Is Testing Really Necessary?

[MarkF]

Chuck Clark originally posted:

We do not have testing fees, only a nominal charge for promotion.

__________________
Chuck Clark
Jiyushinkai Aikibudo
http://www.jiyushinkai.org







BBRRRRRRRaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazz.aaaaaaaaayyyyyyaaaah

[Chuck Clark]

Mark,

I must admit that I don't understand your last communication.

[MarkF]

Chuck,
The most honest answer is that it made me laugh. The fact you don't charge for testing, but charge for the promotion is thought to be the same thing. Sorry I found it funny.

[Paul Mathews]

Joe,
I understand your frustrations. I have had similar experiences where very dedicated students tested at the same time as a less dedicated but more physically talented student. I think the point that you should consider centers on whether the test is the sole criteria of promotion.

While we have been discussing the relative merits of testing we may not have paid enough attention to where the testing fits into the scheme of things. For my part, a student doesn't test until I think they are ready for promotion. The test is much like a right of passage. It is just one more hurdle which I hope brings some closure to the period of training for a certain rank while opening up thepossibilities inherant in the training for the next rank. It is a benchmark. This is especially true at the higher mudansha levels as well as for shodan.

While I feel that testing is an important part of the process, it is not a conundrum for me as to who deserved the promotion more. It is obvious from your post that you agree that the young lady was more deserving.

Paul

[Chuck Clark]

Mark,

Many organizations charge for testing (even if you fail) and then also charge for a promotion fee. We only charge for the promotion and it is a way of getting some funds to run the organization. I believe in keeping costs to a level that just about anyone can afford them.

There's no such thing as a "Free Lunch." If you have a patron who pays the bills...that usually "costs" in hidden ways too. As I said before, I've found that most people do not value things that don't cost something. The trick is in keeping it ethical and equitable.

[MarkF]

Hi Chuck,
I agree with you. That is not why I found it funny. Without a little more explanation, it just struck me so. It was not a put-down, or anything else of how you do things. I also agree that certain things do require a show of value, and today, money, unfortunatly, is the only clear way. I don't test as such, but students know they are being "tested" and that I place more importance on a students general "wa" than how they might fare during a given test. That is how many with whom I came up, see the matter as well. As far as the fee, I tell them immediately after promotion how much and the reason for the charge, IE, the cost of the obi. If one knows everything he does and the goal of promotion (I rather like the term "grading" a students level of training), s/he will understand this from the get-go, and the ones who stand around with their thumbs hooked on to the belt around h/her waist, is not going to advance frequently.

So if you are offended by my first glance at the wording of how you charge for the thing, I apologize, but please do not take any offense. I happen to like your website and in general, I agree with you on most points. As it was brought up in koryu, I think highly of your abilities. Is the invitation still good for a chance to visit and "see more of the elephant?

[Chuck Clark]

No problems, Mark.

I understand how those of us who've been around "awhile" get a bit like the folks from Missouri about budo claims.

Anytime you're in the area, give us a call.

[D. Chopper]

I find points on both sides of the coin to be valid. but in general, I think some rite of passage is in order--something that gets the nerves up, as it were.

Money, well, we charge to cover the cost of the belts, plus a little--maybe 10 bucks total. We don't charge for dan grades. By that time, the student has paid enough. And we furnish the belt. Not a fancy silk one. Just black and cotton like the rest. No embroidery. It's all very plain.

But I think that one of the most important things to remember is that the test is also for us as instructors. It's generally agreed that we wouldn't "test" a student without their being ready. But we have all seen our students not live up to our own expectations--or just perform less-admirably than usual.

This gives us an idea of what we need to teach and whether we need to make adjustments in the curriculum. As teachers, we should also be seeking the most efficient way to extract the most efficient performance from our students.

In karate,


D. Chopper

[MarkF]

This, indeed, was a post well worth the effort. Even if I do not agree, and in nanka in Los Angeles, most did not test. Certain aspects of performance were, as an example, how you performed at shiai was always one of the criteria, a major one, but not the only one. If you were a serious competitior, there for nothing but getting into the Olympics and world championships, then it counted heavily. If it was more fore the self-defense, then you were expected to perform kata well. There are many others, and it is not a perfect system by any means, but when comparing notes, if seems it is about even with those who test. probably the only real difference was a certain change in attitude when one knew testing was coming, but I also made note of something similar in the way I do it. It took me ten years to be graded for dan, so it does say something about the teacher, and, no doubt, me

[kenshorin]

In re: to Mark's statement...

I underatnd your reasoning, but I am really wondering what value it has when you know the student ot be ready



The main reason I run tests isn't so much for myself... I know in advance who I am going to pass, because if they aren't ready I don't put them up for it. It is more or less a demonstration than a test... I make it mandatory that the students bring someone with them to the "test" so that they can build confidence doing karate in front of others who aren't part of the dojo. secondly, there is always this feeling of accomplishment the student takes away, even if there was no way i would fail them based on a test alone...

[D. Chopper]

I think you may have missed my point a bit. As I said, it seems that none of us would put up a student who was not ready to test. However, it is usually the case when someone tests that they don;t perform quite as well as during the day-to-day dojo training. The comfort level has gone down.

Just because they do quite well during daily training doesn't mean that they will do well when the "pressure" is on.

And that is what I mean by getting feedback about instruction. How do they perform under pressure? Diffrently? Then adjustments need to be. Eithe more intense session, or perhaps less-intense session.

My point is that as instructors we should constantly be looking to evaluate ourselves and improve what we do. A testing situation gives us some of that feedback. I wouldn't be so selfish as to have a student test merely to see whether I had done a good job.

But I will see where their shortcomings are. And if a majority of the dojo has problems with certain techiniques or concepts, then those need to accentuated.

That is what I mean that as instructors, we are tested, also.

In karate,


D. Chopper

[Paul Mathews]

Just to add to Mr. Chopper's comments above; one of the primary purposes of scholastic evaluation IS to determine just how well the educator has done his/her job. Unfortunately, in the classroom as well as in the dojo, too often the instructor takes the credit for outstanding performances while placing the blame for less than adequate performances on the student.

As I stated previously, testing should be an opportunity for learning. Sometimes I learn as much from the testing as the student does.

Paul

[Walt Harms]

all the comments have been insightful. My point however hasn't been truly addressed. Re-stated; if a test is given it should be a real test with pass/fail criteria, it should apply equally to all (the bar should be at the same height for all taking the test) lastly it should test what is taught.

Walt Harms

[Joseph Svinth]

One thing your test criteria fail to address, Walt, is how the student fires the teacher for incompetence. If a student fails, what corrective measures were taken beforehand to ensure he was qualified for the test? If the student fails twice, what remedial training was provided? And if several students fail, then the fault is almost surely that of the instructor rather than the student.

In the pre-WWII era in the US, the clubs had parental supervisory groups that got rid of instructors who didn't deliver the goods. Unfortunately, few modern MA schools have parental supervisory groups. Instead they are either clubs or businesses, and as a result the only restraints on the instructor are market demands and the law.

As for the organizations, well, let's get real -- in the MA, we don't fire the incompetents, we just put them in charge of the Yudanshakai.

Anyway, it is my belief that were we to get rid of the self-inflated balloons on top, then the problems of the club supervisors and their troopies should quickly resolve themselves. However, this is unlikely. Therefore the best that we as instructors can do is try to develop students who will not embarrass us or themselves either in public or in contests with students of their own relative ability.

The easiest way is to hold no promotions at all. That way everyone is a white belt, to include the instructor, and their are no expectations of prowess save what student/instructor can make work for him/her. If your white belt can throw the Japanese national champion, so? That isn't embarrassing for you or your white belt, is it? And if your 10-dan can't throw the white belt's grandma, well, who is more embarrassed? If I were in 10-dan's association, I would be humiliated.

If promotions are the issue, get rid of them. Contest goes as contest goes, beginner, intermediate, advanced, and national class. Tournament officials on duty wear blue jackets and are called Mr./Mrs. Coaches wear black belts and are called Mr./Mrs. Players are called players and wear white, brown, or black belts, depending on status. They get called by name.

Meanwhile party hacks,yudanshakai heads, and the rest of the politicians and hangers-on are charged full retail if they want admission to the event, and are otherwise given all the respect owed middle-aged fat men by their proctologists. If they aren't coaching, refereeing, or competing, then they are paying customers, and nothing more. (Old guys who offer something of value are one thing, but as a rule Congressmen are harder working, more ethical, and generally helpful to constituents than are MA politicians.)

[kenshorin]

in re: to d.chopper's statement...

Yes, but I feel the EXPECTATION of the instructor is that the student won't do as well on a test date as in class. Yes, it is a comfort level issue, but we as instructors would be doing our students a disservice if all we ever provided for the student was a comfortable environment. The student needs to have experience dealing with situations they are not quite as comfortable with. One of the reasons karate is taught is for self defense. What good are we doing teaching the student all these techniques, if they become paralyzed with fear in a situation where they are confronted on the street because they don't know quite how to handle discomfort? What are they supposed to say to their attacker... "Wait I can't fight you here... but if you fight me at the dojo I'll kick your ass!"

However, the more experienced they are I think they should perform better during a test. Obviously, if a white belt does good during class, but does poorly during a test, that should be expected, but someone testing for a dan level should be given a lot less leeway.

I agree with Paul and Joeseph on the point that instructors should view the test as indicative of their teaching style, whether it is efficient or not. Very nice string from you two because, yes I find sometimes I focus a lot on the students during a test and don't always think of what I am doing wrong so yes this is definitely something we should all keep in mind.

Lastly, Joeseph, the only thing a student can do to "fire" an instructor who is lacking is to leave that school. There is plenty of competition, so as a customer (and that IS what students are) is take their business elsewhere, same as anything.