Belt tests: Are they really necessary?

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Belt tests: are they necessary?

Are belt tests necessary to determine proficiency?
Should a belt test push a student to their physical limits?
Should a belt test be an opportunity for a student to perform a demonstration?
Or, are they unnecessary.

What types of tests have you seen, what types of tests (if any) would you like to see implemented in your school/association?

Most martial artists believe that Belt rank is an important indicator of skill and knowledge. Belt testing varies widely from school to school. Here are some of the extremes and in-betweens I’ve seen.

The Black Belt test at my nephew’s TKD school is a 24-hour test. The 24-hour test included a grueling uphill run, hundreds of sit-ups, pushups, calisthenics, basics, breaking, forms, sparring, and very little sleep. The belts are awarded at a ceremony a couple of weeks later. Well, the ceremony was something else. They held the awards ceremony at a local high-school gym. Families and friends were invited. It was 3-hours. Speeches, live music, kata demonstrations, weapons demonstrations, breaking, a parade of TKD and other Martial Arts seniors, testimonials, etc. At the end, with music playing, the families were invited to stand behind the black belt candidates while the instructors handed out the Black Belts. Wow.

At many other schools, there is a group test lasting anywhere from one to six hours with belts awarded on the spot or within the next week. These tests may be public or private.

At the Kenpo school I trained at, every student received a weekly private lesson and belt tests were private.

One week or more before the test, the student would get a private lesson from another higher-ranking instructor to determine their readiness and provide feedback to the student and their regular instructor. If the student was ready, a test was scheduled. All tests were private.

The lower belt tests were about ½ hour long. The student, their uke, the instructor, and 1 – 3 Black Belts (depending on the students’ rank) attended. Students demonstrated basics, techniques and kata, then performed techniques on their uke and sparred with the uke or their instructor. At the end of the test, the student and uke were left kneeling for five or ten minutes while the instructor and testing board went into the office to discuss the students progress/performance and to sign the certificate and grab the belt. The belt was awarded on the spot, the student was congratulated and emerged from the test with new belt about the waist, certificate in one hand and old belt in the other. Students rarely failed tests – if they weren’t ready, the instructor should not have tested them. An instructor would get a major chew-out if he tried to test a student that was not ready. In 15 years of teaching at this school, I only had one student fail a test. He forgot one technique and started cussing at himself. The head instructor stopped the test. We worked on the student’s composure for a couple weeks, then he tested fine.

Brown and Black Belt tests were also private. They were longer—about 2 hours. We usually did these in the afternoon or late evening when the school was closed. There was a fixed sequence to the test. The testing panel could ask to see more material if they had any concerns, wanted to push the student, wanted to see a good show, or just wanted to see the ukes get pounded. Again, belts were awarded after the test. Beer and Pizza with the ukes and testing panel usually followed. Again, you wouldn’t dare bring a student into a brown belt test if there was a risk of failure. Students did fail brown belt tests, but it was usually because they failed to execute a technique and got nailed by their uke.

The Jiu-Jitsu school where I train now has a reputation for being extremely conservative on promotions. There was a thread on a Jiu-Jitsu forum where half the respondents named this instructor as the most difficult promotion requirements out of all the schools in the country. Surprisingly, there are no belt tests! People’s skills are readily apparent when you drill and spar with them. Belts are awarded by surprise in the middle of class. After the award, a line forms to shake hands and congratulate the students, and then there is a “belt-whipping” where the student runs a gauntlet through the class.

My current opinion is that tests are unnecessary. Promotions should be the reward for skills and behaviors demonstrated every day, not on a one-time performance.

As far as the after promotion congratulations method, that is already the subject of another thread...

 

[moving target]

I have never practiced in a place that tested for rank and I was never quite sure of the bennefits. In my opinion an instructor should know their students capability. I have never heard of a sports coach putting a player through a specific test for a position. Pro and college teams have evaluations where the test the your maximum output in a bunch of catagories and these may be taken into consideration, but your ability ultimately is gauged by proformance over time.

I do think in some situations some aspects of your ability could be tested to see what you are capable in a more clinical situation, but if you base a student passing a grading on a single test, than a less skilled student may make it through through luck and a more skilled student may not through bad luck.

 

[RCastillo]

Belt tests: are they necessary?

Are belt tests necessary to determine proficiency?
Should a belt test push a student to their physical limits?
Should a belt test be an opportunity for a student to perform a demonstration?
Or, are they unnecessary.

What types of tests have you seen, what types of tests (if any) would you like to see implemented in your school/association?

Most martial artists believe that Belt rank is an important indicator of skill and knowledge. Belt testing varies widely from school to school. Here are some of the extremes and in-betweens I’ve seen.

The Black Belt test at my nephew’s TKD school is a 24-hour test. The 24-hour test included a grueling uphill run, hundreds of sit-ups, pushups, calisthenics, basics, breaking, forms, sparring, and very little sleep. The belts are awarded at a ceremony a couple of weeks later. Well, the ceremony was something else. They held the awards ceremony at a local high-school gym. Families and friends were invited. It was 3-hours. Speeches, live music, kata demonstrations, weapons demonstrations, breaking, a parade of TKD and other Martial Arts seniors, testimonials, etc. At the end, with music playing, the families were invited to stand behind the black belt candidates while the instructors handed out the Black Belts. Wow.

At many other schools, there is a group test lasting anywhere from one to six hours with belts awarded on the spot or within the next week. These tests may be public or private.

At the Kenpo school I trained at, every student received a weekly private lesson and belt tests were private.

One week or more before the test, the student would get a private lesson from another higher-ranking instructor to determine their readiness and provide feedback to the student and their regular instructor. If the student was ready, a test was scheduled. All tests were private.

The lower belt tests were about ½ hour long. The student, their uke, the instructor, and 1 – 3 Black Belts (depending on the students’ rank) attended. Students demonstrated basics, techniques and kata, then performed techniques on their uke and sparred with the uke or their instructor. At the end of the test, the student and uke were left kneeling for five or ten minutes while the instructor and testing board went into the office to discuss the students progress/performance and to sign the certificate and grab the belt. The belt was awarded on the spot, the student was congratulated and emerged from the test with new belt about the waist, certificate in one hand and old belt in the other. Students rarely failed tests – if they weren’t ready, the instructor should not have tested them. An instructor would get a major chew-out if he tried to test a student that was not ready. In 15 years of teaching at this school, I only had one student fail a test. He forgot one technique and started cussing at himself. The head instructor stopped the test. We worked on the student’s composure for a couple weeks, then he tested fine.

Brown and Black Belt tests were also private. They were longer—about 2 hours. We usually did these in the afternoon or late evening when the school was closed. There was a fixed sequence to the test. The testing panel could ask to see more material if they had any concerns, wanted to push the student, wanted to see a good show, or just wanted to see the ukes get pounded. Again, belts were awarded after the test. Beer and Pizza with the ukes and testing panel usually followed. Again, you wouldn’t dare bring a student into a brown belt test if there was a risk of failure. Students did fail brown belt tests, but it was usually because they failed to execute a technique and got nailed by their uke.

The Jiu-Jitsu school where I train now has a reputation for being extremely conservative on promotions. There was a thread on a Jiu-Jitsu forum where half the respondents named this instructor as the most difficult promotion requirements out of all the schools in the country. Surprisingly, there are no belt tests! People’s skills are readily apparent when you drill and spar with them. Belts are awarded by surprise in the middle of class. After the award, a line forms to shake hands and congratulate the students, and then there is a “belt-whipping” where the student runs a gauntlet through the class.

My current opinion is that tests are unnecessary. Promotions should be the reward for skills and behaviors demonstrated every day, not on a one-time performance.

As far as the after promotion congratulations method, that is already the subject of another thread...

Mr. Wortman,

Do you prefer private, or group testing?

Thanks :asian:

 

[Black Bear]

There is a distinction between ability and achievement. Folks who favour testing would see the belt as representative of achievement, moreso than ability.

Plus, tests make for easy standardization.

Personally, belts have never meant much to me. The awarding of ranks is often based as much on other variables such as seniority, curriculum memorization, politics, etc. rather than performance. The reason that BJJ belts are taken fairly seriously is the way in which they are ascribed: to be a blue belt, you have to tap blue belts. To be a purple belt, you have to tap purple belts, etc... It's performance-based. You don't just demo various techniques from the corresponding curriculum. You have to be able to use them in an alive setting.

 

[Zepp]

I think ideally the "testing" is supposed to be more of a demonstration than anything else. An instructor shouldn't test a student for a rank unless they expect them to pass. That's the way it works in our organization at least.

I think there are two main purposes for a "test." The first is for the instructor to demonstrate to the rest of his students, fellow instructors, and anyone watching that his student is ready for the next rank. It's a way to show that the teacher has done his job. The second is to build up the student's confidence in their abilities by putting them in the spotlight.

 

[Gary Crawford]

I am so glad this thread came up.I have always had a serious opinion on the subject and I am glad to finally be able to express it.I think belt tests could be either.I think promotions like bjj schools do work very well for them since the instructors get plenty of opportunity to watch their students match up regularly,thus giving them a "performance based" ranking like Black Bear referred to.In this case tests are unneccisary.All other "stand up" styles have many factors to them,knowlege,natural abilty,self disciplin,dedication,technique quality and sparring ability.All my Kenpo tests were private, in which I agree with.The publicTeakwondo tests I have witnessed had a spectator/family and freinds factor added to them and I have never seen anyone fail(although I have seen several that should have).Which brings me to my main criticism.Testing Fees-this is the biggest corruption to the process.I personaly know of one school that tests every possible student when bills are comming due.The fees become progressively higher especially when the student tests for First and second Dan.The most common fee for teakwondo bb is $500.In the case of USTU affiliated schools who want Kukiwan certificates,the instructor must pay $125 to the WTF for the application process.The students pay at least that and most of the time much more.I realize everybody has to make money to keep going,but if you can't make it with regular school fees,get out.Testing Fees only poison the whole thing.

 

[elcajon555]

I believe, that if testing is done right then it is a good thing. I also believe that test day is not the actual test, more so just making it offical. Instructors should only send people that are ready for the next belt. Working with them on a weekly basis is the real test and when they are ready, they just have to go through the fomaltiy of the standerized test. Having a ranking system helps people stay focused and they have something to work for. It also tells the new students for the experienced students just by looking at them. It also allows standerzation for learning new material. It just takes people various times to reach those belts based on the individual. Now if tests are done often and take a lot of money then it is bad for obvouis reasons. In my school testing is done 6 times a year and degree testing is done 3 times a year. I believe that is too much I would have at most 4 tests a year. I am in a large school and to get everyone ready for all the tests is very challenging, since they are always happening. Our tests are basically the same throughtout the ranks. They start off with a set of kicks and punches, followed by a form, followed by board breaking and the sparring. They also look at flexabilty and strength(like pushups). After red belt at least 50% of the people fail. My last test, which was 2 weeks ago, all six people, including myself, failed the test. It was a 365 dollar test. It was for 2nd degree grrrr.

 

[KenpoTex]

I believe, that if testing is done right then it is a good thing. I also believe that test day is not the actual test, more so just making it offical. Instructors should only send people that are ready for the next belt. Working with them on a weekly basis is the real test and when they are ready, they just have to go through the fomaltiy of the standerized test.

I agree with this statement. After my brown-belt test (which lasted six hours) my instructor said that the test was not to see if you knew your material, if you didn't you wouldn't be given permission to test, it was to "showcase" your material. The test also gives the instructors a chance to see how you perform under stress and to evaluate your attitude to see if you can work through mistakes without becoming frustrated or losing your temper.

 

[7starmantis]

My current opinion is that tests are unnecessary. Promotions should be the reward for skills and behaviors demonstrated every day, not on a one-time performance.

I couldn't agree with you more, except that I do think tests are neccessary and I'll explain why. I think a person whould be able to "stand on their own skill" so to speak. Rank means nothing to me. However, a test should be a time when a student has to push themselves past a normal routine. That is the beauty of the test, not demonstrating or signing autographs, but physically and mentally pushing yourself past where you thought you could go. Also, in a school that is designed to at least make enough money to feed its owner and or instructors, testing is neccessary becasue the general populous has to have goals. They have to see their progression and for some reason belts or rank has fullfilled that need.

Those are the two reasons I think tests are inportant, but it is worth noting that the test has to be physically and mentally grueling or the first point is missed completely, and in reality so is the second.

7sm

 

[OULobo]

In my experiences I have trained at a few schools that have different opinions on rank and testing.

At my first club (Aikido) they had very standardized regular tests that were for rank within a federated national and international association, but there were also quarterly tests that were more of a review/evaluation. The rakings were set so that students had a goal to work toward (and for marketing reasons). Internationally, there was no rank but white and black. Black was considered the transition from basics to the real process of education. The test was long and grueling, but only tests fitness by seeing if you can make it through the duration of the test.

Another club I attended (various MAs), involved no rank. There was an executive council of sorts and the members were either advanced practitioners or administrative people. The administrators always directed new people to the advanced practitioners for questions. There were no tests at all and no rank (no uniforms, no contracts, no bowing either). It was a very loose environment.

Another club (Bando) had rank, but no one wore it or exhibited it unless there was a competition. Most of the time the rank was just unceremoniously given when you exhibited sufficient abilities in the next competition or match. This continued to black belt. To get black you have to attend a weekend camp for the whole national association and complete a very rigourous physical and mental process, testing fitness, knowledge, everything even ethics and history. Blackbelt was a step of respect and agknowledgment.

Another club (FMA) had rank that was given on testing basis and was used as a symbol of who to ask if you had questions and a convient way to divide the class into groups of various experience. Black in this class was really just a step in progression with another larger set of techniques, methods, and concepts to learn, but it also signaled mastery of the basic system, ability to teach and allowed you to attend without paying dues. This test was less demanding and again tested your knowledge and abilities, but not direct fitness, ethics or history.

All the tests are public at least within the school and family.

My personal belief is that there should only be black and not, and to acheive black you must demonstrate everything essential to the individual system (technique, system history, fitness as applied to the system). That rank can never be revoked or stipped. Things like more general history, ethics, all around fitness and dedication to spreading, expanding and furthering the art are admirable qualities that warrent being made a true heir to the art.

I share the outlook of many of the people here. I don't think rank means much in the big picture. When I train now I don't wear rank like the rest of the school. This ticks off some of the instructors, but the master understands my reasons and makes a special consideration, so the rest officially fall in line behind him. The students know my abilities by watching my actions and that speaks more than any colored belt can, for better or worse.

 

[loki09789]

'I think ideally the "testing" is supposed to be more of a demonstration than anything else. An instructor shouldn't test a student for a rank unless they expect them to pass. That's the way it works in our organization at least.'

Then it isn't much of a test, is it? I don't agree with the above idea because it will perpetuate the attitude that the test is not a test, but a ceremony or a demonstration. Tests serve many purposes but in MA practice they seem to becoming ceremonial and not assessment and evaluations.

If testing in a school/system is used as assessment and evaluation, then some will fail and some will pass, and the student will not be the only one under the microscope during a testing session. The instructors ability to prepare the student, the effectiveness of the art/system/school, the character of the student will be tested by how well he or she bears up under the pressure. Testing sessions are an opportunity to shine for the student, and an opportunity for the instructor/staff to re-examine what and how they do things. If changes need to be made, they will show up during a testing session.

I made this point about experience in fighter development, but I thinkin a training 'experience' level it applies here. Granted, students are tested on a daily basis through regular training, but they will only be confident in those little junks that they are working on. They will not 'know' that they can make it all work together until they have to. Testing environments give them that 'training experience' so they can evaluate the whole experience (coping with stress, adjusting to mistakes, fear, pain perception under stress vs. training, fatigue issues under stress vs. training...) of performance.

Paul M

 

[Pacificshore]

I believe, that if testing is done right then it is a good thing. I also believe that test day is not the actual test, more so just making it offical. Instructors should only send people that are ready for the next belt. Working with them on a weekly basis is the real test and when they are ready, they just have to go through the fomaltiy of the standerized test.

Funny..this reminds me of last summer when a couple of my students tested for their next rank. Prior to the "official" test day, I'd worked with each one individually on their past and present criteria. This went on for at least 2 weeks. Then the day of the test, both my students failed to perform, and this was a group test. Even the most basic drills came off like they were white belts. I've always granted nerves during test situations, but really this was not going as I expected, and not looking good for another visiting instructor in the same system that sat on the board.

Belt tests are like a necessary evil, it was around when I started, and it isn't going away anytime soon. Unless of course you decide on a personal level to get rid of it as an instructor.

In regards to my students, they failed their testing, I talked to each one to discuss what went wrong. If their failure was due to my instruction, then I could accept that, but in these 2 cases, fortunately foe me it wasn't the case. What I did tho was offer a re-test after a couple of weeks. I knew they knew their material, but the needed to be able to put in motion with speed/power/focus/and without hesitation.

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Thank you all for your thoughtful replies.

With regard to Ricardo's question about whether I prefer individual or group testing...I have very mixed feelings and am really undecided. I think that private tests and public tests both have their merits. Either could be made a positive demonstration or a subjective humiliation depending on the approach. Lately, I think no testing at all is best.

I should have also mentioned that when I took a Shotokan class in college in 1979-81 we tested in a group. I remember one quarter when I was taking the intermediate class, there were two beginning classes at different times during the day. In one beginning class, everyone passed the (1st) belt test. In the other class, several people failed. Attendance had a bigger impact on course grade than belt test or proficiency.

 

[theletch1]

I've done tests in large groups, small groups and privately. The large group tests were the ones where the "I can write a check" kata seemed to be more important than anything else. I've been in tests where how many push-ups you could do was more important than technique and everyone passed regardless. This wasn't a case of the instructors not puting up someone who wasn't ready it was you did x number of months at x rank so you'll get promoted if you pay. The private tests were a farce but more because of the instructor than the actual test. The school that I'm at know does tests over a period of time. Each time you test you are retested on all the material that you've had to that point so you may spend one class with the head instructor going over your white belt material and the next on yellow and so on. After demonstration of all techniques in classic form and in combat application with an uke you will have to survive an attack line with and without weapons for a period of time that extends as your rank gets higher. After the attack line there is usually a period of randori. My instructor has been accused of being a perfectionist, so if you aren't ready you simply don't test.
For me, testing is, at least at this point, somewhat needed. It helps to reinforce to ME that I've got the material down. It allows me to use the material in a setting that pushes me physically and mentally and gives me a good check on how quickly my techniques will pop to the front when having to react to an unrehearsed attack.

 

[ShaolinWolf]

In my opinion, I think that belt testing are necessary for some people...I kind of like the old way of training...they just moved you up when you were ready for the next level....like back in the old old old days of ancient history...I like that...I don't mind testings, but what I do at testings I do in class and I don't feel the pressures of nervousness, even in a room full of 1000 people watching me...lol..so testings don't really do anything for me other than it shows me to be legit to move up so that people can't argue that I shouldn't be moved up when my instructors say yes...lol...

 

[elcajon555]

I think rank is important as well. It keeps the tradition respect and procedure with the art. Rank is just as important to the art as the actual art because it is part of the history and foundation of years of training. Now there might be more ranks inbetween white and black but it still keeps the spirit alive. And because rank is important, belt test, I feel, are a nessecity for reasons already mentioned and so gain rank and experience.

 

[Zepp]

'I think ideally the "testing" is supposed to be more of a demonstration than anything else. An instructor shouldn't test a student for a rank unless they expect them to pass. That's the way it works in our organization at least.'

Then it isn't much of a test, is it? I don't agree with the above idea because it will perpetuate the attitude that the test is not a test, but a ceremony or a demonstration. Tests serve many purposes but in MA practice they seem to becoming ceremonial and not assessment and evaluations.

Well the real test is supposed to be every day that you show up to class. An instructor should be able to evaluate a student's skill adequately over time. Unless, of course, the class is too large for the instructor in charge of testing people to give all of his students adequate attention. Then I could see the reason for mistakenly testing a student who isn't ready.

I didn't mean to imply that it should be a cakewalk. Testing should still be stressful enough to push the student a little. But I think that if the student fails the test, it's really more the instructor's fault than anyone elses.

I made this point about experience in fighter development, but I thinkin a training 'experience' level it applies here. Granted, students are tested on a daily basis through regular training, but they will only be confident in those little junks that they are working on. They will not 'know' that they can make it all work together until they have to. Testing environments give them that 'training experience' so they can evaluate the whole experience (coping with stress, adjusting to mistakes, fear, pain perception under stress vs. training, fatigue issues under stress vs. training...) of performance.

I agree.

 

[ShaolinWolf]

I agree with what Loki Said. Totally. It more of a demonstration so your peers can say, yeah you earned it. I mean your instructors know, and so do you, so it doesn't totally matter if other know or not. Anyways, MA are not supposed to be bragging anyways, so it's just for proof that you can say I did this. And yes, I believe Rank is important too...totally.

 

[Mark L]

Testing is about validation. I agree that the invitation to test is an expression by the instructor that the student is ready for the next rank. But I do think that the test itself is more than a demonstration or ceremony, it must be a challenge. Advancing in rank is more than just adding more techniques/forms, and more than just performing them with a higher level of skill than your peers. The stress in my tests (I'm the testee, not the tester) is substantial. It is about physical and mental fitness, mastery of the curriculum, dealing with stress, reacting to stuff, never, ever giving up. Will.

My teacher uses the word battle to describe aspects of the test, I'm just now as I type this understanding what he means (I think). White to blue is a physical think, doing the techniques properly, working hard under the elevated stress level. Green is where we start to battle. It's organized and conducted towards the end of the test. Sparring, grappling, self defense, and weapons attacks gradually escalate until you're pretty much in an unwinable situation. Hanging in there and not giving up is the goal. Brown has the same stuff at the end of the test, but we're subject to random muggings throughout the entire test. I got jumped about 25 times during my last one. It's unrealistic to expect to win them all, but you better come close. That one was about battling from start to finish, on top of all the typical test stuff. Black is something I've yet to experience, my shodan test is in 43 days 18 hours, and 31 minutes. I've gotten some hints from the BBs about what to expect (anything & everything), I gather the day is mostly about doing whatever it takes to make me quit. Won't happen, mental toughness, I can put up with anything for 10 hours :wink2:

To me rank is about two things. First, it indicates where I am within the curriculum. It conveys what I know and what I should be learning within the context of the school I attend. Second, it establishes kind of a fraternal bond amongst peers. I know what I am and what I am capable of as a martial artist, I can say the same thing about anybody else in my school wearing the same rank.

 

[ShaolinWolf]

Well, my test aren't too hard...wish I really understood what a "hard" test is...I know what it is, just never actually had a hard test...all our requirements are for white, orange, yellow- forms, self-defense, and one steps...camo(DO NOT SAY A WORD ABOUT CAMO!!!...lol),green- forms, sparring, and self-defense... purple, blue- sparring, forms, self-defense, and weapons(we break boards in class at this point, but not at testing)...Brown, red, black/red(it's called black belt recommended, a step just below 1st degree Black Belt)- Board Breaks, Forms, Self Defense, and Sparring.

1st degree Black belt- Forms, Board Breaks, Self-defense(Joint Lock Flow system...very long, but very cool), Weapons(Jahng Bahng(Bo Staff) form, Bahng Mang Ee(short stick, 2 ft. long) and Sahng Jeol Bahng(nunchuck) Form), and Create-a-form, ...in Black belt, you do one of those things every semester, which is every 3 months...like right now black belts are focusing on the Sahng Jeol Bang Form for the semester. Also, each black belt testing has sparring in it...

2nd degree Black belt- All I know about this is there is like double nunchuck form, double short stick form, more board breaks, 2nd degree form, and another set of self defense, though I don't know if it's the Joint Flow...and I don't know about when exactly you start on 3 sectional staff...maybe that's 3rd of fourth degree...and I don't know if there is another bo staff something or other, but I don't think so.:idunno: