Martial arts testing and society today

[Gerry Seymour]

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.

I don't think this is about introducing children to the "harshness of the world". Rather, it is about helping them form realistic reward reactions - or, more accurately, avoiding accidentally helping them form inaccurate (to society) reward schema. So long as what is used builds their motivation (immediately and in the long term), it is good for them. We just want to avoid causing them problems with well-intended actions.

ADMINISTRATORS: If this is seen as a political area, please let me know. I see this as discussing child development (an area of psychology), which has relevance to instructors who teach kids.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

" 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.

Just because belt ranks were originally designed for Japanese children, that doesn't mean they can't be used appropriately outside that context. They should undergo changes to make them useful to that context. In Japan, colored belt ranks are not limited to children, so I assume the Japanese found a way to use them effectively among adults, as well.

 

[Tez3]

I think the difference may be partly that I'm considering that age group as part of the overall span

In the UK though that's the only age group that has school 'participation' awards. It's in reception classes that this happens not older children. I believe children in the USA aren't at school at this age and are still in kindergarten/playschool which is for much younger children here.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

In the UK though that's the only age group that has school 'participation' awards. It's in reception classes that this happens not older children. I believe children in the USA aren't at school at this age and are still in kindergarten/playschool which is for much younger children here.

Kindergarten isn't the same thing as playschool, and now often starts at 4-5 years old in the US, as I understand it. When I was in school, kindergarten started at 5-6, and involved some actual learning, even back then. Since then, there has been a move to start more actual education earlier.

 

[Tez3]

School sports day is one afternoon a year, we have hundreds of thousands of children who compete against each other in a myriad of sports. Gymnastics, Cheer, football, touch rugby, cricket, athletics, cross country running, shooting, fishing, gymkhanas, dancing, BMXing, netball, hockey, volleyball, etc etc. Children aren't reliant on gaining information about 'winning and losing' from one afternoon of silly school races.

 

[Tez3]

Kindergarten isn't the same thing as playschool, and now often starts at 4-5 years old in the US, as I understand it. When I was in school, kindergarten started at 5-6, and involved some actual learning, even back then. Since then, there has been a move to start more actual education earlier.

Your kindergarten would be our children at primary school, Years 1 and 2. Ours start school in the September or Easter so basically they start proper school at about four and a half some can be younger though. Kindergartens ( usually called nurseries here) usually have rooms for babies and toddlers as well as a playschool for older children, they are daycare centres though some posh ones (pre-prep schools are for getting rich kids ready to get into Prep schools ( they start at 4 until 11 or 13 when they will go onto Public schools) the pressure on this children to succeed is every bit as robust as the Japanese system.
At 6 and 7 here children are taking national tests in English, maths and science. this is the curriculum for age 6-7 The national curriculum: Key stage 1 and 2 - GOV.UK.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

School sports day is one afternoon a year, we have hundreds of thousands of children who compete against each other in a myriad of sports. Gymnastics, Cheer, football, touch rugby, cricket, athletics, cross country running, shooting, fishing, gymkhanas, dancing, BMXing, netball, hockey, volleyball, etc etc. Children aren't reliant on gaining information about 'winning and losing' from one afternoon of silly school races.

Agreed. What happens that one day will have little (though not nonexistent, probable immesurably small) effect. It would only matter if it is a part of a larger trend (or confusing lack of consistency) a child is exposed to. Absent that, it won't be significant in the formation of a reward schema.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Your kindergarten would be our children at primary school, Years 1 and 2. Ours start school in the September or Easter so basically they start proper school at about four and a half some can be younger though. Kindergartens ( usually called nurseries here) usually have rooms for babies and toddlers as well as a playschool for older children, they are daycare centres though some posh ones (pre-prep schools are for getting rich kids ready to get into Prep schools ( they start at 4 until 11 or 13 when they will go onto Public schools) the pressure on this children to succeed is every bit as robust as the Japanese system.
At 6 and 7 here children are taking national tests in English, maths and science. this is the curriculum for age 6-7 The national curriculum: Key stage 1 and 2 - GOV.UK.

It does sound like the education is more rigorous at that age point (consistent with my wife's experience in the USSR), though a similar track.

 

[Tez3]

It does sound like the education is more rigorous at that age point (consistent with my wife's experience in the USSR), though a similar track.

Certain people here, and it is political because of the Brexit situation, like to claim that the no competition thing is from the EU therefore 'bad'. There are more and more claims everyday, it's a crazy situation, accusations of 'nanny state', and PC'ism are rife, while harking back to the good old days when we were an Empire etc are also banded around. The good old days never were that good and it's going to take years before the UK settles down probably decades maybe even a century. It's also noticeable that everyone has an opinion on education and what is good for children, they also have opinions on just about everything and they aren't afraid to express them quite often in the most insulting way possible. A very good reason not to discuss politics on here lol!

 

[jobo]

this thread has flip flopped,since my last viewing, getting back to the original concept, I think its counter productive to teach children to persevere at things generaly, there are only three reasons to do anything, I it will pay you money, two) its a moral duty, ) three ) you enjoy it.. Schools work falls into the first class, children then find that the other two get mixed up, they feel a moral duty to continue say MA because their parents want them to do it and have invested time and money in it. That is really not fare, either the kid enjoys what they are doing or they should be,supported in jacking it in.and not morally black mailed into continuing because mum and dad think its good for them

 

[Tez3]

this thread has flip flopped,since my last viewing, getting back to the original concept, I think its counter productive to teach children to persevere at things generaly, there are only three reasons to do anything, I it will pay you money, two) its a moral duty, ) three ) you enjoy it.. Schools work falls into the first class, children then find that the other two get mixed up, they feel a moral duty to continue say MA because their parents want them to do it and have invested time and money in it. That is really not fare, either the kid enjoys what they are doing or they should be,supported in jacking it in.and not morally black mailed into continuing because mum and dad think its good for them

I've been involved in children's activities for years, Pony Club, Scouting, Guiding, children's martial arts, I've taken my children to various activities too and the common thing running through all of these is the pushy parent, the one who wants the child to win everything or to be the best out of everyone and the poor child hates the activity, just does it because the parents want them to. It's heartbreaking to see a child who is scared of horses on a pony trying to please a parent, or a girl taking ballet exams because mum wanted to be a ballerina, the Cub who had to do every badge because mum wanted to boast how many badges he had and of course the child who has to grade top in martial arts but really didn't want to.
It can be frustrating finding the activity your child enjoys and wants to do but it's out there, just have to be patient and keep looking. It makes the child and the instructors/coaches/teachers frustrated and sad when the child doesn't want to be in the class.

 

[hoshin1600]

Just because belt ranks were originally designed for Japanese children, that doesn't mean they can't be used appropriately outside that context. They should undergo changes to make them useful to that context. In Japan, colored belt ranks are not limited to children, so I assume the Japanese found a way to use them effectively among adults, as well.

i dont see it as a child/ adult thing. i see it as a Japanese cultural thing. my question and line of thinking is that as a different culture, can we borrow a system like rank and use it as it was meant to be used, or like you said do we need to change its significance? if the significance needs to change then we are at present in a state of confusion. some people using it as a mark of competency and others using it as a mark of time in grade yet others will assign their own significance to rank. this is the same for adult as for children. this is why we often have conversations here about what a black belt means. if we have to reassign meaning to belts to match our culture perhaps we could do better by scraping the entire concept and hand out "participation awards" to children like every other activity. if we compare karate to football or trumpet playing , no other activity assigns a grading to it.

 

[jobo]

I've been involved in children's activities for years, Pony Club, Scouting, Guiding, children's martial arts, I've taken my children to various activities too and the common thing running through all of these is the pushy parent, the one who wants the child to win everything or to be the best out of everyone and the poor child hates the activity, just does it because the parents want them to. It's heartbreaking to see a child who is scared of horses on a pony trying to please a parent, or a girl taking ballet exams because mum wanted to be a ballerina, the Cub who had to do every badge because mum wanted to boast how many badges he had and of course the child who has to grade top in martial arts but really didn't want to.
It can be frustrating finding the activity your child enjoys and wants to do but it's out there, just have to be patient and keep looking. It makes the child and the instructors/coaches/teachers frustrated and sad when the child doesn't want to be in the class.

I had it as a kid, my dad was a good rugby player, I was a better one, but I didn't at all like it, I was 16 and playing for an elite under 18 side before I had the courage to yell him I didn't want to do it, I wanted to play soccer, a thing I wasn't very good at but enjoyed.

some decades later, I spent a load of money taking my niece horse riding, , I could see after a few weeks she wasn't enjoying it, mostly because the bossy instructor woman kept shouting at them, . Tell them to stick it, if you don't like it I told her
after on out burst at her, she got of the horse and just walk out, she thought I would be cross, but I was very proud of her for sticking up for herself

 

[jobo]

i dont see it as a child/ adult thing. i see it as a Japanese cultural thing. my question and line of thinking is that as a different culture, can we borrow a system like rank and use it as it was meant to be used, or like you said do we need to change its significance? if the significance needs to change then we are at present in a state of confusion. some people using it as a mark of competency and others using it as a mark of time in grade yet others will assign their own significance to rank. this is the same for adult as for children. this is why we often have conversations here about what a black belt means. if we have to reassign meaning to belts to match our culture perhaps we could do better by scraping the entire concept and hand out "participation awards" to children like every other activity. if we compare karate to football or trumpet playing , no other activity assigns a grading to it.

swimming,assigns grades, as does gymnastics and dancing and trumpet playing

 

[Gerry Seymour]

this thread has flip flopped,since my last viewing, getting back to the original concept, I think its counter productive to teach children to persevere at things generaly, there are only three reasons to do anything, I it will pay you money, two) its a moral duty, ) three ) you enjoy it.. Schools work falls into the first class, children then find that the other two get mixed up, they feel a moral duty to continue say MA because their parents want them to do it and have invested time and money in it. That is really not fare, either the kid enjoys what they are doing or they should be,supported in jacking it in.and not morally black mailed into continuing because mum and dad think its good for them

Okay, I like the general concept here, Jobo, but I feel like I'm missing something between the first and second parts of your comment. How does learning to persevere not meet the first and third criteria? Nearly everything I enjoy today only became really enjoyable after I got through a part I didn't enjoy as much (including MA, public speaking, exercise, training managers, consulting). In fact, there are things I kind of like in concept, but don't really get to enjoy because I haven't put enough effort into them (like playing guitar) to get to the fun part (playing actual music). And learning to persevere is perhaps one of the biggest factors in career success.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

i dont see it as a child/ adult thing. i see it as a Japanese cultural thing. my question and line of thinking is that as a different culture, can we borrow a system like rank and use it as it was meant to be used, or like you said do we need to change its significance? if the significance needs to change then we are at present in a state of confusion. some people using it as a mark of competency and others using it as a mark of time in grade yet others will assign their own significance to rank. this is the same for adult as for children. this is why we often have conversations here about what a black belt means. if we have to reassign meaning to belts to match our culture perhaps we could do better by scraping the entire concept and hand out "participation awards" to children like every other activity. if we compare karate to football or trumpet playing , no other activity assigns a grading to it.

Perhaps that's not a state of confusion. Perhaps it's simply 3 different uses for the same indicator (belt color/rank). Perhaps this is, in fact, the context-appropriate adaptation of the indicator, and it's only confusing because we relate it back to the original context.

As an analog, let's consider shirt color. This is an indicator used in many contexts: telling sports teams (and fans) apart, identifying managers separately from line staff, identifying staff at a store, identifying prisoners, distinguishing gang members. All of those contexts are quite different, but since we don't try to relate the sports teams to the prison use, we don't see them as confusing.

This becomes more of an intellectual/conceptual discussion at this point, but I think it's useful to consider whether we (including myself in that) confuse the issue if we actually try to link the usage to the original application. Even within NGA - where colored belts appear to have been part of the original organization of the art (unclear - all pictures are black and white) and dan grades clearly existed from inception - it's quite likely that the actual application of what those different ranks/grades mean changed when Bowe brought the art to the US. Whether it changed or not seems immaterial (in our case, entirely so, since the art no longer exists in Japan), so long as the current usage serves its purpose.

 

[Tez3]

Okay, I like the general concept here, Jobo, but I feel like I'm missing something between the first and second parts of your comment. How does learning to persevere not meet the first and third criteria? Nearly everything I enjoy today only became really enjoyable after I got through a part I didn't enjoy as much (including MA, public speaking, exercise, training managers, consulting). In fact, there are things I kind of like in concept, but don't really get to enjoy because I haven't put enough effort into them (like playing guitar) to get to the fun part (playing actual music). And learning to persevere is perhaps one of the biggest factors in career success.

There is so much to learn when you are only five, persevering at something you don't like perhaps shouldn't be one of them. Later on then yes of course but young children, who have short attention spans definitely not. If children have to be made to do something then they will learn only negative things.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

i dont see it as a child/ adult thing. i see it as a Japanese cultural thing. my question and line of thinking is that as a different culture, can we borrow a system like rank and use it as it was meant to be used, or like you said do we need to change its significance? if the significance needs to change then we are at present in a state of confusion. some people using it as a mark of competency and others using it as a mark of time in grade yet others will assign their own significance to rank. this is the same for adult as for children. this is why we often have conversations here about what a black belt means. if we have to reassign meaning to belts to match our culture perhaps we could do better by scraping the entire concept and hand out "participation awards" to children like every other activity. if we compare karate to football or trumpet playing , no other activity assigns a grading to it.

I forgot to respond to that last point. In football, we actually have a different context. Kids are grouped entirely by age, usually. And those who aren't good enough don't make the team, while others are considered "starters". And in larger sports groups (high school football in the US, for instance), there will even be two levels of teams: varsity and junior varsity. That's a form of grading inherent in most sporting groups. In the most casual groups, there may not be that same set of designations. I coached in AYSO (American Youth Soccer Organization) many years ago. In that association, the rule is that every child plays at least half the game, and nobody is refused from a team (except for disciplinary reasons). So, we lose the cut/make/starter designations. But kids were given a rating by their coach, which rating was passed along to the organization (not the kid) for the formation of reasonably equal teams next season. So, when we can't cut and include only the most competent, we fall back on a rating scheme.

As for music, there is a grading scheme, when groups are involved. Look at the order musicians are seated in an orchestra. The best group of violinists are "first violinists". The best of these is "first chair, first violin", often concertmaster.

 

[jobo]

Okay, I like the general concept here, Jobo, but I feel like I'm missing something between the first and second parts of your comment. How does learning to persevere not meet the first and third criteria? Nearly everything I enjoy today only became really enjoyable after I got through a part I didn't enjoy as much (including MA, public speaking, exercise, training managers, consulting). In fact, there are things I kind of like in concept, but don't really get to enjoy because I haven't put enough effort into them (like playing guitar) to get to the fun part (playing actual music). And learning to persevere is perhaps one of the biggest factors in career success.

well the making money part is career success, we all have to do things get good at things because it does or will pay the bills.

if you have an ambition, to say play guitar and your willing to put the effort in to fulfil that ambition, that's good, but if you don't enjoy the practise then you should pack it in.and do something you do enjoy hoping you get to like it after a decade of effort is a big risk, when you could have spent that time doing something you do enjoy
but there is the distinction between working for your own ambitions and working for someone else's . I've persevered though some horrible jobs to get long term career success and looking back now, I wish I had jacked them in and not wasted four years of my life doing something I hated,

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There is so much to learn when you are only five, persevering at something you don't like perhaps shouldn't be one of them. Later on then yes of course but young children, who have short attention spans definitely not. If children have to be made to do something then they will learn only negative things.

I agree, partly. I didn't like to practice soccer. But I liked playing. One of the rules was you had to practice to play, and that's a fair rule even kids can understand. When I didn't want to go to practice, my mom simply reminded me that was what I had to do to play, and that if I wanted to play more in the goal (always my favorite position, but never my best), I'd have to be better at that than the other kid who wanted to play in there.

What I agree with is that this should be a minor bit for kids that age. They needn't deal with a lot of struggle and strife. But when they want to skip something simply because they don't want to do it that moment, they should be given some help in figuring out why they should (or shouldn't) do it. They need that help, because they aren't old enough to think beyond "right now!". If I'd wanted to quit soccer, my mom would probably have made me stick out the season (assuming I was already partway in), to make sure it wasn't a "right now!" decision, but she'd have let me quit once she was sure I really didn't want to play.