Martial arts testing and society today

[Gerry Seymour]

You didn't read the word all in my post, so yes, exaggeration.

I also didn't read the word "some". If I say, "Cars have only 3 wheels", that implicitly refers to all cars - and is therefore incorrect. If I say, "Some cars only have 3 wheels", that is accurate.

 

[Tez3]

"Some cars only have 3 wheels", that is accurate.

Did you have them in the US? Messerschmitts, Bubble cars and of course the Robin Reliant! Made famous by 'Only Fools and Horses', if you haven't watch that see if you can hunt the box set down.

 

[DaveB]

...

But I don't put that blame on martial art teachers. It's the way society is today.

If you invoke "society today" you are invoking political viewpoints.

In schools now we have non competitive sports days where everyone's a winner or cross county races where no one gets timed and everyone gets a medal. People are to afraid to tell a kid they lost. They think it'll upset a kid if they lose and it'll damage their self confidence.

To me that's nonsense. You win or you lose it's as simple as that. A kid loses a running race oh well suck it up life goes on.

Not all kids are the same, many do have their confidence crushed and drop out of things they might otherwise be good at.
Each child learns to manage defeat and disappointment at different rates so there's no way to know if your feeding into their issues or having no effect at all.

As I and others pointed out, winners and losers aren't diminished based on who gets a certificate. The kids still know how they did and feel suitably elated or deflated as a result.

Look at it this way. 20 kids run a race.
1 kid wins and learns that effort gets you a reward and that he/she is awesome.
2 runner ups learn that hard work gets them a reward and either they are nearly awesome but just not talented enough to win.

Now, 17 other children learn that they suck.

You see young kids in a race always put max effort because they don't know how not to. They also don't yet know that they can get better at things, so if they win they are winners and if not they are losers until they are taught otherwise.

But what they don't learn is that putting effort in is waste of time because they lost anyway. [/QUOTE]

It makes the kids think they deserve a reward for doing nothing basically. Why bother putting in the effort when you can just the bare minimum and get the same reward as the guy who won and put 100% In.

Not true, for reasons already discussed.

It's the same in martial arts now. Parents want their kids to think they're great and if they fail they'll leave so instructors will give them the belts so they stay and their confidence stays high.

What you're describing is the failure of the instructors integrity. Parents and students can want whatever they like, if the instructor thinks it's wrong it is up to him to say so and hold his ground.

None of this does kids any good at all in the long run. When they get to adulthood they won't be protected like they were as kids. They'll experience losses in jobs, sports, relationships etc and since they'll have never dealt with this before they won't know how to cope.

Because of the experience at the morally compromised dojo they will never learn any life lessons or lose at anything ever?
Just slightly ridiculous don't you think?

Parents are far more invested in their child's success than you are and judging a life based on one relationship dynamic is stupid.
In the case of such parents you might simply find that they have an idea of when their child that they love and care for daily might be ready for such lessons. After all the notion that anyone is acting this way out of fear of hurting feelings is purely your guess from the outside of the situation.

I remember when I was a kid about 8 I did a running race for sports day I came dead last by a long margin. That was before I started martial arts and frankly I was a lazy git then but losing like that it motivated to get myself better so I started running more.

And if you'd been given a participation medal do you think that would have removed the heartbrake at being the last person to pass the finish line? I don't.

 

[DaveB]

I also didn't read the word "some". If I say, "Cars have only 3 wheels", that implicitly refers to all cars - and is therefore incorrect. If I say, "Some cars only have 3 wheels", that is accurate.

But since we're grown ups and know that's not true it can go without saying, as it usually does. Also I made no such definitive statement. Because it would be stupid and unnecessary and disrupt the flow of my writing.

 

[Tez3]

Look at it this way. 20 kids run a race.
1 kid wins and learns that effort gets you a reward and that he/she is awesome.
2 runner ups learn that hard work gets them a reward and either they are nearly awesome but just not talented enough to win.

Now, 17 other children learn that they suck.

Exactly. The thing of course is that those 17 children did work hard, they did put effort in likely more than the winner did but they simply aren't fast enough runners, they never will be however hard they work. They really don't suck. Not everyone is born physically able to run fast. It's all about talent not work so actually it actually only rewards someone for being born with a talent. Frankly sports days are a waste of time, the talented will win, the untalented will be deemed losers who 'didn't work hard enough.

Competitions are good but only when everyone is a willing participant and everyone has a good chance of winning because they can work hard and put the effort in as opposed to being up against someone who doesn't have to work hard because they have a natural talent. The thrill of winning against peers is awesome, losing against peers means you will work harder to beat them next time. You wouldn't put Sir Mo Farah up against Usain Bolt in either a sprint or distance race because you know who will win, but put either of them in a race of their peers and you have a true race. Don't just bung kids in a race then tell them they would have won if they worked harder so it's a life lesson. No, it isn't.

 

[drop bear]

It was not Socrates say, I know that I know nothing? So see? You cannot trust that guy Plus he was not smarter than poison so

Smarter than poison?

I mean Socrates said some smart stuff.

But poison came up with the meaning of life.

Every rose has its thorn.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Did you have them in the US? Messerschmitts, Bubble cars and of course the Robin Reliant! Made famous by 'Only Fools and Horses', if you haven't watch that see if you can hunt the box set down.

There have been a few that showed up in the US, including some newer ones, which were probably kit cars.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You see young kids in a race always put max effort because they don't know how not to. They also don't yet know that they can get better at things, so if they win they are winners and if not they are losers until they are taught otherwise.

But what they don't learn is that putting effort in is waste of time because they lost anyway.

This set of statements isn't supported by psychological research. Young kids do not always put max effort in. Most start to learn fairly early that they can improve. And most do not give up because they didn't get a trophy.

That last point can be observed by the vast number of children who played soccer on the teams around me when I was growing up. Many of them played in that league for 11 years, just like I did. Most of us only got trophies a couple of those years, if we were lucky, since only the top team got trophies.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

But since we're grown ups and know that's not true it can go without saying, as it usually does. Also I made no such definitive statement. Because it would be stupid and unnecessary and disrupt the flow of my writing.

If you make a statement that appears to be absolute (as I demonstrated), then it's not a "strawman" for someone to understand it as such. Miscommunication isn't a logical fallacy.

 

[DaveB]

This set of statements isn't supported by psychological research. Young kids do not always put max effort in. Most start to learn fairly early that they can improve. And most do not give up because they didn't get a trophy.

That last point can be observed by the vast number of children who played soccer on the teams around me when I was growing up. Many of them played in that league for 11 years, just like I did. Most of us only got trophies a couple of those years, if we were lucky, since only the top team got trophies.

I'd like to see that research if possible.

It strikes me that we may all be speaking about different age groups when we refer to kids. I'm thinking of 5-7 yr olds because I'm not aware of participation awards being prevalent outside that age group.

 

[jks9199]

Gentlefolk,

If I was unclear, let me change that. Drop the politics. If you want to discuss political issues -- go to US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

No more warnings. Keep to the original discussion, and leave the politics out.

jks9199
Administrator

 

[drop bear]

Smarter than poison?

I mean Socrates said some smart stuff.

But poison came up with the meaning of life.

Every rose has its thorn.

 

[Hyoho]

Getting back to subject belts gradings etc was and still is a system for Japanese. Education there, what one does, what is expected is somewhat different than the West.

I did seminars last year in Canada where a couple of millennials were taking part. I got dragged in a bit as they seemed to be sending out a ton of emails as to what they 'expected' rather than what they earned.

This was all quite new to me. Hats off to their sensei who was going with the flow and trying to ease them in. Personally my own feelings were along the lines that MA was just not the place for them.

Are we talking about gradings for money or gradings for ability here?

 

[Tez3]

Young kids do not always put max effort in.

I'm thinking of 5-7 yr olds because I'm not aware of participation awards being prevalent outside that age group.

There is no reason why such young children should put maximum effort into anything, they are young children still learning about the world, still learning how to react 'properly', and frankly they should be enjoying themselves not setting out to please adults, even education should be enjoyable. The idea that children should be introduced to the harshness of the world immediately is sad, far too many already know how hard the world can be as it is.
I haven't heard of these participation awards being given out beyond the first couple of years in school either, they start school most often in the September of the year they are five here so the first couple of years are spent fitting themselves into the school day which usually starts at nine and goes on until half three, lunch is at school. This is a huge learning curve for such young children so if you add a competitive sports day where they are expected to strive for medals it's plainly ridiculous. I'm sure some helicopter parents would love it to be competitive for boasting points but the truth is giving the children participation awards is the correct thing because they are learning to participate, learning how to function in the wider world and their place in it. If there are school sports days afterwards, by no means certain as the testing the government wants now precludes many activities they children used to do, they certainly have a winner and runners up but as my points earlier they actually mean little because of the randomness of genes and talent!

Many here wouldn't teach children aged 5-7 martial arts so why expect them to be able to do 'proper' athletics? Participation is the precursor to much, let the children find out what they enjoy doing, what they are good at, give them a wide range of activities to try before making it serious enough to have winners and losers. Every child is good at something, it just needs the patience to find out what it is.

 

[Hyoho]

I dont normaly post videos. But as an example this child is 'not' exceptional in Japan. Even Kindergarten kids compared with other countries have exceptional abilities and mind sets and its not just in Budo. Japanese kids are 'forged' to the extent that I am sure many foreigners would disagree with. They would even possibly put it down to child cruelty. Kindergarden is a kids boot camp It's for them that the grading systems and belts were devised. Kano Jigoro was not just a Judo founder. He was a leader in Japanese education.

This is partly why Japan has been so successful. But the problem lies in a lack of or actual disdain of international understanding. Anybody else that lives in Japan and works in the education system would agree. I know other countries have arts and gradings but what we see today is a bastardized version of the original made to fit Western ideals.

 

[hoshin1600]

Gentlefolk,

If I was unclear, let me change that. Drop the politics. If you want to discuss political issues -- go to US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

No more warnings. Keep to the original discussion, and leave the politics out.

jks9199
Administrator

In my opinion, to separate the two is impossible. The OP made a post about the current state of belt rankings, which is a proxy war of sorts of people's political ideologies. This is why I bowed out of the conversation.

 

[hoshin1600]

Japanese kids are 'forged' to the extent that I am sure many foreigners would disagree with. They would even possibly put it down to child cruelty. Kindergarden is a kids boot camp It's for them that the grading systems and belts were devised.

" it was for them that the grading systems were devised "
This is so important I can't repeat enough.
My question then to you Hyoho, as westerners, are we incorrect in using the belt ranks at all? Would it not be better to abandon them all together? We are in essence putting the round peg in a square hole. It will fit but that doesn't make it right.

 

[Tez3]

I dont normaly post videos. But as an example this child is 'not' exceptional in Japan. Even Kindergarten kids compared with other countries have exceptional abilities and mind sets and its not just in Budo. Japanese kids are 'forged' to the extent that I am sure many foreigners would disagree with. They would even possibly put it down to child cruelty. Kindergarden is a kids boot camp It's for them that the grading systems and belts were devised. Kano Jigoro was not just a Judo founder. He was a leader in Japanese education.

This is partly why Japan has been so successful. But the problem lies in a lack of or actual disdain of international understanding. Anybody else that lives in Japan and works in the education system would agree. I know other countries have arts and gradings but what we see today is a bastardized version of the original made to fit Western ideals.

It comes with it's own problems though. Suicide of Japanese Youth. - PubMed - NCBI
Japan's Suicide Problem: Searching for Answers
Why have young people in Japan stopped having sex?
Japanese children and young people explained

I wouldn't say that young Japanese children have exceptional abilities that children in other countries don't have, I'd say they are hot housed and pressured into becoming something they are too young to be. With a suicide rate as high as Japans it would bear more investigation than boasting about how good Japanese children are compared to foreigners.

 

[Jenna]

Smarter than poison?

I mean Socrates said some smart stuff.

But poison came up with the meaning of life.

Every rose has its thorn.

So then it was Socrates all along who started hair-rock? You must cite you revidence for that claim!

Socrates have a cool beard though.. he is like the hipster of ancient Greeks!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'd like to see that research if possible.

It strikes me that we may all be speaking about different age groups when we refer to kids. I'm thinking of 5-7 yr olds because I'm not aware of participation awards being prevalent outside that age group.

I think the difference may be partly that I'm considering that age group as part of the overall span. Developmental milestones in that age range create a different effect than the same structure used at a different age, but the effects extend beyond that age, affecting the children's reactions later.

Note that I don't think participation awards are inherently problematic. In fact, they are useful. It's how they are delivered in context that changes things. For instance - using an adult example - I get a "trophy" of sorts for every mud run I do. Time and performance aren't relevant. In fact, they are often given at the beginning of the activity. For adults in that context, we know someone who shows up 1) is almost certain to participate, and 2) has already made an unusual choice in participation. Rewarding unusual participation in some manner (a t-shirt or even a medallion) isn't problematic, so long as there is still some reward for those who excel in some way. MVP awards are probably only useful among peers (people of roughly similar ability), and best performance (winner) awards are useful to those who win if they have to work for it (not the kid who is just naturally much faster than the others, but the one who manages to just edge out the other two fast kids).

If everyone (in the cohort) is participating, that's when a participation award dilutes reward schema. Also, if participation awards are automatic, regardless of level of participation, so the kid who barely bothers gets the same reward as those who put forth full effort. In that latter case, both sets of children (the vague participant and the full participant) can receive some improper cues from the awards.

I'll do a quick search later and see if I can't find a public link to a couple of journal articles related to the research I mentioned.