A Different View on Rank

[bushidomartialarts]

So many people view rank as either entirely detrimental to the arts or at best an interim measure to appease folk until they understand enough not to care about rank. The idea is that, if you really love the arts, the belt around your waist shouldn't matter. Training itself should be sufficient.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but let's look at this from another angle.

Everybody who knows about general effectiveness and success agrees that distinct, concrete, subdivided goals are the way to go. Want to retire early? Set goals and set a plan for meeting them. Want to go far in your career? Set goals and set a plan for meeting them. Want to finish that novel? Set goals and, etc...

In many other venues, a failure to pursue a set goal is the mark of an underachiever. Why do we, as a group, tend toward the opposite when pursuing our training?

Thoughgs?

 

[stickarts]

We have found ranking effective for goal setting, motivation, visible recognition, a memorable day for the student, and a great diagnostic tool for the instructors to see what kind of job we are doing.

It has worked well for us. Like anything else it can be put to good use or bad use. I have found that many of the people that continually go on about how ranking is unimportant to them are actually the ones that it means the most to. If it is truely unimportant it is rarely discussed. Often times too it is a source of jealousy.

Ranking is just part of the way we do things. It is not over emphasized and we are all equals as people in the school.

 

[Grenadier]

In an ideal world, with an ideal situation, nobody would care about rank. Everyone would simply learn what they could from the people around them, and not worry about who was the highest ranking person.

The real world isn't as pretty, though. While it's true that there are some folks who really don't care about rank, and would be some of the finest students that you could ever ask for, the fact remains, that the overwhelming majority of your students aren't going to be that type.

Students need a bit of encouragement here and there. If it means using something tangible (such as a different color belt) to reward them along the way, then so be it. If you can keep them training and developing, they're going to become excellent students in their own right, for the most part, as long as they can stay interested.

Let's face it; some of your students may become bored, despite (or possibly because of) the multiple lectures that a teacher would give, telling them that they need to become highly proficient at fundamentals. They can, and do, grow bored at doing the same things over and over, and sometimes, they need to start learning new things, just to keep things fresh.

The way I see it, if you can keep your students training diligently, then there's nothing wrong with using things such as ranks, different rank colors, etc., and dare I say, even the titles of Renshi, Kyoshi, and Hanshi?

 

[theletch1]

Having the rank structure often allows the instructor to glance around the room and instantly have a good, general idea of which students should be familiar with which material.

I truly think that one of the reasons that many in the MA are so put off but the rank structure is that one of the tenets of the arts is the loss or tight control of the ego. Is it possible that at least subconsciously many see the idea of worrying about what rank you've attained as being egotistical and therefore counter to one of the more esoteric asperations of the arts? Me, I've never really cared what rank I was beyond looking forward to getting the new material in the next rank. Sure I'm looking forward to the sho-dan level so that I'll be allowed to open my own dojo but I could continue to teach out of my sensei's dojo for as long as I wanted.

 

[Kacey]

So many people view rank as either entirely detrimental to the arts or at best an interim measure to appease folk until they understand enough not to care about rank. The idea is that, if you really love the arts, the belt around your waist shouldn't matter. Training itself should be sufficient.

How many people are in the activity(ies) they participate in for "rank"? If that were the only motivator, why would people engage in any sporting activity where there is any way to compare oneself to another? From one perspective, training should be for oneself - rank should not matter. From another perspective - rank (be it belt rank, seeding, comparing one's performance to another's, etc.) is a way of judging one's progress against a (supposedly) objective standard.

In many other venues, a failure to pursue a set goal is the mark of an underachiever. Why do we, as a group, tend toward the opposite when pursuing our training?

Thoughgs?

While I have seen a great deal of what you're talking about, at the same time, I have seen the reverse, as well. I have been advised by other martial artists to set goals; I have been advised by other martial artists to concentrate on learning and not worry about rank. I see no problem with setting goals and attaining them; however, it's one thing to say "I want to learn and be able to demonstrate all the information for my current rank" (reasonable) and "I want to be a grand master" (egotistical, unless one is the rank below grand master - or whatever your style's most senior rank is).

I don't think it's underachieving to set reasonable goals and work toward them - I do think it's overachieving (in the egotistical sense) to set exceedingly high goals and expect to attain them - and many MA practitioners have seen enough of the latter to be leery of the former.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Kacey, very good points.

I do think it's overachieving (in the egotistical sense) to set exceedingly high goals and expect to attain them - and many MA practitioners have seen enough of the latter to be leery of the former.

On the other hand, for many people, the black belt journey teaches them to raise their understanding of what a reasonable goal is. Most people profoundly underestimate what they're capable of.

 

[Kacey]

On the other hand, for many people, the black belt journey teaches them to raise their understanding of what a reasonable goal is. Most people profoundly underestimate what they're capable of.

True. Myself, I've seen both... and that's why I try to set reasonable goals - and if I manage to rise above them on occasion, well... that just offsets the ones I miss!

 

[mjd]

Rank in also used for finanical gain, some add intermediate ranks to get another buck, but in general I think ranks is good, goal setting, when goals are met I makes people feel good so it can be a confidense builder also. I like the idea of the instructor being able to take a quick inventory of the class.

 

[Carol]

There seems to be an assumption that training without rank means that one cannot break a larger goal in to workable sections, one cannot be motivated by smaller achievements, or that one doesn't have a sense of where they are in the curriculum.

I haven't found that to be the case.

I'm not against belt ranks or schools that issue them, or the hard-working martial artists that earn them. But having been in an environment that awards rank and one that doesn't, I prefer training in an environment where belt ranks aren't part of the picture.

Thats just me though...I can also understand why others may feel differently. :asian:

 

[Steel Tiger]

I think that practitioners should be concerned with rank. As many have already said it is a good way to delineate goals. The problems we clearly all have with rank arise when someone uses it to present themselves as something they are not.

One problem I can see with goal setting and a ranking system is the number of incrementations in a system. Personally, I think that the kyu/dan style systems present too many increments so some people become caught up in the achieving of small gains and goals and forget the larger progression, from novice (kyu) to adept (dan). The progress becomes more important than the substance.

 

[jdinca]

I feel that rank can be very appropriate when used properly. Many of the responses have listed the reasons. It gives the student the ability to set goals and it allows the instructor to quickly assess the level the student is at. It also gives the student a sense of accomplishment that can help keep them enthused when the material gets more involved and advancement becomes more difficult.

As for the goal setting angle, it's also a tool to help develop mental discipline. By the time a student reaches an advanced level, that self discipline should also have reached a level where the student understands that it's the journey to BB and beyond that is important and not what color the belt around your waist is. If a BB is still rank driven, then imo, they've missed the most important lesson and that is that it's the journey and what you learn along the way that matters the most, not the goal itself.

 

[uk-kenpo]

I would prefer to be a white belt in my chosen martial art and style, than a black belt in another that i don't enjoy doing.

Have fun

 

[Bigshadow]

So many people view rank as either entirely detrimental to the arts or at best an interim measure to appease folk until they understand enough not to care about rank. The idea is that, if you really love the arts, the belt around your waist shouldn't matter. Training itself should be sufficient.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but let's look at this from another angle.

Everybody who knows about general effectiveness and success agrees that distinct, concrete, subdivided goals are the way to go. Want to retire early? Set goals and set a plan for meeting them. Want to go far in your career? Set goals and set a plan for meeting them. Want to finish that novel? Set goals and, etc...

In many other venues, a failure to pursue a set goal is the mark of an underachiever. Why do we, as a group, tend toward the opposite when pursuing our training?

Thoughgs?

I don't think you are saying anything different than those that say that the belt really is insignificant... in the beginning. Certainly, the belt is a goal in the beginning and belt ranks are used as such, but eventually one learns that the belt isn't the aspiration, but there is something far more valuable to self to achieve than the rank and we tend to move from rank to more intangible things as a measure of ourselves.

This also translates to life in general. Look at what young people tend to measure themselves by in the beginning (clothes, cars, etc). Eventually, one realizes that there is more to life than just material possessions, there are intangible things that we can only feel that bring us more comfort than those material things could ever do alone.

 

[qi-tah]

So many people view rank as either entirely detrimental to the arts or at best an interim measure to appease folk until they understand enough not to care about rank. The idea is that, if you really love the arts, the belt around your waist shouldn't matter. Training itself should be sufficient.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but let's look at this from another angle.

Everybody who knows about general effectiveness and success agrees that distinct, concrete, subdivided goals are the way to go. Want to retire early? Set goals and set a plan for meeting them. Want to go far in your career? Set goals and set a plan for meeting them. Want to finish that novel? Set goals and, etc...

In many other venues, a failure to pursue a set goal is the mark of an underachiever. Why do we, as a group, tend toward the opposite when pursuing our training?

Thoughgs?

Rank is only one way to attain clearly defined goals in the MA setting though. Rank can be the most visible and clearly defined set goals, but that may not suit every student. Some ppl might have other goals that feel are more important in their training, such as:

Being able to defend themselves from being bullied at school
Improving their overall health
Becoming more flexible
Stress release

For these goals, markers like rank aren't really applicable - personal benchmarks must be set by the student to know when they have acheived their aims. I guess the problem with rank is that, by it's very nature of being a highly visible and validated measure of skill (whether deserved or not - another issue) it has the potential to sidetrack students from concentrating on other, internally set goals. I have found this to be the case myself, and am only now beginning to reassess my own goals in light of what i now know about my school's ranking system.

 

[Balrog]

In many other venues, a failure to pursue a set goal is the mark of an underachiever. Why do we, as a group, tend toward the opposite when pursuing our training?

Thoughgs?

No thoughgs, but I do have a few ideas.

I agree completely with the concept of goals. We teach the SMART goals concepts: goals should be Specific, Meaningful, Achievable, Relevant, and Timely. I use our rank and belting structure as a perfect example of how these goals work, and how to manage them.

Without goals, you really are wandering aimlessly. An analogy I use is that you want to drive from New York to Los Angeles. All you know is that you have to head west. Without a map, it will take you a lot longer to get where you want to be. Your goals are your map in your life, and with them, you will get where you want to be a lot faster.

 

[IcemanSK]

I see your original thought on this & I tend to agree. We never would say that once earns a bachellors degree that we stop learning.

There is, however, a parelel (sp?) thought among many kids & parents in some chueches about confirmation. That when one "finishes" one no longer needs to go to church. (It was the thought process my buddies & I had).

If belts are benchmarks of accomplishment or achievement (which is the point here) then one would want to "finish what one started. It is a great way to lay a foundation for goal-setting in other areas of life. Most of the best things in life are things we have to work at. (Relationships are among the things the best & they don't just "happen.") We don't often get from wishing something to be to having it happen overnight. It's when we look back at our hard work that we can put value on things, often.