3 levels of MA training

[Gerry Seymour]

If we divide our training into 3 levels,

1. beginner,
2. intermediate,
3. advance.

Assume one has to pass 1 level before he can get into next level. The question is the "pass qualification". Does he need A score to pass. or he can pass with a B score, or even a C score.

Also if he gets C during the beginner level. One day when he has reached to the advance level, can he come back and make A score in his beginner level?

This may involve with some bad habit that will need to be removed later on.

That presumes that what you defined as "beginner" is a prerequisite to what you defined as "advance". I don't see the three areas you listed as a progression, but as three areas of the technique. In my experience, they can be corequisite, meaning they can be learned at the same time.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Beginner level: Learning techniques
Intermediate Level: Using techniques effectively
Advanced Level: Teaching techniques

Or, for those not into teaching (and as a parallel path for some of us who are):
Beginner level: Learning techniques
Intermediate Level: Using techniques effectively
Advanced Level: Working between techniques (digging into the principles in a more intellectual approach)

We could also look at another alternative Advanced Level: Using techniques effectively against highly skilled opponents.

 

[jobo]

. im glad you know more about why opinions then i do.

I'm glad we agree

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Beginners are beginners. The adult beginners are no different from the children beginners. Sometime the children beginner can learn faster than the adult beginners.

Today, we all want to get into the advance level training ASAP. But we may forget how much time that we had spent on the beginner level training before. We might get A grad, B grad, or even C grade when we were beginners. Nobody will require that we have to have all straight A grade before we can graduate from our elementary school.

That's not true. Adults learn quite differently from children. Their brains are physically (neurologically) quite different. There are tomes of information on the differences between juvenile and adult learning.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Interesting, in what way?

The juvenile brain has a higher degree of plasticity, and actually has some excess dendritic connections that are (apparently) specifically designed to improve learning through environmental absorption (even more so pre-toddler). Children learn much better by rote than adults do. Adults generally need to understand what will be learned (and often the application) prior to learning, if they are to get optimal results.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Adult learners are more able to draw on their previous experiences of similar activities, allowing them to make connections between what they are doing and what they have done in the past, and in doing so pick up things quicker. Children naturally don't have as many previous experiences to draw on so are less able to make those connections. Also, adults tend to think about what they are doing more, and the theory behind what is happening, whereas children don't. Children don't really care how they are able to float as long as they can float, whereas adults want to know why. Finally, in my experience, children are far better at copying actions than listening to explanations of what to do. As such when I'm teaching children I spend a lot more time demonstrating the movements, whereas with adults I can generally just tell them what to do, explaining the reasons behind it and they will get it.

I left this part out of my prior post on this. Adult learners learn much more by association (pretty much what you say in the first sentence) than do children - they connect a concept, principle, or action to something they already know. That "connection" appears to be a literal thing - how the neural pathways are changed in learning seems to reflect this.