Disabled students as black belts

[puunui]

Sparring and/or fighting ability trumps a lot of other things in my book. In the end, we are looking for the application of all this stuff we practice right?

Wrong.

 

[puunui]

But in college, there are accommodations made. The key isn't to compromise standards. In college, a deaf student can have an interpreter. If the measure of success in a math class is the ability to learn and execute the math functions being taught, and the student is being unnecessarily handicapped not by their impairment, but by the mechanism of instruction, then the student could fail for reasons unrelated to the standards of the school.

And in a public school, if accommodations are not made, then it opens up the school and school district to a discrimination claim. You go to a store, there are handicap stalls in the restrooms and handicap parking in the lot in front. Of course accommodations are made for those who are both mentally and physically challenged. This includes taekwondo as well. For example, the WTF has a World Para Taekwondo Championships. We have a competitor from the US who regularly competes and he only has one arm. Technically, he does not qualify for a 1st Dan, because he is unable to do the poomsae movements with the missing arm. And yet he is allowed to compete in the black belt divisions at World Championships.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

I have not had many people that would consider truly "disabled." I had a blind man who achieved black belt. He was not born blind, he had been shot in the face with a shotgun about 10 years prior in a turkey hunting accident. He was able to break boards with a jump back pivot, and he was able to spar with proficiency. Therefore, I would not say that he was disabled as much as i would say that he was handicapped.

As for the those with cerebral palsy, that is a different story altogether. There is a minimum standard, but I grade on those who are realizing their potential. Have they tried their best, are they committed to their training? I have held back students who are on the cusp of the "bare minimum" who haven't put forth effort, whereas passed students who are at the bare minimum because they have put forth the best effort that they can. However, it does all come back to a set standard.

 

[puunui]

And on this subject, I think that the USAT should look into creating an organization for physically and/or mentally challenged practitioners, in the same way that we have separate collegiate and military organizations.

 

[puunui]

There is a minimum standard, but I grade on those who are realizing their potential. Have they tried their best, are they committed to their training? I have held back students who are on the cusp of the "bare minimum" who haven't put forth effort, whereas passed students who are at the bare minimum because they have put forth the best effort that they can. However, it does all come back to a set standard.

Taekwondo is, by definition, an inclusive martial art. All kwan and all schools are a part of it. Everyone should be allowed in and everyone should be allowed the same opportunities to advance and participate.

 

[Twin Fist]

on one hand, you can say college is an intellectual exercise, and there shouldnt be a physical limitation allowed, like wheelchairs and the availability of ramps, only intellectual ones. Bottom line, you have to be smart enough to pass the classes

thats a fair standard

the practice of martial arts is a physical pursuit, so physical impairment is a fair reason to limit someone....at the end of the day, you have to be able to meet the standards.

 

[puunui]

the practice of martial arts is a physical pursuit, so physical impairment is a fair reason to limit someone....at the end of the day, you have to be able to meet the standards.

PE is a required course in I think every high school. If you cannot do the PE class due to a disability, does that mean you should not be allowed to graduate from high school?

 

[dancingalone]

Wrong.

Really? If we seek to study Eastern philosophy solely or even primarily, it would be a much more direct route to seek instruction in another setting. A temple or monastery comes to mind, perhaps even an academic setting like a university. A dojang seems to be full of other extraneous things in comparison.

It's certainly possible that pondering the I Ching or reading the writings of Laozi or Sun Tzu can help us grow as martial artists, but the foundation of martial arts, taekwondo included, rests first upon the training of our physical bodies. Without this first step, there can be no other - this is why prospective monks and priests in the eastern traditions often work hard physical labor in the beginning of their training, to let weariness in their body free them from distractions and thus sharpen the senses and the mind ultimately.

What is TKD without first honing the body? If beginner has no concept of what and where their body is in relation to the outside, how can he proceed towards self-mastery and then later the 'mastery' of others?

 

[Markku P]

I wholeheartedly agree. Does "black belt" only mean "physically capable with all limbs, faculties, and senses? " I think not. I've had many physically capable students quit after a few months of hard work, while less capable or very challenged people stick around each and every day working their button off to learn to perform forms, techniques and self protection in a way that works effectively for *them* while still trying to keep a certain standard of posture, intention, or power.

-Restita

We have to use common sense. I had a student who couldn't even walk without pain and she still came and did her Taekwondo training with me almost 4 years.
she couldn't do any high kicks, jumping kicks or any spinning movements. But mentally she was one of strongest student I ever had. ( She got her black belt )
Yes, everyone should be able to to train Taekwondo and we have to adjust our black belt tests if needed.

Yours,

Markku P.

 

[Steve]

on one hand, you can say college is an intellectual exercise, and there shouldnt be a physical limitation allowed, like wheelchairs and the availability of ramps, only intellectual ones. Bottom line, you have to be smart enough to pass the classes

thats a fair standard

the practice of martial arts is a physical pursuit, so physical impairment is a fair reason to limit someone....at the end of the day, you have to be able to meet the standards.

I completely agree with this. The key point I'm making is that there is often confusion about what is a standard and what is a measure. Often... usually... I'd say that when the discussion turns to specifics, we're talking about measures, where there is room for accommodation.

And, ultimately, as with people who have no obvious physical or mental impairment, some can hang and others can't. Plenty of people fail, regardless of whether they are disabled.

What I'm talking about isn't whether or not a disabled person can fail to earn a black belt. As with those who are not disabled, some will fail and some will succeed. What I'm really getting at is, for those of you in positions of influence or authority in your school, are you doing what you can to distill your instruction down to what's really important?

 

[Steve]

Also, someone brought up the legal obligations of a school owner to accommodate under the ADA. That was actually a thread I started a few years back. I dug up the link for any who are interested. I learned a lot from that discussions. As I said in the opening post of that thread, I'm pretty familiar with work place issues, but was curious to learn more about non-workplace discrimination and the associated issues.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?71712-ADA-and-Martial-Arts-Schools

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

In a nutshell if you have a mentally/physically disabled person as a student, can they reach a black belt in your school if they are unable to perform to the standards like non disabled students can?

Being a kendo instructor, there is no 'belt' in my class, but we do have first dan.

It would really be dependent upon the nature of the disability. A person who does not have the use of their hands would be unable to practice kendo barring some major advancement in prosthetics. On the other hand, a person without the use of their legs could at least learn to use the sword. While it isn't kendo, there is a wheel chair division in fencing.

Mental disabilities are another where I would be hesitant to just say yes/no because not all mental disabilities are the same.

Forrest Gump was mentioned in another thread. While a gent like ol' Gump might be unable to pursue theoretical physics, he'd do just dandy in martial arts. A person with a mental illness that causes them to be violent, however, I would refuse to arm with a weapon.

In short, I would say that it would be a case by case basis.

I also think that for people with disabilities, certain arts are a better fit depending upon the disability. Someone posted an article here on MT a few years back about a blind judoka. The gent was the target of an attempted mugging, but once the mugger was touching him, he had no trouble making a pretzel out of the mugger. On the other hand, striking arts might not be the best fit.

Finally, I think that we need to draw a distinction between training a disabled person and whether or not their particular disability would prevent them from earning a first dan in our system. Part of that depends upon the nature of the disability and part of it depends upon what a first dan represents in a particular school/style/org.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Taekwondo is, by definition, an inclusive martial art. All kwan and all schools are a part of it. Everyone should be allowed in and everyone should be allowed the same opportunities to advance and participate.

I don't disagree, to a point. For example, we had a perspective student years ago with significant birth defects that presented serious physical handicaps. Not that he didn't have the mental ability to learn, but his skull was very thin and very soft, which made the practice of Taekwondo a serious risk for him. It was against his doctors' recommendations to participate, and ultimately our instructor chose not to accept him as a student. He had inner ear problems which gave him significant balance problems (which if that were the only problem it wouldn't have been an issue). If he were to even fall during floor exercises it could have left him with a serious concussion, even with matted floors. At what point does a desire to learn/participate outweigh the risk of serious harm/potential death? What responsibility does an instructor/school owner have on taking vs. denying a potential student?

We have modified requirements for those with limitations, just as you had mentioned about the Taekwondoin with one arm (which I don't consider a disability so much as I do a handicap). So while there has only been one potential student at our school that I can ever remember that has been turned away, IMO it was with good reason and sound judgement.

 

[chrispillertkd]

In a nutshell if you have a mentally/physically disabled person as a student, can they reach a black belt in your school if they are unable to perform to the standards like non disabled students can?

I met one gentleman who had no arms and was a II dan in Taekwon-Do. He was, to put it mildly, an awesome kicker. He demonstrated his version of the patterns, which consisted completely of foot techniques. I know it would be very difficult for me to do them nearly as well as he did (his Kwang-Gae was very cool).

A teenager used to train at my instructors' school who only had one arm. He quit at 3rd gup, IIRC, but was every bit as good as students of the same rank who had no physical limitation.

Grand Master Ra, Young-Chul was missing one of his hands (and part of his forearm, I think). He was phenomenal.

I trained with a student at my instructors' school who was mentally slow (most likely he had mild mental retardation). He got his I dan and all of the students present were very impressed at how good his test was. He totally dominated in free sparring. He was an excellent black belt.

The point of all these examples is that people can overcome handicaps and excell at whatever endeavor they engage in. The real question is why are people without such disabilities being promoted in the first place when their training can only be described as lackluster? I've seen more non-disable people promoted to black belt who either couldn't or wouldn't put forth any effort than I have seen disabled people who weren't worthy of being promoted. Not exactly answering your question, but I hope you see my point.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

Really? If we seek to study Eastern philosophy solely or even primarily, it would be a much more direct route to seek instruction in another setting. A temple or monastery comes to mind, perhaps even an academic setting like a university. A dojang seems to be full of other extraneous things in comparison.

It's certainly possible that pondering the I Ching or reading the writings of Laozi or Sun Tzu can help us grow as martial artists, but the foundation of martial arts, taekwondo included, rests first upon the training of our physical bodies. Without this first step, there can be no other - this is why prospective monks and priests in the eastern traditions often work hard physical labor in the beginning of their training, to let weariness in their body free them from distractions and thus sharpen the senses and the mind ultimately.

What is TKD without first honing the body? If beginner has no concept of what and where their body is in relation to the outside, how can he proceed towards self-mastery and then later the 'mastery' of others?

But that is not what you said. You said this:

Sparring and/or fighting ability trumps a lot of other things in my book. In the end, we are looking for the application of all this stuff we practice right?

Not everyone is looking for sparring, fighting ability or application of the stuff we practice. I would even go so far as to say most people are not interested in this. Most people, which are white and color belt beginners, are there to get some exercise, lose weight, improve concentration or coordination, gain self confidence, etc. They are not there to learn how to fight. Even the ones who are focused on these things, when young, often times continue their training in their older years for different reasons, health being the biggest one.

 

[puunui]

The real question is why are people without such disabilities being promoted in the first place when their training can only be described as lackluster? I've seen more non-disable people promoted to black belt who either couldn't or wouldn't put forth any effort than I have seen disabled people who weren't worthy of being promoted. Not exactly answering your question, but I hope you see my point.

I suppose there are those who, having no students of their own, feel the need or desire to judge other people's students. For me personally, if an instructor chooses to promote someone to whatever rank, then I feel we should respect that decision. Otherwise, we end up being the nosy neighbor who constantly criticizes what others are doing around the block. I don't care what my neighbor's lawn looks like, or how they raise their kids. That's their business.

 

[TKDinAK]

We have to use common sense. I had a student who couldn't even walk without pain and she still came and did her Taekwondo training with me almost 4 years.
she couldn't do any high kicks, jumping kicks or any spinning movements. But mentally she was one of strongest student I ever had. ( She got her black belt )
Yes, everyone should be able to to train Taekwondo and we have to adjust our black belt tests if needed.

Yours,

Markku P.

We have several autistic people training in our dojang. I believe it's part of an off site program that one of our students is a part of of. She is always in attendance with them, and gives them a little extra attention. But when they test, they are required to complete all the physical aspects.

That said... and without speaking to my instructor about it yet... it seems he has the same attitude as you Markku. He adjusts his requirements... to what extent, I don't know.

 

[Carol]

But in college, there are accommodations made. The key isn't to compromise standards. In college, a deaf student can have an interpreter. If the measure of success in a math class is the ability to learn and execute the math functions being taught, and the student is being unnecessarily handicapped not by their impairment, but by the mechanism of instruction, then the student could fail for reasons unrelated to the standards of the school.

Say there's a student in a wheelchair unable to enter the lecture hall because there is no ramp and he can't navigate the stairs. It's pretty clear that the student will fail the class if he can't attend the lectures. But is he failing due to his disability? I'd argue not, and that the reason for his failure is a fundamental misunderstanding of the true nature of the standards for the school. In this example, we haven't even allowed the student the opportunity to meet the standards.

In the same way, a martial arts school has standards, but are folks with impairments failing to meet the standards due to their impairment or due to your inability or unwillingness to accommodate their impairment.

Even more on point -- colleges are about learning, yet many colleges have outreach for the learning-disabled. There are even colleges such as Landmark in Vermont who have decided to focus exclusively on teaching the learning-disabled.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/education/edlife/09landmark-t.html?pagewanted=all

Travis Miller is a 5th degree in American Kenpo. I wouldn't mess with him or his 400 pound wheelchair. I dare anyone to tell him to his face that he shouldn't be a black belt because he can't kick. Oh, and put it on youtube, eh? :lol:

 

[puunui]

Even more on point -- colleges are about learning, yet many colleges have outreach for the learning-disabled. There are even colleges such as Landmark in Vermont who have decided to focus exclusively on teaching the learning-disabled.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/education/edlife/09landmark-t.html?pagewanted=all

There is also gallaudet university for the deaf in washington dc.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Not everyone is looking for sparring, fighting ability or application of the stuff we practice. I would even go so far as to say most people are not interested in this. Most people, which are white and color belt beginners, are there to get some exercise, lose weight, improve concentration or coordination, gain self confidence, etc. They are not there to learn how to fight. Even the ones who are focused on these things, when young, often times continue their training in their older years for different reasons, health being the biggest one.

What are you using to support this position? Is this your opinion or is there data to suggest why the majority of people are taking TKD?