Over in 21 year old 6th dan thread, a question was posed about whether or not one can do 'karate without kata, kendo without sparring, or aikido without falling' which led to a tangent (as is often the case in threads that go on for more than five pages).
We got to the subject of a student training in the art but not doing at least one mainstay practice in the art. Though no specific reason narrowed down, several were mentioned; medical reasons, psychological issues, embarrassment, fear, or inability to purchase the equipment necessary for that part of the class.
Chris maintained that if the student cannot do essential parts of the art, then really, they're just practicing some techniques from the art but not the art itself (paraphrasing Chris' comments over a six page discussion). I suggested starting a separate thread to Chris and he indicated that he was game.
So here is the question: in accommodating a student to enable them to practice the art, at what point, if any, is the student no longer really practicing the art?
Bear in mind, that this is not about disallowing the student from participation or from training; only as to whether or not training under such accommodation can still be considered practicing the art. This is not specifically about disabled students (the student who just never purchases sparring gear but continues to come in and train for years came up), though disabled students fall into the scope of the question.
We got to the subject of a student training in the art but not doing at least one mainstay practice in the art. Though no specific reason narrowed down, several were mentioned; medical reasons, psychological issues, embarrassment, fear, or inability to purchase the equipment necessary for that part of the class.
Chris maintained that if the student cannot do essential parts of the art, then really, they're just practicing some techniques from the art but not the art itself (paraphrasing Chris' comments over a six page discussion). I suggested starting a separate thread to Chris and he indicated that he was game.
So here is the question: in accommodating a student to enable them to practice the art, at what point, if any, is the student no longer really practicing the art?
Bear in mind, that this is not about disallowing the student from participation or from training; only as to whether or not training under such accommodation can still be considered practicing the art. This is not specifically about disabled students (the student who just never purchases sparring gear but continues to come in and train for years came up), though disabled students fall into the scope of the question.