Ideals on a belt system

[Slihn]

What are your ideals on a colored belt systems?

Do you perfer to use them or not use them?

Do you think that it is good to have them in order to show what level a student has obtain or do you think that they may cause an ego or build a false since of security?

I training in two different arts that dont use belts.Traditional Muay Thai (but not the gym that I am training at now) does have a ranking system called "Kru" but its not really highly empsized unless you are planningto be an instructor.My MMA class doesnt use rank either.

I personally perfer not to have the belt system.The reason for this is because,I think that not taining with a belt system takes much of the egotism away.For example if I where a black belt or something and I got beat by a lower ranking practier,it would be humiliating.But if I where to get beat by someone who perhaps hasnt been there as long as me,I would have more of the"this is what I need to work on" attuide in my head(thats just me though).

Alot of times people will ask me"If you dont have belts how to you know where your at ?" I always say,"By your fighting ability".

Im not disagreeing with belts,it just that my personal pefernce is not to use them.

What are your thoughts?

 

[pstarr]

In my association, we use them - students need to have something to work towards and instructors (coming from outside the local school) can tell immediately at what level a given student is training-

 

[SFC JeffJ]

Like most things, they have their good points and bad points. Whatever system is in place will have opportunity for abuse though. So I'm of the opinion complaining about how ranking structure works is next to useless.

Also, different styles progress their students differently, so between them, they aren't a good indication of where a student is at. You just have to look at them in the context of that particular school.

All in all, I like them. They do give students something a little more tangible than knowledge and skill to work towards. By the time a student reaches a high rank, they'll realize the color of their belts true worth.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong,

Jeff

 

[stickarts]

We do use colored belts and although it has its down side (students or parents can get too caught up worrying about the prestige of rank instead of whats important) the belts do a great job giving students goals to shoot for and provide visible recognition and achievement. It largely comes down to the manner in which you implement the belt system.
It needs to be fair, challenging, yet achievable.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Belts, Instructor titles such as Kru, instructor, levels, pre fight training etc. all help a practitioner shoot for a goal. Goal setting has generally been proven in life to be a successful way to achieve something. I am not a big proponent of rank in any form because what really counts is skill. However for students having goals to shoot for is very beneficial. By having a certain goal to go for the practitioner will improve along the way and that is what we are all trying to do!

When people achieve something and let it go to their head is when the problems begin. That is when rank abuse, etc. becomes a problem.

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com

 

[Kacey]

There are some people who practice MA who have figured out that belt ranks are meaningless compared to experience - but they are not generally the people who are just starting, unless they've been in a different style (and not always then, either). Like anything else that externally demonstrates achievement, belt ranks provide goals for students as well as tangible proof of progress. Within an organization with consistent standards for each rank, belt ranks provide a guideline for guest instructors about who knows what; even outside that organization, belt ranks follow a general pattern in that lighter colors (white, yellow, green, blue) are generally lower ranks than darker colors (red, brown, black) and therefore still provide some guidelines to instructors from other organizations and/or styles.

In a perfect world ranks would not be needed - people would come to learn for the joy of learning, and instructors would be able to tell instantly, in a glance, what each student knows and needs to learn next - but this is not a perfect world. Most people need tangible goals to reach for, and belt ranks provide that. If you don't need it - more power to you!

 

[Grenadier]

In an ideal situation, I think we can generally agree that having no belt system would be the way, or if one were to be implemented, then having as few colors as possible would be the best choice.

However, no situation is going to be ideal, if you want to retain students, and grow the size of your dojo. The bottom line is, that unless you have a very secure financial backer, you do need numbers to survive.

By implementing colored belts, you can reward your students with tangible things along the way. Some may scoff at me for saying this, but it does make a difference. Sometimes, people might quit because they seem to be "stuck" at a certain level, and that the next step seems so far away. At least this way, with the multiple color belts in the system, this feeling of being "stuck" can be minimized.

Students should feel proud of their achievements, and the fact that they have made progress along the way. These rewards help them confirm that they have made such progress. At the same time, though, they should never let it "get to their heads."

Let's face it: If we all had ideal situations, then our students would be eager, enthusiastic, energetic, dedicated, and would never get discouraged. They would have such a love for the art, that they would never want to quit.

However, as I stated before, the real world isn't as pretty, and we must face the fact that you do need students in your school to survive. It is, after all, still a business, and if a belt system can help keep the students eager, enthusiastic, energetic, and dedicated, even if it's far from the ideal student's levels, then it's certainly a good thing.

Some may argue that this sounds like "quantity over quality," and I can't necessarily disagree. However, I will ask such people what's better? To have only 3-4 students in your school that are phenomenal ones, or to have 200 students that aren't quite there, but many are capable of reaching that level?

 

[matt.m]

What are your ideals on a colored belt systems?

I believe they are a good thing.


Do you perfer to use them or not use them?

It helps for several reasons. 1. It helps beginners to understand their is a hierarchy. 2. It helps to design a cirriculum of knowledge that way you know what you should be progressivly learning. 3. It shows people where you are at in your schools cirriculum for whatever art. 4. The cirriculum and belt ranking go hand and hand, I am speaking from an organizational standpoint. For instance my organization is roughly 10 schools just in Missouri. I travel between two of them occassionally. When I go between the two I know exactly what is expected knowledge wise etc.

Do you think that it is good to have them in order to show what level a student has obtain or do you think that they may cause an ego or build a false since of security?

Ego and false sense of security can happen anywhere between white and black belt, I don't think either are rank specific.

I training in two different arts that dont use belts.Traditional Muay Thai (but not the gym that I am training at now) does have a ranking system called "Kru" but its not really highly empsized unless you are planningto be an instructor.My MMA class doesnt use rank either.

I personally perfer not to have the belt system.The reason for this is because,I think that not taining with a belt system takes much of the egotism away.For example if I where a black belt or something and I got beat by a lower ranking practier,it would be humiliating.But if I where to get beat by someone who perhaps hasnt been there as long as me,I would have more of the"this is what I need to work on" attuide in my head(thats just me though).

Alot of times people will ask me"If you dont have belts how to you know where your at ?" I always say,"By your fighting ability".

Im not disagreeing with belts,it just that my personal pefernce is not to use them.

What are your thoughts?

I think they are important, however I am in Tae Kwon do. It seems that the kicking and forms are pretty much standardized between schools. For instance my friend goes to a totally different school than myself yet he learns the exact same wtf forms that I do.

 

[Last Fearner]

do you think that they may cause an ego...
I personally perfer not to have the belt system.The reason for this is because,I think that not taining with a belt system takes much of the egotism away.

Belts don't cause egos - - poor instructors cause egos.

Cause and effect....

My instructor is not senior to me because of the belt he wears.... he wears the belt because he is senior to me. Belts don't make you what you are, they represent what you already are! If your ego grows because of your belt, then you should lose your ego, not the belt. Otherwise, you are taking away the tool that reveals your hidden ego problem. If I can wear a belt without having an inflated ego, then I have conquered any ego problems. If a student can not wear a belt without having an inflated ego, then they have the problem. The problem lies in their head, not around their waist.

An instructor who does not know how to teach students to wear belts, but lose the ego, needs better instruction on how to teach (in my opinion)! The problem lies in the teacher - - not the student, or the belt.

CM D.J. Eisenhart
______________________
Last Fearner

 

[Jonathan Randall]

Belts don't cause egos - - poor instructors cause egos.

Cause and effect....

My instructor is not senior to me because of the belt he wears.... he wears the belt because he is senior to me. Belts don't make you what you are, they represent what you already are! If your ego grows because of your belt, then you should lose your ego, not the belt. Otherwise, you are taking away the tool that reveals your hidden ego problem. If I can wear a belt without having an inflated ego, then I have conquered any ego problems. If a student can not wear a belt without having an inflated ego, then they have the problem. The problem lies in their head, not around their waist.

An instructor who does not know how to teach students to wear belts, but lose the ego, needs better instruction on how to teach (in my opinion)! The problem lies in the teacher - - not the student, or the belt.

CM D.J. Eisenhart
______________________
Last Fearner

Great point.

The belt is just a marking for students of where they are in their training and for masters how much they have contributed to the art AFTER achieving expert level.

 

[MBuzzy]

First, let me frame my arguement. I know that this subject is a source of great debate. I am in the Military, so I definately believe in rank. It is necessary for an organization to function. Even if it is as simple as instructor/student, there must be a line. Second, I think that the idea of using colored belts is a good idea at its core. There are many advantages to the system. I also understand the need for the system, financial, marketing, heirarchy, etc.

With that said, my problem with the belt system is more in how it is interpreted and what it has become. Of course, a great deal of it is marketing and is necessary for studios to exist.

But my question is, shouldn't your rank be more about your ability level than your "time in service." Why do organizations have time limits on how long you must have studied before you are even eligible for a belt. Of course there are reasons for it, but shouldn't it be based on ability, and not time? Some students learn faster than others.

Another point that studying in Korea has brought up....A great deal of instructors in the states "with hold" information. They will only teach you things that you "should" be learning at your level or belt. I even had a school in which you were required to sit down for forms that were above your belt level. This makes no sense to me. Or my Korean instructors. I am taught based on my ability level, not based on my belt color or how long I have been here.

Bottom line is that there are reasons for the system, but I think that the intention has fallen to the wayside because of marketing and finance. I can't count how many times I have seen a lower ranking person perform far beyond that of a higher ranking person, yet they cannot wear the rank because they have to wait another 6 months to test....

 

[MJS]

What are your ideals on a colored belt systems?

Do you perfer to use them or not use them?

We use them at the school I train at. As others have said, I feel that its all in the way the system is used.

Do you think that it is good to have them in order to show what level a student has obtain or do you think that they may cause an ego or build a false since of security?

Of course there is going to be egos. Not everyone is going to have one, but there will be those that do.

I personally perfer not to have the belt system.The reason for this is because,I think that not taining with a belt system takes much of the egotism away.For example if I where a black belt or something and I got beat by a lower ranking practier,it would be humiliating.But if I where to get beat by someone who perhaps hasnt been there as long as me,I would have more of the"this is what I need to work on" attuide in my head(thats just me though).

One thing that some tend to forget on the issue of rank, is that the color or the stripes on the belt does not always equal success in a confrontation or sparring match. I'm a bit confused by your wording in the above quote. In one part, you're saying that if you got beat by a low ranking student, you'd feel humilated, but further down you say it wouldn't be so bad if the student wasn't there as long. Well, chances are if they're a lower belt, it may mean that they have not been there that long, right? Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying here.

Alot of times people will ask me"If you dont have belts how to you know where your at ?" I always say,"By your fighting ability".

Personally speaking, I'm more interested in the training than what belt is around me.

Mike

 

[Eternal Beginner]

Belts don't cause egos - - poor instructors cause egos.

Cause and effect....

My instructor is not senior to me because of the belt he wears.... he wears the belt because he is senior to me. Belts don't make you what you are, they represent what you already are! If your ego grows because of your belt, then you should lose your ego, not the belt. Otherwise, you are taking away the tool that reveals your hidden ego problem. If I can wear a belt without having an inflated ego, then I have conquered any ego problems. If a student can not wear a belt without having an inflated ego, then they have the problem. The problem lies in their head, not around their waist.

An instructor who does not know how to teach students to wear belts, but lose the ego, needs better instruction on how to teach (in my opinion)! The problem lies in the teacher - - not the student, or the belt.

CM D.J. Eisenhart
______________________
Last Fearner

Bravo! Nail hit firmly on head in this post.

Belts do not cause egos...I've trained with many people who do not use belt systems and have encountered just as much ego as in systems that do use belt ranking.

Eliminating belts doesn't eliminate ego, it just eliminates belts.

 

[jks9199]

But my question is, shouldn't your rank be more about your ability level than your "time in service." Why do organizations have time limits on how long you must have studied before you are even eligible for a belt. Of course there are reasons for it, but shouldn't it be based on ability, and not time? Some students learn faster than others.

I don't have a problem with some recognition of time in grade, and especially with minimum times before you can test again. It's one thing to memorize a form and do it. Or to just slug it out with somebody. It takes more time to really begin to internalize the principles of the form.

Another point that studying in Korea has brought up....A great deal of instructors in the states "with hold" information. They will only teach you things that you "should" be learning at your level or belt. I even had a school in which you were required to sit down for forms that were above your belt level. This makes no sense to me. Or my Korean instructors. I am taught based on my ability level, not based on my belt color or how long I have been here.
[/qoute]

Once a student acquires enough to participate in the drills or exercises in class, they participate. They may be pulled aside to learn another basic punch or block, or to learn a form -- but as a general rule, the whole class does the same lesson for the day. It was just expected that more advanced students would learn & perform at a more advanced level as they participated. Within my system, in the past there was very little differentiation in what was taught. A few things were reserved for black belts, and there were restrictions for competition. The competition restrictions were mostly just for fairness; until they were added, we had people doing more advanced forms poorly winning over someone doing a more basic form well.

Bottom line is that there are reasons for the system, but I think that the intention has fallen to the wayside because of marketing and finance. I can't count how many times I have seen a lower ranking person perform far beyond that of a higher ranking person, yet they cannot wear the rank because they have to wait another 6 months to test....

So... to look at it in a different way, should a person straight out of Basic be promoted to sergeant or general? They might march better! Isn't there more to the job than that?

Hopefully, the contrast between students you've seen is more a result of different emphasis than actual promotion beyond their skill. If it's not -- I'd say there's a problem with that promotional process. It's also hard to compare between schools and systems.

 

[Rook]

Well, lets think about one of the primary origional purposes of the belt system - to allow people to tell who they could safely spar/randori with and at what intensity. Without belts, you have to know the capabilities of the person you want to work with by watching, and even then, there are lots of problems, foremost among them the probable lack of interaction between people of different levels in sparring/randori.

 

[funnytiger]

EXCELLENT topic!!!

They do give students something a little more tangible than knowledge and skill to work towards.

I think this is a very important statement. It seems to be echoed throughout most of the responses given who agreed with the belt system.

What are we teaching our kids with this train of thought? Knowledge and skill really should be its own reward. Its not the reality obviously, but in my mind the satisfaction in knowing that I accomplished something on my own is what keeps me thriving and yearning for more.

2. It helps to design a cirriculum of knowledge that way you know what you should be progressivly learning. ... The cirriculum and belt ranking go hand and hand...

At our kwoon we do not have the belt system and yet we still have a curriculum. One does not necessarily need the other.

Belts do not cause egos...I've trained with many people who do not use belt systems and have encountered just as much ego as in systems that do use belt ranking.

Eliminating belts doesn't eliminate ego, it just eliminates belts.

I think it goes without saying you are going to have some bad egos in almost every organization. Belts or no belts. But does a belt system encourage enflated egos?

I'm sure we could debate that until we were blue in the face.

Well, lets think about one of the primary origional purposes of the belt system - to allow people to tell who they could safely spar/randori with and at what intensity. Without belts, you have to know the capabilities of the person you want to work with by watching, and even then, there are lots of problems, foremost among them the probable lack of interaction between people of different levels in sparring/randori.

This could be a key reason why certain styles/schools have a belt system versus those that don't. Where as some school approach sparring a sporty event others approach it as training for real life encounters. First, sparring with someone who is the same level as you is not a very productive way of getting better. You need to learn from someone better than you to get better. Second, a real fight will not be weighed by how much skill you have versus the person your fighting. They aren't going to back off because you aren't as skilled a fighter as them. But that is the difference between training to fight versus training to spar. A completely different thread...

When I sought out a style and school I was most impressed with the schools that did not feel the need to have a belt system. I had never done any kind of MA before and was well aware of how most schools used a belt system. For me it was all a little too intimidating. I didn't want to feel like I was inferior or superior because of a certain colored belt or with x amount of stripes on said belt.

My school uses a traditional family system that unites us as a school. We all see each other a part of a family and respect each other for our roles and positions in that family.


- ft

 

[Kenpojujitsu3]

Short version. The Belt system is helpful to some but not entirely necessary.

Long Version. From an instructor stand point it makes it easier to tell approxiametly where a student is in his/her training. As far as the belt being a motivational tool......I frown upon that and my students know it. They either train for the knowledge and ability or they don't train with me. I can afford the luxury of being this stringent on the "source of motivation" as I choose not to run a commercial dojo but instead run a "private club". the mentality of "I'm training to get to the next belt" doesn't fly with me. So far I haven't had any problems with keeping my people motivated. Some of my students have been keeping their colored belts for years. Not because they aren't good enough but because they want to learn more about what they know instead of learning the next cool new technique. One of my Ju Jitsu white belts just recently ran through an international grappling tournament submitting everyone including an overseas MMA instructor and some Ju Jitsu Brown Belts. His belt is White but he's been with me for 2+ years. He is very good at what he knows but doesn't know the material I deem necessary for a blue belt. In other schools he would be a brown or black belt already given the amount of time he's spent on the mats and his accomplishments.

It all boils down to what motivates a student and what an instructor is willing to allow to be a motivational factor. It also boils down to whether or not an instructor can keep track of who knows what or does he/she need a belt system and curriculum to organize the learning/teaching process.

 

[zDom]

A great deal of instructors in the states "with hold" information. They will only teach you things that you "should" be learning at your level or belt. I even had a school in which you were required to sit down for forms that were above your belt level. This makes no sense to me. Or my Korean instructors. I am taught based on my ability level, not based on my belt color or how long I have been here.

It isn't what you know, it is what you have trained.

You can learn an entire system in a couple of months. But it takes 1,000 repetitions to get a basic idea of a technique, and 10,000 reps to master it.

If you are busy doing things above your rank, you never get the reps you NEED in on the stuff you SHOULD be working on.


Colored belts are a great way for instructors to see at a glance where each student is in the curriculum.

And belts also work as clear goals for the student to focus their training on.

I have seen SO many "two year" black belts who STILL can't make a basic chamber position for their punches, who STILL can't form a proper foot position for a kick, who STILL can't do a proper stance.

Letting a talented student race through the curriculum is a dis-service to the student, a selfish decision by the instructor.

On the other end of the scale, there are some students who will NEVER be able to pull off a pretty jump spinning hook kick. Does that mean they should never be awarded a black belt?

A black belt should a symbol that they have mastered the basics to the best of their ability and are now ready to begin studying the "art."

 

[Haze]

I have ten kyu ranks (Class grades, I like to call them) Reading this gave me an idea. I will start a student out with a black belt with 10 white tips on it and after each test I'll remove a tip untill they have a (all) Black Belt. Then we will start the other way and add Red tips. Tell them the BB represents your potential. The tips are rungs of a ladder you need to climb to reach your potential.

Basicly belt or not, each student is at a level that may be looked up to or down on by others and dealing with the fact that you may not be a high a rank as someone else is part of the total training and experience of what life is realy like. In the world there will be people that are better than you at things and some that are not as good as you at other things. some people will hold posistions that they may not realy deserve. But such is life. And Karate Do or any art that teaches "the way" should be teaching this as well as how to defend ones self.

If the art is only teaching one to fight then the outcome of a fight can be used to determine the pecking order.

 

[w.kaer]

Interesting idea.