptions
based on nothing? You assumed I wasn't dedicated or serious as a child, you
assume I'm teaching for money, you assume I'm "exploiting" people, you assumed
that some other guy here is making $90K+/year.
>>Private groups still require space, and in many areas, space isn't free or
>>even cheap. Parks are only seasonally useful in many areas, and the length of
>>the useful season can be pretty short in many areas. Co-ops? As in, have
>>everyone chip in to cooperatively pay for a place? That's what a non-profit
>>school does.
>Then there's your answer.
What answer? That a school still needs an income whether or not the teacher
has one, and that income has to come from somewhere? The only viable "answer"
I see is to teach privately, and further reduce the number of quality teachers
who are publicly available, thus helping out a local McDojo.
>>If you paid my salary, I would not necessarily share your opinion. I'm not
>>for sale, and my salary has no relevance to this discussion.
>You may not be for sale but you seem very willing to exploit kids for
>their parents money. For the best intentions, of course. ;-)
What are you talking about? I've made less than $50 in my life in teaching
martial arts, and that was unexpected and unrequested. I've never charged
anyone for instruction. My teacher teaches publicly and has to charge for
instruction, but he doesn't keep a cent of it. It all goes to rent,
utilities, equipment, and other costs associated with running the school. His
salary is paid by the county, for his full time job in child protective
services.
And teaching kids for money is no more of an "exploitation" than teaching
adults for money. Either way, you're taking someone's money and teaching them
about martial arts. What exactly they get out of it differs from person to
person, regardless of age. I've seen plenty of adults get far less out of it
than an average interested 8 year old. Age is a factor in what people get out
of it, but it's one of many factors.
Don Wagner
>I quit because of an unrelated medical problem that was preventing me from
>attending classes.
Well thats a bit more clarity now, isn't it?
>Size isn't a measure of ability or dedication.
I'll bet on the 250lb. dockworker over the 140lb. teenager in a fight.
> You don't need to be the
>biggest, toughest guy in the school to benefit from martial arts training.
You need lemons to make lemonade or else you don't have lemonade.
>And you don't see anything wrong with making often insulting assumptions
>based on nothing? You assumed I wasn't dedicated or serious as a child,
Correct. You said "I quit". Thats an assumption on my part? I don't
think so.
> you
>assume I'm teaching for money, you assume I'm "exploiting" people,
You don't even enter into the equation, Erik. I don't know or care
what you teach or who you exploit. You joined this little fray and
I'm responding to you now based upon what I said to Gary and what you
are saying now.
> you assumed
>that some other guy here is making $90K+/year.
And he is unless he was lying before. 130 students at $60/month with
12 months in a year. Thats $93,600 even using "New Math" skills.
;-)
> The only viable "answer"
>I see is to teach privately, and further reduce the number of quality teachers
>who are publicly available, thus helping out a local McDojo.
Quality isn't measured in numbers. If you play by McDojo rules and
exploit kids as cashcows, you _are_ a McDojo.
>What are you talking about? I've made less than $50 in my life in teaching
>martial arts, and that was unexpected and unrequested. I've never charged
>anyone for instruction.
Maybe thats what the lesson is worth then. Don't really care either
way.
>And teaching kids for money is no more of an "exploitation" than teaching
>adults for money. Either way, you're taking someone's money and teaching them
>about martial arts.
Read what you wrote again and look for loopholes. There are laws that
protect kids from monetary exploitation. MA schools catering to
parents with kids sneak around this little issue. Water down the
training and you have Tae Bo Day Care.
Eric D. Berge
BarnesKenpo wrote:
> Very many, if not most, adults who come to a martial arts class for the
> first time readily understand the material until it is appropriately explained
> and taught to them.
"Barnes Kempo: Obfuscation is our specialty"?
--
Eric Berge
---------------------------------------------------
Clay lies still, but blood's a rover
Breath's a ware that will not keep
Up, lad! When the journey's over
There'll be time enough to sleep.
- A.E.Housman, "Reveille"
---------------------------------------------------
BarnesKenpo
>art you teach to the able-bodied is.
No shit, Columbo.Techniques must be modified to be used by a wide variety
of people. We are all physically different and skilled differently and
therefore logic dictates that what works for one may not work for another. The
MA never have been and never will be a "one size fits all" suit. Weren't you
the one that said universal anything sucks? Hence, the approach of tailoring
the style to the individual. This method was handed down to Kenpo instructors
via its founder, Edmund K. Parker. Mr. Parker felt that there was a need to
avoid cookie-cutter teaching -- everybody does it this way 'cause sensei says
so; that's the way he did it, that's the way you'll do it, so just shut up and
don't ask questions -- and so set about creating a system of teaching that was
adaptable to different individuals, that encourages free thought and
questioning, not the creation of robots.
>If the technique is do-able by a
>person, and that technique is a part of the style then you are
>teaching the style.
You're joking, right? To describe a style by its techniques is to describe
virtually every fighting system under the sun. It is the principle behind the
technique, and the application of those principles in an ever-changing
fighting situation that is of real importance -- not whether the person does
technique A, stance 2 exactly like it was written in some manual.
>Is it Barnes "Kenpo" just because that is the style you trained under?
It is Ed Parker's American Kenpo, combined with 11 years experience in
Korean Tang Soo Do (which I learned from instructors whose idea of light
training was to try to make the class drop from exhaustion by the halfway point
just to weed out the wannabes), and the Filipino stickfighting that is
currently being taught to me by my sifu. Furthermore, there are elements of
American and Filipino knife fighting, that are taught strictly to the adults,
as well as other elements that we learn and share with other styles. The
"Barnes" simply denotes that it is my school. Nonetheless, we respect and honor
our lineage.
>I guess at a certain point a lot of
>prostitutes stop caring if they sold out too.
You make alot of assumptions based on almost no previous knowledge or
proof. That, if it is your normal mode of conduct, can be a dangerous, perhaps
deadly way of doing things, not to mention short-sighted and self-limiting. You
assume that because I make money doing what I do -- and it is nowhere near the
90K you mentioned before -- I have prostituted myself and my art. I suppose the
restaurateur who charges a fair price for a decent meal prostitutes him/herself
as well? Or the physician who sees to your health? Or the surgeon who saves
your life from a bursting appendix? Or the teacher who educates you or your
children? They are all professionals, with unique skills and knowledge,
performong services and are treated and compensated as such.
Isn't it possible that your so-called "brutal honesty" is really just a
curtain for arrogance and condescension? That maybe you have tunnel vision and
can see no way other than your own? I stated before that I was not attempting
to change anyone's mind in regard to teaching children -- I do it, I love it, I
will continue to do it with great success -- but to simply deny everything I
have said about the results that have been achieved, the lives that have been
changed, or in some cases saved, is simply blind.
Don Wagner
>>Then I believe that what you are teaching these people isn't what the
>>art you teach to the able-bodied is.
> No shit, Columbo.
Thats better. I was wondering how long it was going to take you to
respond the way you really wanted to. The art isn't the same...so
what is it you are teaching? Your own style?
>Techniques must be modified to be used by a wide variety
>of people. We are all physically different and skilled differently and
>therefore logic dictates that what works for one may not work for another. The
>MA never have been and never will be a "one size fits all" suit.
But the art has specifics inherent to it. Once these specifics are
modified you aren't teaching the art anymore. Teaching people in
different ways and having them do what is being taught is different
from creating a "Style" for people that cannot _do_. Stretch that out
a bit and you have watered down the original style to the point where
it isn't a martial art anymore.
> You're joking, right? To describe a style by its techniques is to describe
>virtually every fighting system under the sun. It is the principle behind the
>technique, and the application of those principles in an ever-changing
>fighting situation that is of real importance -- not whether the person does
>technique A, stance 2 exactly like it was written in some manual.
Really now? Show me good choke techniques is a traditional P/K style.
Show me spinning jump kicks in JJ. Show me a good stick and knife
work in boxing.
...and if you are going to use fighting as a ruler to measure MA worth
by, I think you just buried your basis for teaching kids and the
physically unable.
> You make alot of assumptions based on almost no previous knowledge or
>proof.
Which assumption is this? The fact that you said the majority of your
students are kids, that you charge $60/month for classes?
> That, if it is your normal mode of conduct, can be a dangerous, perhaps
>deadly way of doing things, not to mention short-sighted and self-limiting.
Explain how deadly this can be for me...I'm very curious as to what
your response will be.
> You
>assume that because I make money doing what I do -- and it is nowhere near the
>90K you mentioned before -- I have prostituted myself and my art.
Are you retracting your statement that you have 130 students (the
majority of which are kids) and that you charge $60/month for lessons?
BTW, you never answered the question I had concerning testing fees and
their frequency. What is the answer to that question?
> I suppose the
>restaurateur who charges a fair price for a decent meal prostitutes him/herself
>as well?
Is the patron an adult?
> Or the physician who sees to your health?
Is the patient an adult?
> Isn't it possible that your so-called "brutal honesty" is really just a
>curtain for arrogance and condescension?
Nope, I'm happy to learn from others, give praise where praise is do
and admit my mistakes.
Erik Harris
>esh7@c_rnell.edu (Erik Harris) wrote:
>>I quit because of an unrelated medical problem that was preventing me from
>>attending classes.
>Well thats a bit more clarity now, isn't it?
Yes, though the reasons were/are none of your business. There are many
reasons to quit. Not being ready for the training is only one of very many
possible reasons.
>>Size isn't a measure of ability or dedication.
>I'll bet on the 250lb. dockworker over the 140lb. teenager in a fight.
So what? Without any more info, I certainly would too. Does that mean that
the 140lb teenager would receive no benefits from martial arts training, or
that it would be a waste of time for him to learn? Personally, I think the
answer is a pretty clear "absolutely not." Martial arts don't make a person
invincible, and just because someone can't learn to kick the ass of everyone
in the world doesn't mean that martial training is a waste of their time.
>>And you don't see anything wrong with making often insulting assumptions
>>based on nothing? You assumed I wasn't dedicated or serious as a child,
>Correct. You said "I quit". Thats an assumption on my part? I don't
>think so.
You made an assumption on the reason. I've seen a LOT of people quit training
or stop training for a number of years, and I've seen a LOT of reasons that
have little to do with lack of interest/readiness.
>> you assumed that some other guy here is making $90K+/year.
>And he is unless he was lying before. 130 students at $60/month with
>12 months in a year. Thats $93,600 even using "New Math" skills.
If he said that he's charging each of those kids $60/month, I missed it.
Maybe he did say that. Even if he is charging that, with a school that large,
his operating costs are probably incredibly high. Maybe other instructors in
his school are paid for their time. A school that large would need a large
facility and a lot of instructors. Rent or mortgage and utilities on a large
facility are expensive. I can't even imagine the cost of running a school
that large (and personally, I can't imagine trying to run a school that
large effectively).
When I started training, my family was paying half that, and at my teacher's
school now, kids' tuition is 3/4 that, less if their families choose to pay
for more than a month at a time (or a lot less if more than one person in
their family is training with us).
>> The only viable "answer" I see is to teach privately, and further reduce
>> the number of quality teachers who are publicly available, thus helping out
>> a local McDojo.
>Quality isn't measured in numbers. If you play by McDojo rules and
>exploit kids as cashcows, you _are_ a McDojo.
Huh? The only "numbers" I mentioned are in terms of availability of teachers.
One needn't exploit kids in order to teach them. The kids' program (if it
can be called that) at my teacher's school is quite small by comparison to any
profit-based school I've seen (probably about 15 kids last time I was home,
and about as many adults). The kids have helped us pay the rent and
utilities, without a doubt. Without them, we'd have to charge a lot more than
$50/month to the adult students to pay the rent. Does that make us a
McDojo/McKwoon? You could just as easily say that without the adult students,
we couldn't afford to teach the kids for $40/month, and that we're "exploiging
the adults as cashcows."
Both groups are taught to be the best martial artists that we can help them
become. Another teacher and myself ran the kids' program for a number of
years (since then, the kids and adults have been semi-merged, and the
distinction between the two programs has been blurred considerably). We never
had any intention of running a baby-sitting program, and we didn't. It was
tough for a few years, sure, but after awhile, the kids started to settle into
the training routine and got quite serious. There is some material that isn't
taught to the kids, but otherwise, their curriculum is the same as the adults,
and they start to learn the missing pieces later on (no specific age, but
usually 13-16, depending on the student). In terms of rigor and quality of
technique, I'm not any easier on the kids that I teach than I am on the adults
that I teach. For a few years, I ran an intermediate level class for the
kids, and at the risk of sounding like I'm bragging, I was their toughest
teacher, and I had them doing things that many of the newer students at our
club here at Cornell couldn't do half of without collapsing. I had a few
complaints from parents about my teaching methods, but not many, and to those
who complained, I did my best to explain my reasons, and made it clear that I
had listened to them, but that I wasn't going to drop my expectations of the
kids. Some of them probably won't stick with it for too long, but it's very
clear to me that a bunch of them have an incredible head start on becoming
first rate adult martial artists
>>What are you talking about? I've made less than $50 in my life in teaching
>>martial arts, and that was unexpected and unrequested. I've never charged
>>anyone for instruction.
>Maybe thats what the lesson is worth then. Don't really care either
>way.
Are you capable of writing without flaming? So far, you've accused me
of being an un-dedicated student, implied that my instruction is worthless,
compared everyone who teaches children MA to whores and death row inmates, and
probably quite a few others that I haven't seen or am forgetting. Believe it
or not, tossing around insults doesn't do anything to help your argument (or
your credibility).
I can't help but wonder whether you're trying to engage in a discussion or
simply trolling for flames.
>Read what you wrote again and look for loopholes. There are laws that
>protect kids from monetary exploitation. MA schools catering to
>parents with kids sneak around this little issue. Water down the
>training and you have Tae Bo Day Care.
Or I could do what you did.. Read what I wrote (maybe you did that), ignore
what I said, and go on a tirade about greed and toss around insults. (You
asked someone for specific benefits of martial arts training. I offered some,
and you ignored them
I'm not denying that a lot of teachers do exactly what you're talking about.
But there are also a lot of teachers who offer quality instruction to
interested students of all ages. Teaching children is NOT synonymous with
running a daycare facility to get cash. And many of the schools that DO that
also do the same thing for adults, preying on their ignorance and wasting
their time for up to $90/month while they do not learn what they're there to
learn.
Erik Harris
> Isn't it possible that your so-called "brutal honesty" is really just a
>can see no way other than your own? I stated before that I was not attempting
What do you mean by "maybe"? I thought he made it "definitely" clear.
Don Wagner
>Yes, though the reasons were/are none of your business.
Asked and answered. You may step down now, Mr. Harris.
;-)
>>>Size isn't a measure of ability or dedication.
>>I'll bet on the 250lb. dockworker over the 140lb. teenager in a fight.
>So what? Without any more info, I certainly would too.
Size just seemed to play an important part in your answer.
;-)
>If he said that he's charging each of those kids $60/month, I missed it.
>Maybe he did say that. Even if he is charging that, with a school that large,
>his operating costs are probably incredibly high.
Look it up in the past posts to verify my statements. No matter what
the take home pay is, thats still $90,000+ in income.
>>Quality isn't measured in numbers. If you play by McDojo rules and
>>exploit kids as cashcows, you _are_ a McDojo.
>
>Huh? The only "numbers" I mentioned are in terms of availability of teachers.
How about that! I was mentioning the same thing.
> Does that make us a
>McDojo/McKwoon?
You'd have to tell me....does it?
> You could just as easily say that without the adult students,
>we couldn't afford to teach the kids for $40/month, and that we're "exploiging
>the adults as cashcows."
If they are being exploited, then yes...you would be absolutely
correct. You see, adults have the great responsibility and freedom to
make these decisions first hand. Kids do not and as such exploiting
them through their (untrained in the MA) parents is wrong...and easy.
>Are you capable of writing without flaming?
Sure, but this seperates the wheat from the chaff much faster.
> So far, you've accused me
>of being an un-dedicated student, implied that my instruction is worthless,
>compared everyone who teaches children MA to whores and death row inmates, and
>probably quite a few others that I haven't seen or am forgetting.
Thats a fairly creative way of seeing it. Lets take it step by step.
1. You said you quit training without (at first) an explanation.
2. I merely implied that quality instruction is not determined by a
high or a low charge.
3. "Prostituting" ones skills is slightly different from saying that
"everyone who teaches children MA is a whore". I called into question
the fact that teaching children is easily exploited and that the
practice of having children generate a majority of your income should
be examined...carefully. The MAs aren't the best way to teach kids
right and wrong or to work out developmental problems.
> Believe it
>or not, tossing around insults doesn't do anything to help your argument (or
>your credibility).
You and Gary seem to be attempting to keep up. As to me credibility,
where have I said anything that I can't back up? I've given my honest
opinion, made comments based on the information provided, etc.
>I can't help but wonder whether you're trying to engage in a discussion or
>simply trolling for flames.
Thats the kicker, ain't it?
>Or I could do what you did.. Read what I wrote (maybe you did that), ignore
>what I said, and go on a tirade about greed and toss around insults. (You
>asked someone for specific benefits of martial arts training. I offered some,
>and you ignored them
Not at all! I think the are fine, fine benefits for adults.
>I'm not denying that a lot of teachers do exactly what you're talking about.
And how do we determine who they are? Do they wear black gi with evil
cobras on the back? I've brought forward some points concerning kids
being taught MA that are very unpleasant and prevalent. My opinion is
that kids being taught something called martial arts for the express
purpose of some sort of inner growth/developmental breakthrough or
social improvement is a fairly bad way doing things. Sort of like
teaching a pig to sing.
>But there are also a lot of teachers who offer quality instruction to
>interested students of all ages. Teaching children is NOT synonymous with
>running a daycare facility to get cash. And many of the schools that DO that
>also do the same thing for adults, preying on their ignorance and wasting
>their time for up to $90/month while they do not learn what they're there to
>learn.
Yeah, bad schools abound, bad teachers abound, they outnumber the good
teachers and good schools. What was your arguement against what I
said again?
BarnesKenpo
one has to like it or agree with. I am proud to do what I do, regardless of the
trolls and flamers.
>Thats better. I was wondering how long it was going to take you to
>respond the way you really wanted to.
It seems to be the only way to penetrate those blinders you're wearing.
>But the art has specifics inherent to it. Once these specifics are
>modified you aren't teaching the art anymore.
Specifics in the form of principles of movement and economy of motion,
principles that, in the 21st century, should be grounded in scientific
validity and utilize the latest knowledge of modern psychology to produce the
most well-rounded practitioner.
>Really now? Show me good choke techniques is a traditional P/K style.
>Show me spinning jump kicks in JJ. Show me a good stick and knife
>work in boxing.
I said virtually, not exclusively. Apparently your point is to nitpick
semantics rather than debate fact. Of course there are certain physical
techniques unique to various systems, that is beyond argument. It still stands
that the majority of striking systems contain the same (or slight variations on
the same) techniques; grappling systems contain very much the same techniques,
etc. Those are to name just a few; and the way the arts are taught in modern
times, many strikers now train heavily in grappling and vice versa, tending to
homogenize systems while creating more well-rounded practitioners.
>..and if you are going to use fighting as a ruler to measure MA worth
>by, I think you just buried your basis for teaching kids and the
>physically unable.
Wrong. Fighting skills are but one benefit, as previously stated, but not
the only benefit. I also prefer to think that we as instructors teach
self-defense rather than just fighting, although the former, out of necessity
contains the latter. Self-defense, in relation to kids and the handicapped
(physically challenged if you prefer a different term) is more than knowing how
to punch a hole in someone or choke them lifeless. It is, in part being aware
of your environment as well as coming to grips with your fears, and percieved
limitations, and either eliminating them or adapting them. Improved physical
health is another benefit -- but not the only other -- that comes immediately
to mind. This, of course, enables kids, and the physically challenged, to not
only develop a basis for protecting themselves, but to experience
mental/physical progress and success in ways they may never have before.
>Which assumption is this? The fact that you said the majority of your
>students are kids, that you charge $60/month for classes?
>
The assumption that everyone at my school pays the same or pays at all.
The overall average tuition -- which, I believe is what you asked about -- is
$60, yes, but different programs call for different price structures; we offer
discounted programs to additional family members to ease the financial
commitment, and still allow more than one family member to train and reap the
benefits; other students who cannot pay due to hardship or other reasons do not
pay and are not asked to pay; every school -- yours included, sir -- also
experiences a certain attrition rate, a percentage of students who do not or
cannot continue their training for whatever reason, and that too affects the
income.
>Explain how deadly this can be for me...I'm very curious as to what
>your response will be.
Jumping to conclusions, for instance, or assuming a situation is something
other than what it is, without full command of the facts, can, under any number
of circumstances, lead to trouble, or worse. Use your imagination on this one
... but people who possess only partial information of a subject or situation,
or underestimate either an opponent (to use a physical example) or jump
headfirst into a project without prior planning (to use a more mental example)
are usually not mature enough to handle it in the first place, regardless of
age, as brawn takes over where brains fail. I'd like to think in this new
millenium that, despite all of our problems in society we've come a little
further than dragging our knuckles and beating the shit out of people who look
crosseyed at our girlfriend.
>BTW, you never answered the question I had concerning testing fees and
>their frequency. What is the answer to that question?
Test fees are $15, one time per belt level; if the student fails -- and I
assure you that students do fail at nearly every test -- they may test again
but they do not pay again. A test is held the last Friday of every month, but
-- so as to eliminate any confusion or further assumptions on your part -- this
does not mean that all students test every month. Figure roughly one third or
less test, while the other students take part in the process (call it a
pre-test if you will), so I am able to gauge their progress and determine the
areas that need the most work for each student. I look at this as quality
control.
As I said, this is my last response to this thread. Please go on
responding if that is your desire ... or go on ignoring the facts that I have
tried to present in a rational, fairly level-headed manner, along with my
personal experiences, and continue to throw around insults of prostitution and
whatever else you feel necessary. I run a good school, a strong school, and
turn out high-quality, eminently capable Martial Artists of all ages, and I
remain proud of the work that I do. You, my friend, don't have to like it or
even care about. Ain't life great?
As one of my former instructors once told me, "The best thing is often to
state your piece and shut the fuck up. " I have stated mine, and I move on to
other things.
Thanks for your time and input.
Don Wagner
>>Thats better. I was wondering how long it was going to take you to
>>respond the way you really wanted to.
> It seems to be the only way to penetrate those blinders you're wearing.
I understand Gary. When in Rome...
> Specifics in the form of principles of movement and economy of motion,
>principles that, in the 21st century, should be grounded in scientific
>validity and utilize the latest knowledge of modern psychology to produce the
>most well-rounded practitioner.
The martial arts aren't rocket science, in fact they are quite basic
to human nature and require little if any scientific, "21st century"
;-) methods in order to produce that well-rounded artist. Are those
kids well rounded, btw?
> I said virtually, not exclusively. Apparently your point is to nitpick
>semantics rather than debate fact.
The facts are that the specifics in arts are important to that art.
Trim them down and you have something that isn't the art anymore.
What you have, I don't know, but it sure isn't a martial art.
> Those are to name just a few; and the way the arts are taught in modern
>times, many strikers now train heavily in grappling and vice versa, tending to
>homogenize systems while creating more well-rounded practitioners.
In what style? This is integration of styles usually only usefull
once a person has spent years in a single core style. If your core
style isn't teaching, lets say sticks, and you learn a few power shots
that doesn't make you well rounded. It just makes you slightly less
ignorant.
> Wrong. Fighting skills are but one benefit, as previously stated, but not
>the only benefit.
An important benefit shall we say? A prime yardstick for a martial
art even?
> I also prefer to think that we as instructors teach
>self-defense rather than just fighting, although the former, out of necessity
>contains the latter.
SD is almost entirely _non_ physical as I've previously said. It can
also be seperated entirely from MA lessons and taught to anyone
willing to listen, learn and practice.
> The assumption that everyone at my school pays the same or pays at all.
I see....this assumption on my part was due to what you wrote when I
asked a specific question. I had no idea that you were running such
an atruistic institution. Doesn't the gov'ment cheese bind you up?
>>Explain how deadly this can be for me...I'm very curious as to what
>>your response will be.
> Jumping to conclusions, for instance, or assuming a situation is something
>other than what it is, without full command of the facts, can, under any number
>of circumstances, lead to trouble, or worse. Use your imagination on this one
Sorry, all you've done is reiterated that it's a bad thing. Educate
me.
> Test fees are $15, one time per belt level; if the student fails -- and I
>assure you that students do fail at nearly every test -- they may test again
>but they do not pay again. A test is held the last Friday of every month, but
>-- so as to eliminate any confusion or further assumptions on your part -- this
>does not mean that all students test every month. Figure roughly one third or
>less test,
So testing fees bring in approx. $7,000 per year on top of tuition.
Just curious.
> I run a good school, a strong school, and
>turn out high-quality, eminently capable Martial Artists of all ages, and I
>remain proud of the work that I do.
Huzzah! <queue sounds of banging ones own drum>
;-)
Erik Harris
>>If he said that he's charging each of those kids $60/month, I missed it.
>>Maybe he did say that. Even if he is charging that, with a school that large,
>>his operating costs are probably incredibly high.
>Look it up in the past posts to verify my statements. No matter what
>the take home pay is, thats still $90,000+ in income.
Does that mean my income is the same as the total revenue of whatever company
I work for? Of course not (I wish it did), not even if I owned the company.
The company's income is split up between the incomes of any employees
(including the owner) and what goes back into that company, in the form of
upkeep or reinvestment. His income is not the same as his school's income.
>> So far, you've accused me of being an un-dedicated student, implied that my
>>instruction is worthless, compared everyone who teaches children MA to
>>whores and death row inmates, and probably quite a few others that I haven't
>>seen or am forgetting.
>Thats a fairly creative way of seeing it. Lets take it step by step.
It was the most apparent way of seeing it, based on the way it was written.
>1. You said you quit training without (at first) an explanation.
None should've been necessary.
>2. I merely implied that quality instruction is not determined by a
>high or a low charge.
And when I said that I've made only $50 in my entire life for teaching, and
that I don't charge for instruction, you said that perhaps that's all my
instruction is worth. Not even remotely the same as your number 2 above.
>3. "Prostituting" ones skills is slightly different from saying that
>"everyone who teaches children MA is a whore". I called into question
I said 'compared them to', not 'called them'. You made the analogy of the
prostitute selling her body and the analogy of death row inmates (in two
separate messages. I believe both were in response to Mr. Barnes' messages).
>>Believe it or not, tossing around insults doesn't do anything to help
>>your argument (or your credibility).
>You and Gary seem to be attempting to keep up.
Could you be more specific? I've been pretty careful to resist the temptation
to lower myself to that level. I don't feel like undermining my own argument
by throwing in needless insults. If you feel that I've flamed you in this
discussion, please point it out. I'll do my best to explain it or I'll
apologize for it.
>>what I said, and go on a tirade about greed and toss around insults. (You
>>asked someone for specific benefits of martial arts training. I offered some,
>>and you ignored them
>Not at all! I think the are fine, fine benefits for adults.
Sorry, typo on my part. You asked someone for specific benefits of children
training in martial arts, and I offered some.
>>I'm not denying that a lot of teachers do exactly what you're talking about.
>And how do we determine who they are?
Pretty much the only way to be sure is to try and evaluate them on a
case-by-case basis. There are plenty of ways to do it, some less civilized
(and legal) than others.
>>But there are also a lot of teachers who offer quality instruction to
>>interested students of all ages. Teaching children is NOT synonymous with
>Yeah, bad schools abound, bad teachers abound, they outnumber the good
>teachers and good schools. What was your arguement against what I
>said again?
My argument against what you said is that teaching children martial arts is
not inherently bad, worthless, greedy, or in any way fraudulent. You're
trying to take two situations with a fairly high correlation and say that the
correlation is causal and universal. I'm saying that the correlation isn't
causal and isn't nearly universal. i.e. I'm saying that I believe you're
wrong.
Don Wagner
>Does that mean my income is the same as the total revenue of whatever company
>I work for?
Uh, Erik...Gary said (sorry, implied) he owns the place. Small
business revenue minus rent, insurance, improvement, etc. has to be
accounted for in some way. I merely did the math and found the
schools income and then added the price of grading tests to that.
Gary then replied that the nature of the school fee structure is such
that some people pay, some don't, some people pay full price, some are
offered discounts. Frankly, I'd like to be one of the ones that
didn't pay and still recieved full benefits of being a student. In
fact, if things were reversed, I'd become a bit perturbed at the
unequal tuition.
> His income is not the same as his school's income.
I believe we've covered this. Gary teaches the little darlings
according to their needs and their parents checkbooks (or so it
seems). Poor folk and the disenfranchised seem to train for free I
guess. Some kids pay $60/month but not all of them. The majority of
kids stay 3-4 yrs but there is still a significant attrition rate.
>None should've been necessary.
Well that is definitely not the case it seems.
>And when I said that I've made only $50 in my entire life for teaching, and
>that I don't charge for instruction, you said that perhaps that's all my
>instruction is worth. Not even remotely the same as your number 2 above.
...and that still could be the case. Are you a good instructor?
>>3. "Prostituting" ones skills is slightly different from saying that
>>"everyone who teaches children MA is a whore". I called into question
>I said 'compared them to', not 'called them'.
I quoted you directly, Erik. Look at your post again.
> You made the analogy of the
>prostitute selling her body and the analogy of death row inmates (in two
>separate messages. I believe both were in response to Mr. Barnes' messages).
Might have been. Go fetch them and I'll be happy to put them into
historical perspective for you.
>Could you be more specific?
Certainly. The two of you have been reacting to my comments.
> I've been pretty careful to resist the temptation
>to lower myself to that level.
But it is tempting, isn't it?
;-)
>Sorry, typo on my part. You asked someone for specific benefits of children
>training in martial arts, and I offered some.
...and once again, I think they are fine goals and benefits for adults
to obtain in the area of MA training. Not kids training in something
called martial arts.
>Pretty much the only way to be sure is to try and evaluate them on a
>case-by-case basis. There are plenty of ways to do it, some less civilized
>(and legal) than others.
Which is what we are doing, isn't it? Calling into question motives
and goals. Pointing out commonly used marketing ploys used on kids is
extremely valid to the conversation.
>My argument against what you said is that teaching children martial arts is
>not inherently bad, worthless, greedy, or in any way fraudulent.
Inherent enough that the bad outweighs the good.
> I'm saying that I believe you're
>wrong.
Beautiful. Now say it like you really mean it.
storys
> gets a piece of my attention every time they set foot on the mat. Maybe it
> should be "Ignore the kids at society's peril."
I cannot argue this point! Thankyou for your approbation.
......Tom.......
X
>>Correct. You said "I quit". Thats an assumption on my part? I don't
>>think so.
That is pretty rude.
Saying that he quit one martial art for medical reasons doesn't mean he gave
up on martial arts all together.
>>>What are you talking about? I've made less than $50 in my life in
teaching
>>>martial arts, and that was unexpected and unrequested. I've never
charged
>>>anyone for instruction.
Oh, then why not give the $50 back then? hehe.
-X
Don
is attempting to confuse or darken?. And out of curiosity, why
do you refer to his style of Kenpo, as Kempo. Are you trying to
be funny? Disrespectful? or do you just not know the
difference. Regards, DRD
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
BarnesKenpo
>
Touche, Erik. You are right, and I stand humbly corrected.
JimS
>
> I've noticed that the mention of children in the Martial Arts in this NG
>brings certain trolls and flamers scuttling from the woodwork like so many
>cockroaches. Jim_Storey, with his written sneers and derisive laughter at
>concepts such as "Little Dragons" classes, is perhaps the most vociferous, if
> Like it or not, children form the backbone of nearly every MA school in
>this country; they are here to stay with or without your approval.
> Jim, what kind of man are you that you are so insecure as to be threatened
>by the presence of a child?
Why, did you just enter my office or something?
To answer your question, I dunno, just a regular-kinda-guy who thinks you're not
very interesting, I guess.
And, Little Kempo Dragons?
Get serious.
JS "derisive laughter fades out..."
X
>> I've noticed that the mention of children in the Martial Arts in this
NG
>>brings certain trolls and flamers scuttling from the woodwork like so many
>>cockroaches. Jim_Storey, with his written sneers and derisive laughter at
>>concepts such as "Little Dragons" classes, is perhaps the most vociferous,
if
>>not also the most ill-informed of the lot.
JS seems like a fairly intelligent, well read person.- but he has some
attitude problems. He likes to flame people for little reason other than
different view points (a sign of insecurity).
>And, Little Kempo Dragons?
>Get serious.
>JS "derisive laughter fades out..."
Well, when little kids learn math in school, do we throw them directly into
500 level university math courses?
No.
They need to start somewhere, so we give them big fuzzy blocks with the
numbers on it, and show them how to count on their hands and give them nice,
comfy "times-tables". Why should other types of learning be different?
Seems like you need to "get serious", but better yet, get nice.
-X
Mehran
> <snip>Well, when little kids learn math in school, do we throw them directly
> into
> 500 level university math courses?
> No.
Probably the reason the rest of the world kicks their asses on math and science
tests, methinks.
M
BarnesKenpo
>not
>very interesting, I guess.
>
Interesting enough to elicit a reply from from you though, I suppose.
Better late than never, eh Jim? The discussion ended for me.
JimS
Really? Then why are you responding here?
Erik Harris
>esh7@c_rnell.edu (Erik Harris) wrote:
>>I work for?
>Uh, Erik...Gary said (sorry, implied) he owns the place.
I covered that in the sentences immediately following what you quoted. But
they're conveniently missing from your reply. :-)
>Small business revenue minus rent, insurance, improvement, etc. has to be
>accounted for in some way. I merely did the math and found the
>schools income and then added the price of grading tests to that.
You say yourelf, "minus rent, insurance, improvement, etc." Did you subtract
that from your figure? I can't speak for Gary, his school, or his salary. I
have no idea what he teaches, what he makes, or what his school is like (other
than "larger than I can imagine"). I'm simply saying that his school's income
is NOT synonymous with his income, even though he owns the place. The school
has expenses that have to be met before a fraction of the school's income
makes its way to being his income. What that fraction is, I have no clue. He
hasn't disclosed that, and I don't think it's any of my business.
>Gary then replied that the nature of the school fee structure is such
>that some people pay, some don't, some people pay full price, some are
>offered discounts. Frankly, I'd like to be one of the ones that
>didn't pay and still recieved full benefits of being a student. In
>fact, if things were reversed, I'd become a bit perturbed at the
>unequal tuition.
C'est la vie. Did you go to college? The same is true at most colleges.
Some students get financial aid. Some students get money for being very
smart. Some students get money just 'cause they fit into a scholarship
demographic (I remember looking for scholarships and saying to myself, "gee,
this sucks, there's no money for white males"). Lots of people are at the
same educational institution paying hugely varying amounts for their
education. Often this range is anywhere from $0.00 to $35,000 per year. Most
people don't get too upset about it, though.
>>And when I said that I've made only $50 in my entire life for teaching, and
>>that I don't charge for instruction, you said that perhaps that's all my
>>instruction is worth. Not even remotely the same as your number 2 above.
>....and that still could be the case. Are you a good instructor?
I've been told that I am by several people, and have never been called a poor
instructor. All I can really say for sure is that I do my best, and am always
trying to be a better instructor and martial artist.
>Might have been. Go fetch them and I'll be happy to put them into
>historical perspective for you.
I would, but it would appear that deja.com has no record of any messages in
this thread.
>>Sorry, typo on my part. You asked someone for specific benefits of children
>>training in martial arts, and I offered some.
>....and once again, I think they are fine goals and benefits for adults
>to obtain in the area of MA training.
But the examples I gave were specifically about children. Granted, they were
in the form of future benefits, but MA isn't a short-term thing in general.
It's no more of a waste to teach children than it's a waste to invest money.
In both cases, the most valuable return on the investment is a ways down the
road. Beginning training as an adult means you already missed out on that
investment. It's no longer an option.
>>Pretty much the only way to be sure is to try and evaluate them on a
>>case-by-case basis. There are plenty of ways to do it, some less civilized
>>(and legal) than others.
>Which is what we are doing, isn't it?
Not exactly. It's generally impossible to tell whether or not someone is a
good teacher simply by reading what they write in a newsgroup. There's no
correlation between how well someone writes and how well they teach martial
arts.
>Pointing out commonly used marketing ploys used on kids is
>extremely valid to the conversation.
Sure it is. But teaching kids is not a marketing ploy in itself.
>> I'm saying that I believe you're wrong.
>Beautiful. Now say it like you really mean it.
I did. I don't need to throw in an insult to "say like I mean it."
Darkmn3300
teaching children and feel that there are more benefits to MA training than
just the development of combat skills. I feel that kids get alot out of their
training. My thinking on the subject is this: If you like teaching kids, and
are fulfilled in that capacity, then by all means do so; if you think kids have
no place in the Arts, then don't. Ne'er the twain shall meet, eh?
There's room enough for everybody.
I have good friends in both camps, the very "traditional" who feel that
teaching children, or even charging for lessons is tantamount to selling out,
and it is their sworn duty to keep the line pure (THAT sounds a bit arrogant to
me and more than a little Aryan ... but that is another subject altogether),
and those who have large, professional schools and teach for profit. Truth be
told, I have seen examples of good and bad Martial Artists from both
environments, and in roughly equal proportions no less. Which leads me to
believe that it boils down to the commitment and dedication of the individual
instructor and not whether he/she offers children's programs, and (God forbid!)
makes a decent living by their skills.
JimS
>JS seems like a fairly intelligent, well read person.- but he has some
>attitude problems.
Well, hey, two out of three ain't bad. My attitude is directly proportional to the
content level of your posts, X. The worse your posts are, the more my attitude has
problems. It's all on your shoulders to improve my attitude with some decent posts,
the way I see it.
JS "When hell freezes over and the New Orleans Saints win their division"
Don Wagner
>>To answer your question, I dunno, just a regular-kinda-guy who thinks you're
>>not
>>very interesting, I guess.
>>
>
> Interesting enough to elicit a reply from from you though, I suppose.
>Better late than never, eh Jim? The discussion ended for me.
This is the third time you said that, Gary. You've got to start
commit to your vows.
;-)
--Don--
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
Don Wagner
>I have no idea what he teaches, what he makes, or what his school is like (other
>than "larger than I can imagine").
Then you should look a bit more closely at the previous posts. Or
expand your imagination to encompass 130 students in a school.
> He
>hasn't disclosed that, and I don't think it's any of my business.
Then hush and let those that do believe it is of importance discuss
it. Shush now...shush.
>C'est la vie. Did you go to college? The same is true at most colleges.
Why how positively liberal of you! Should everyone then make the same
amount of money too?
> Most people don't get too upset about it, though.
"Hi. People of your <insert religion or ethnic background here> have
to sit in the back. Don't worry...the bus will get there."
>I've been told that I am by several people, and have never been called a poor
>instructor. All I can really say for sure is that I do my best, and am always
>trying to be a better instructor and martial artist.
Maybe they were being polite. Do you think you're a good instructor?
>But the examples I gave were specifically about children. Granted, they were
>in the form of future benefits, but MA isn't a short-term thing in general.
How about them apples! The benefits are geared towards adults in this
area (MA). MA can be very short term if basic and useful physical SD
skills and fighting are the goal. Frankly I feel even 3-5yrs is
pretty short term.
>It's no more of a waste to teach children than it's a waste to invest money.
Unless your "investing" in something easily exploited. See "socially
response mutual funds" for instance.
> It's no longer an option.
Screw the old fogies huh?
>Not exactly. It's generally impossible to tell whether or not someone is a
>good teacher simply by reading what they write in a newsgroup. There's no
>correlation between how well someone writes and how well they teach martial
>arts.
How about communication skills? How about backtracking and being
forced to clarify poorly projected thoughts?
>>Pointing out commonly used marketing ploys used on kids is
>>extremely valid to the conversation.
>
>Sure it is. But teaching kids is not a marketing ploy in itself.
Neither are all pyramid schemes. Amway anyone?
>I did. I don't need to throw in an insult to "say like I mean it."
You don't need to, but you'll thank yourself if you do.
Eric D. Berge
Eric Berge wrote:
BarnesKenpo wrote:
> > Very many, if not most, adults who come to a martial arts class for the
> >first time readily understand the material until it is appropriately explained
> >and taught to them.
>>"Barnes Kempo: Obfuscation is our specialty"?
>
> Eric,would you share with the readers what you feel Gary Barnes
> is attempting to confuse or darken?.
Read Barnes's (muddled) statement again - he says that adults understand the material
until he explains it to them. Which was too good to pass up making fun of.
> And out of curiosity, why do you refer to his style of Kenpo, as Kempo.
> Are you trying to be funny? Disrespectful?
Indifferent. Although his account of his school virtually screams "McDojo" at
me.
> or do you just not know the difference.
Is there one? they are two slightly different English transliterations
of the same Japanese word.
JimS
>> And out of curiosity, why do you refer to his style of Kenpo, as Kempo.
>> Are you trying to be funny? Disrespectful?
>
>Indifferent. Although his account of his school virtually screams "McDojo" at
>me.
>
>> or do you just not know the difference.
>
>Is there one? they are two slightly different English transliterations
>of the same Japanese word.
>--
> Eric Berge
Golly, I'm not sure a minor error like this means a school appears to be a McDojo,
are you Eric? :-))))
Jim "Big Dragon" S.
Eric D. Berge
JimS wrote:
>
> In article <38B56C21...@hotmail.com>, eric_...@hotmail.com says...
>
> >> And out of curiosity, why do you refer to his style of Kenpo, as Kempo.
> >> Are you trying to be funny? Disrespectful?
> >
> >Indifferent. Although his account of his school virtually screams "McDojo" at
> >me.
> >
> >> or do you just not know the difference.
> >
> >Is there one? they are two slightly different English transliterations
> >of the same Japanese word.
> Golly, I'm not sure a minor error like this means a school appears to be a McDojo,
> are you Eric? :-))))
>
> Jim "Big Dragon" S.
Makes ya long for the good ol' days of "Sensei" Paul Miccichichichichi, don't
it?
--
Eric "Middling Sized Dragon" Berge
Don Wagner
>Makes ya long for the good ol' days of "Sensei" Paul Miccichichichichi, don't
>it?
>
>--
> Eric "Middling Sized Dragon" Berge
Or Alan Platts magical, mystery trip.
;-)
--Don "Puffing Dragon" Wagner--
Badger
> Makes ya long for the good ol' days of "Sensei" Paul
Miccichichichichi, don't
> it?
>
> --
> Eric "Middling Sized Dragon" Berge
Hey, I forgot about him. I assume he blew up and was never seen again,
I can't imagine him quietly drifting off into the sunset.
Badger "Skinny Dragon" Jones
--
Northern Shaolin Five Animals Kung Fu
& Filipino Martial Arts
http://www.cyberus.ca/~badger/
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
JimS
>
>"Eric D. Berge" <eric_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Makes ya long for the good ol' days of "Sensei" Paul Miccichichichichi, don't
>>it?
>>
>>--
>> Eric "Middling Sized Dragon" Berge
>
>;-)
>
>--Don "Puffing Dragon" Wagner--
>--Don--
Damn, I miss Sunshine Al. I tried to get him going on that recent kata thread, but no dice.
Jim "Puff Daddy" S.
Eric D. Berge
Don Wagner wrote:
>
> "Eric D. Berge" <eric_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Makes ya long for the good ol' days of "Sensei" Paul Miccichichichichi, don't
> >it?
> > Eric "Middling Sized Dragon" Berge
>
> Or Alan Platts magical, mystery trip.
> ;-)
>
> --Don "Puffing Dragon" Wagner--
Weird Al has been back recently, you know...
--
Eric "Pink DragQu^H^H^H^Hon" Berge
Erik Harris
>>C'est la vie. Did you go to college? The same is true at most colleges.
>Why how positively liberal of you! Should everyone then make the same
>amount of money too?
Liberal of ME? I have nothing to do with deciding who gets money to go to
college.
And no, I don't.
>> Most people don't get too upset about it, though.
>"Hi. People of your <insert religion or ethnic background here> have
>to sit in the back. Don't worry...the bus will get there."
What has this to do with Gary teaching people who can't afford his tuition,
need and merit-based scholarships and grants in college?
>>I've been told that I am by several people, and have never been called a poor
>>instructor. All I can really say for sure is that I do my best, and am always
>>trying to be a better instructor and martial artist.
>Maybe they were being polite. Do you think you're a good instructor?
People don't usually go out of their way to say something that they don't mean
to be polite. Often people will lie out of politeness if the topic comes up
and they're asked to comment, but generally, someone won't seek a person out
to lie to him out of politeness.
And yes, I do.
>>But the examples I gave were specifically about children. Granted, they were
>>in the form of future benefits, but MA isn't a short-term thing in general.
>How about them apples! The benefits are geared towards adults in this
>area (MA).
The benefits I spoke of are specifically benefits of learning martial arts as
a child.
>MA can be very short term if basic and useful physical SD skills and fighting
>are the goal.
True. It doesn't take long to become relatively good at defending onesself.
>Frankly I feel even 3-5yrs is pretty short term.
So do I. And every time I have an opportunity to train with someone who has
25-50 years of experience, I see my ten years as incredibly short term.
>> It's no longer an option.
>Screw the old fogies huh?
No, I didn't say that training is no longer an option once one reaches
adulthood. I said that reaping the benefits of having trained as a child is
no longer an option. That has nothing to do with "screw the old fogies,"
that's a pretty simple matter of us being unable to travel back in time.
>>Not exactly. It's generally impossible to tell whether or not someone is a
>>good teacher simply by reading what they write in a newsgroup. There's no
>>correlation between how well someone writes and how well they teach martial
>>arts.
>How about communication skills? How about backtracking and being
>forced to clarify poorly projected thoughts?
How about them? There are many ways to communicate. Written communication,
verbal communication, and even physical communication. As far as teaching
martial arts goes, written communication isn't a necessary skill. Many
teachers have even proven that with sufficient physical communication skill,
verbal communication skill (in a language that the student understands,
anyhow) isn't even vital.
There are also a lot of people who are really good at speaking and writing,
and can easily put forth an excellent case for their knowledge and skills in
writing, but not be able to back a thing up phyisically, and can't teach worth
beans. That's often what McDojo's thrive on. Excellent verbal and written
communication skills at the expense of actual martial skill.
Erik Harris
> I have good friends in both camps, the very "traditional" who feel that
>teaching children, or even charging for lessons is tantamount to selling out,
Many very "traditional" arts are based on starting a person's training very
young. Many (maybe most?) family systems operate this way. Start the kid
young, and teach him the more "mature" details of the art as he's ready for
them.