Establishing Standards

[Jaeimseu]

People often talk about standards, especially in posts deriding various mcdojangs, but these standards are generally talked about in ambiguous/relative terms. What kind of objective standard(s), if any, do you think should be in place for different levels/ranks? Who decides what is "good enough?"

 

[andyjeffries]

People often talk about standards, especially in posts deriding various mcdojangs, but these standards are generally talked about in ambiguous/relative terms. What kind of objective standard(s), if any, do you think should be in place for different levels/ranks? Who decides what is "good enough?"

I would say it's up to the Master Instructor performing the grading to decide. I used to compare students from other schools and think negatively about them/their instructor when comparing their ranks' skill levels to ours. I've grown up.

There are students that A wouldn't pass on a cold viewing but that B has seen progress and grow and worthy of the "next step" on their journey.

I've also come around to thinking that there are definite lessons to be learnt at each step (it doesn't affect my feelings on skip dans though). If you stay at one level too long (be it high kup grades or a particular dan grade) then you run the risk of never progressing.

Let's say that someone has to be at technical level 100 to get to 1st Dan. Then once students pass 1st Dan the scale ups to 200 when there are new things to learn and a different focus/outlook required from a practitioner (not to mention the mental requirement that everyone wants to feel worth their grade so they feel they have something to live up to). If you have a student at 120, easy decision - promote them. If you have someone stuck at 90 for a while, should you not promote them?

Under the objective test - the answer is no - they don't meet the "100 standard". However, using a subjective basis you can see they are stuck in a rut. Promoting them, teaching them new things, ensuring they know what's expected of a 1st Dan, having them want to "feel justified" in being a 1st Dan means their skill may quickly rise to 120-150. You have improved that student and got them out of their period where they were stuck at a skill level with no improvement.

Students need to keep improving to be eligible for rank advancement. Rank advancement gives them new things to work on - technically and expectations wise. The two go hand in hand, but I feel an objective standard would get in the way of this.

Just my opinion of course... Also, although the tone may sound like I'm arguing with you, I'm not - just posting my opinion as you asked an open question

 

[Kong Soo Do]

People often talk about standards, especially in posts deriding various mcdojangs, but these standards are generally talked about in ambiguous/relative terms. What kind of objective standard(s), if any, do you think should be in place for different levels/ranks? Who decides what is "good enough?"

There is an underlying issue that stands in the way of establishing standards; the definitions of 'standards'. One instructor or group can see a standard as set i.e. engraved in stone. Something to motivate the student to excellence. To work hard towards. Not everyone is going to make the standard but that is what makes it a desired goal to work towards. Another instructor or group can see a standard as something that can be waived for something as dubious as a financial gain or infusion.

One instructor/group might state that to earn a BB you need the demonstrate A through Z to a high level of demonstratable skill. And it is going to take X amount of years, period, to reach this level of proficency. Another instructor/group might have a different take such as something like a BB program that guarentees a BB within a certain amount of time, regardless of skill proficiency, as long as the checks clear. Is either group going to impose their definition of 'standards' upon the other? This isn't meant as a jab at any particular group, but realistically speaking, as long as you have ego and greed in any martial art...you can forget about universally applied standards.

I can only speak for my area, TKD 'Mcdojangs' with lax standards come and go on a whim. In the last sevaral years I have seen mulitple...and I mean multiple TKD schools come and go. On the other hand, there is an Aikido school that is very strict i.e. you are a white belt till you earn a BB which is something like five years down the line...maybe. It has been around decades. It's probably been around longer than even my school.

In short, universal standards would be nice, but who going to set them? And who is going to follow them?

 

[Jaeimseu]

I would say it's up to the Master Instructor performing the grading to decide. I used to compare students from other schools and think negatively about them/their instructor when comparing their ranks' skill levels to ours. I've grown up.

I used to do this, too. Especially if the other school had a higher enrollment than mine. I think it was mainly bitterness on my part. I, too, have grown past that type of thinking.

Let's say that someone has to be at technical level 100 to get to 1st Dan. Then once students pass 1st Dan the scale ups to 200 when there are new things to learn and a different focus/outlook required from a practitioner (not to mention the mental requirement that everyone wants to feel worth their grade so they feel they have something to live up to). If you have a student at 120, easy decision - promote them. If you have someone stuck at 90 for a while, should you not promote them?

Under the objective test - the answer is no - they don't meet the "100 standard". However, using a subjective basis you can see they are stuck in a rut. Promoting them, teaching them new things, ensuring they know what's expected of a 1st Dan, having them want to "feel justified" in being a 1st Dan means their skill may quickly rise to 120-150. You have improved that student and got them out of their period where they were stuck at a skill level with no improvement.

Students need to keep improving to be eligible for rank advancement. Rank advancement gives them new things to work on - technically and expectations wise. The two go hand in hand, but I feel an objective standard would get in the way of this.

Just my opinion of course... Also, although the tone may sound like I'm arguing with you, I'm not - just posting my opinion as you asked an open question

Actually, I think we are basically in agreement. I think that if a student is improving then they should almost always be allowed to continue advancing, at least to a certain point. For me, that would include 1st dan. I try not to compare student A to student B at a testing (at least in terms of potential advancement). I also am looking for improvement and hoping that the student will be motivated to improve further.

 

[Jaeimseu]

There is an underlying issue that stands in the way of establishing standards; the definitions of 'standards'. One instructor or group can see a standard as set i.e. engraved in stone. Something to motivate the student to excellence. To work hard towards. Not everyone is going to make the standard but that is what makes it a desired goal to work towards. Another instructor or group can see a standard as something that can be waived for something as dubious as a financial gain or infusion.

One instructor/group might state that to earn a BB you need the demonstrate A through Z to a high level of demonstratable skill. And it is going to take X amount of years, period, to reach this level of proficency. Another instructor/group might have a different take such as something like a BB program that guarentees a BB within a certain amount of time, regardless of skill proficiency, as long as the checks clear. Is either group going to impose their definition of 'standards' upon the other? This isn't meant as a jab at any particular group, but realistically speaking, as long as you have ego and greed in any martial art...you can forget about universally applied standards.

I can only speak for my area, TKD 'Mcdojangs' with lax standards come and go on a whim. In the last sevaral years I have seen mulitple...and I mean multiple TKD schools come and go. On the other hand, there is an Aikido school that is very strict i.e. you are a white belt till you earn a BB which is something like five years down the line...maybe. It has been around decades. It's probably been around longer than even my school.

In short, universal standards would be nice, but who going to set them? And who is going to follow them?

I agree with you. The definition of standards is an enormous obstacle. Everybody has something different in mind when they use that word, even when people talk about what they want to see in a "good" black belt. Some people want to see technical skill, some fighting skill, etc. And sometimes may just be evaluating things that are different from the way they have always done them. I've seen people come into our dojang from different countries, and in their home dojang, they may be at a good standard, but to us they look like they are doing things all wrong.

I've never come across a black belt membership program that guarantees a black belt in a certain amount of time as long as the checks clear. Some programs may appear that way, though. Honestly, I don't think money has a lot to do with it for most people. I don't think that high or low standards and success in business have anything to do with each other. Good business people are successful in business. I would imagine martial arts schools have a similar success/fail rate to other small businesses. As for ego and greed, I think they are a part of every school, and every other kind of business, too. Even people teaching for free have ego and greed.

 

[Jaeimseu]

I asked earlier what objective standards people thought there should be, even though I don't really think that 100% objective standards are a good thing, for many reasons, some of which are mentioned in above posts.

How about at a testing? Are any parts of your testing objective or is it all subjective?

In the past, I've seen many schools, including some that I was a part of, where the majority of the test was subjective, but there were certain objective elements. For example, we had a board breaking section in the test. For red belts and above, students were required to break within 3 attempts to pass. It didn't matter if there poomse was perfect and if they were the greatest fighter in the school. No break, no pass. There were also objective criteria for forms/poomse. If a black belt performed 1 incorrect technique (ex. high block instead of a low block) or omitted a technique/step, they failed, regardless of how good their technique was.

I think some of these objective criteria may have come from having to deal with parents. Objective criteria are much easier to explain to parents than subjective. Anyway, how about everybody else?

 

[Archtkd]

I can only speak for my area, TKD 'Mcdojangs' with lax standards come and go on a whim. In the last sevaral years I have seen mulitple...and I mean multiple TKD schools come and go. On the other hand, there is an Aikido school that is very strict i.e. you are a white belt till you earn a BB which is something like five years down the line...maybe. It has been around decades. It's probably been around longer than even my school.

Lots of truth here, but the opposite also happens a lot. Very many good teachers, with what we might generally agree have high standards fail in business. Some of the best teachers I've ever known are extrememely inept at financial planning and usually only succeed by surrounding themselves with students or people who help them handle the marketing and books of a dojang. I've observed that it takes a very good business mind to run a succesful McDojang, leave alone what we might call a serious school. Aikido establishments tend to be succesful and last forever, and a good number of them operate as non-profits

 

[andyjeffries]

I asked earlier what objective standards people thought there should be, even though I don't really think that 100% objective standards are a good thing, for many reasons, some of which are mentioned in above posts.

How about at a testing? Are any parts of your testing objective or is it all subjective?

Still subjective...

In the past, I've seen many schools, including some that I was a part of, where the majority of the test was subjective, but there were certain objective elements. For example, we had a board breaking section in the test. For red belts and above, students were required to break within 3 attempts to pass. It didn't matter if there poomse was perfect and if they were the greatest fighter in the school. No break, no pass.

I'd never do this. They'd get lower marks, but if the technique is good and the power is good then it's a pass regardless of whether the board breaks or not. Breaking the board is for the student, the strike and how it's performed is for me ;-)

There were also objective criteria for forms/poomse. If a black belt performed 1 incorrect technique (ex. high block instead of a low block) or omitted a technique/step, they failed, regardless of how good their technique was.

Again I disagree with this. Nerves sometimes take over. Sometimes people just make a mistake and don't realise it. I don't expect perfection. I expect improvement and effort, anything else I can live with.

I think some of these objective criteria may have come from having to deal with parents. Objective criteria are much easier to explain to parents than subjective. Anyway, how about everybody else?

In that situation, I'd say to the parent "then you go out and get a 5th Dan and you promote them, but when it's my name on the line I'll decide subjectively whether I'm happy certifying them at that level". To be fair, I charge pretty low fees so all the parents know it would never be about getting the money for a test without having to give them a belt/certificate.

I always assess students in the run up to the tests and if someone won't pass then they're told "next time, sorry". I'd rather do that than either fail someone I knew wasn't ready or pass someone who isn't at my subjective standard. I've only ever seen one person fail (and they came along with the attitude that it was a "given" that everyone always passes these things - he became the one person now always used as an anecdote to prove it's not the case).

 

[sopraisso]

Still subjective...

I'd never do this. They'd get lower marks, but if the technique is good and the power is good then it's a pass regardless of whether the board breaks or not. Breaking the board is for the student, the strike and how it's performed is for me ;-)

Again I disagree with this. Nerves sometimes take over. Sometimes people just make a mistake and don't realise it. I don't expect perfection. I expect improvement and effort, anything else I can live with.

In that situation, I'd say to the parent "then you go out and get a 5th Dan and you promote them, but when it's my name on the line I'll decide subjectively whether I'm happy certifying them at that level". To be fair, I charge pretty low fees so all the parents know it would never be about getting the money for a test without having to give them a belt/certificate.

I always assess students in the run up to the tests and if someone won't pass then they're told "next time, sorry". I'd rather do that than either fail someone I knew wasn't ready or pass someone who isn't at my subjective standard. I've only ever seen one person fail (and they came along with the attitude that it was a "given" that everyone always passes these things - he became the one person now always used as an anecdote to prove it's not the case).

Personally I highly appreciate that attitude and, as a student, I take it as inspiration for the time when I have to deal with these subjects.

 

[Haakon]

Actually, I think we are basically in agreement. I think that if a student is improving then they should almost always be allowed to continue advancing, at least to a certain point. For me, that would include 1st dan. I try not to compare student A to student B at a testing (at least in terms of potential advancement). I also am looking for improvement and hoping that the student will be motivated to improve further.

If the student is improving why not wait until they get to "The Standard" before promoting them? If someone is improving, but their technique sucks would you promote them? Promotion standards are a difficult subject and unless you get technology involved it's going to be subjective. I know that I absolutely do not see eye to eye with my teacher as far as promotions go (including my own), he definitely looks for or sees different things than I do - and it drives me crazy, but he's amazingly talented and I learn a lot from him.

Probably the only way to really have an objective standard would be to do a 3d motion capture of someone doing the requirements as "The Standard", then do the same 3d motion capture of students testing and have a computer measure how far they varied from the standard, if they're within xx% of perfect then they pass, if not, they don't. It would be crazy expensive, and really impossible to implement today, but that would do it.

 

[Jaeimseu]

If the student is improving why not wait until they get to "The Standard" before promoting them? If someone is improving, but their technique sucks would you promote them? Promotion standards are a difficult subject and unless you get technology involved it's going to be subjective. I know that I absolutely do not see eye to eye with my teacher as far as promotions go (including my own), he definitely looks for or sees different things than I do - and it drives me crazy, but he's amazingly talented and I learn a lot from him.

Probably the only way to really have an objective standard would be to do a 3d motion capture of someone doing the requirements as "The Standard", then do the same 3d motion capture of students testing and have a computer measure how far they varied from the standard, if they're within xx% of perfect then they pass, if not, they don't. It would be crazy expensive, and really impossible to implement today, but that would do it.

The problem with "The Standard" is figuring out where to set the bar. What is perfection and how close to it does a student need to be. If the bar is set too high, then black belt will of course become a very exclusive rank that very few can achieve. I no longer believe in one standard, because so many people would be left out in the cold. I also don't view 1st dan as a high rank. If someone does view 1st dan as BLACK BELT then I can see where they might have an issue with that. As far as my students are concerned, I'm the only one who knows what the student looked like on the first day and how far they have progressed, so I don't worry too much about whether or not an outside eye thinks they suck or not.

 

[Jaeimseu]

In that situation, I'd say to the parent "then you go out and get a 5th Dan and you promote them, but when it's my name on the line I'll decide subjectively whether I'm happy certifying them at that level". To be fair, I charge pretty low fees so all the parents know it would never be about getting the money for a test without having to give them a belt/certificate.

I always assess students in the run up to the tests and if someone won't pass then they're told "next time, sorry". I'd rather do that than either fail someone I knew wasn't ready or pass someone who isn't at my subjective standard. I've only ever seen one person fail (and they came along with the attitude that it was a "given" that everyone always passes these things - he became the one person now always used as an anecdote to prove it's not the case).

Haha. I've felt like saying this many times. And I also would much prefer to catch a student who isn't quite ready before setting them up to fail.

 

[Dirty Dog]

This is an ongoing debate, but it seems to me that the reality is pretty simple.

Standards exist. Every school has some set of standards that are applied to promotions: TIG, Forms/techniques demonstrated, sparring, breaking...

The debate comes when people apply a "black and white" definition to something that is completely gray.

One of our students was performing Palgwe Yook Jang the other day, and when she performed jebi poom tokchigi, the fingers of her left hand were curled to the same position as the hand performing the palm heel strike. Is that to standard? No, of course not, it's supposed to be a knifehand high block. But would she fail a promotional exam because of it? No, because nobody is ever going to perform a form to absolute perfection.

Gradings come down to "close enough", and exactly what "close enough" means will vary, depending on the students rank, their physical and mental abilities, the phase of the moon...

 

[Cyriacus]

This is an ongoing debate, but it seems to me that the reality is pretty simple.

Standards exist. Every school has some set of standards that are applied to promotions: TIG, Forms/techniques demonstrated, sparring, breaking...

The debate comes when people apply a "black and white" definition to something that is completely gray.

One of our students was performing Palgwe Yook Jang the other day, and when she performed jebi poom tokchigi, the fingers of her left hand were curled to the same position as the hand performing the palm heel strike. Is that to standard? No, of course not, it's supposed to be a knifehand high block. But would she fail a promotional exam because of it? No, because nobody is ever going to perform a form to absolute perfection.

Gradings come down to "close enough", and exactly what "close enough" means will vary, depending on the students rank, their physical and mental abilities, the phase of the moon...

Plus, Im fairly sure that one error isnt going to be the difference between Life and Death. It was a mistake, ans she probably noticed it. If she didnt, if someone told her, shed be aware of it, and it would be fixed. I completely agree, overall.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Plus, Im fairly sure that one error isnt going to be the difference between Life and Death.

Actually, I think in a real life or death situation, one mistake CAN be the difference. And probably usually IS. I know one mistake (a blocking error) cost me an eye. Forms are forms, not armed assaults, but they do (or should) help to prepare us for that armed assault.

It was a mistake, ans she probably noticed it. If she didnt, if someone told her, shed be aware of it, and it would be fixed. I completely agree, overall.

Actually, she was under the impression that it was correct as she'd done it. I told her. Hopefully she'll fix it.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I tend to view the standard the way that it is viewed in school. There is getting everything perfect and scoring and ending the year with a 4.0 gpa and there is making some mistakes and finishing with a 2.9. Both students still passed. The one hit the honor role and may have received other accolades, but both still move onto the the next grade.

Not everyone is going to do every technique in every form perfectly, even if they do all of the correct techniques in sequence and kihap at all the right points. Not everyone is going to do all the right techniques in sequence, but may do them perfectly.

Personally, I'm more concerned with whether or not the student gets the big picture and isn't just mailing it in. I'd rather see a less than gifted student practice hard and pour their all into the test than a prodigy going through the motions perfectly with all the heart of touch typing the ingredients on a can of hair spray.