Requirement ifferences between WTF and ATA

[Dave Leverich]

Yep, I practice all of the poomse I've learned so far on a regular basis. If I don't run through them regularly I know I'll start forgetting them. Anyway, I've always enjoyed practicing poomse.

IMO, if you put in a focused effort and perform all of the techniques correctly instead of just doing them half-assed, as I've noticed a lot of TKD practitioners tend to do, then poomse practice can be a great workout. It's also a good way to practice TKD when your TKD training partners aren't around.

I couldn't agree more!
Simply doing the entire set of forms and one-steps is a great workout. Again though, you get out what you put in

 

[IcemanSK]

That is just plain sad. Forms are a central, essential part of TKD.

He had just graduated high school. He had good kicking technique, but that about it. I showed him a form once (I think it was Koryo) & he was amazed & said he'd never seen it before.

 

[terryl965]

He had just graduated high school. He had good kicking technique, but that about it. I showed him a form once (I think it was Koryo) & he was amazed & said he'd never seen it before.

That is why we need to have some type of authority to ensure people are getting training from qualified instructors.

 

[Balrog]

You are correct, Iceman. It was a bit unfair of me to specify the ATA in that statement.

I do tend to be less forgiving of some things than I should be. I often to fall into the old trap of "...things were so much tougher in my day..." and things of that nature.

Well, they were.

I don't know about you, but I used to have to catch my own dinosaur to ride to class. If I didn't, I had to hike 15 miles uphill each way. In the snow.

Kids these days have it too easy.

 

[CF'er]

Can someone explain to me the "block" teaching method? I am rather new to this and not sure.

Thanks.

 

[stoneheart]

Can someone explain to me the "block" teaching method? I am rather new to this and not sure.

Thanks.

I'm no expert, but it's a teaching method that allows you to have fewer instructors. If you have a class of students with varying experiences you have to teach different material since the more experienced students will be ready for more advanced forms or techniques. This is usually why in a traditional class after warmups, students will break up into a specific grouping of ranks and work together on their material, but this requires a number of senior students or black belts who can supervise and provide correction as needed.

In a block style class, everyone works on the same material at the same time. So, if this month the focus is on say, Won-Hyo (a green/purple belt form in taekwondo), everyone will work on Won-Hyo even if they are a complete beginner.

I'm not a fan of block-style teaching.

 

[Dave Leverich]

There is much debate about block style teaching (also known as rotational curriculum in other orgs), I think if it's done with small enough blocks it can work, but I also did come up through the ranks traditionally, rank after rank, form after form etc.

Small blocks, taught by good instructors.. Aka, 1-2 or 3 form max (ranks). Won Hyo would be too high for a beginner to start with, I agree. But say your block was White/Yellow (orange etc), and you had Chon-Ji and Dan-Gun as the forms. Then in your white-blue belt class, you have white/yellow doing Chon-Ji and Green/Blue doing say Do-San. Then the next cycle the white and yellows are doing Dan-Gun and the Green/Blues are doing Won Hyo.

It can work, but as instructors they have to make certain the students learn the basics, no foundation, no building etc.

If you have single rank or few ranked classes, I don't see much advantage. Aka a white/yellow class. But say in all belts, where you have some 10 gups, if you have 5 groups to work with vs 10 etc.

I find that if I'm working a class, and say I have 20 students going, if they're doing the same form, I can quickly spot and correct errors.

So, right/wrong, some are for, some very against the system. But it's been shown to work, and to fail, it just depends on how it's applied. I've seen it done well, I've also seen it done very poorly, but then again I'm not sure at those schools the output would have been different without it. It boils down to the instructors being good instructors or not.

 

[Balrog]

So, right/wrong, some are for, some very against the system. But it's been shown to work, and to fail, it just depends on how it's applied. I've seen it done well, I've also seen it done very poorly, but then again I'm not sure at those schools the output would have been different without it. It boils down to the instructors being good instructors or not.

The major shortfall, and one that absolutely cannot be overcome regardless of the skill levels of the instructors, is the fact that block teaching requires students to learn and execute techniques for which they have no foundation.

For example, in the ATA our first three belts are white, orange and yellow. When block was introduced, we were supposed to group the first three ranks, then the next three, then the next three. So we would have scenarios in which someone with no experience whatsoever would join a class that happened to be on yellow belt block. You would have to teach that individual ALL of the white belt basics, ALL of the orange belt basics and ALL of the yellow belt basics in order for them to be able to do the form. You would have them doing jump front kicks before they knew how to do a basic front kick.

Needless to say, those poor folks would not learn the basics properly because they would be totally swamped, like being thrown into the deep end and told to swim the first time you ever came to a pool. And we all know that once something is learned incorrectly, it is far more difficult to unlearn and relearn it correctly.

Some folks modified it to teach white belts by themselves, then block the remaining ranks by twos. That is an improvement, but you still have the issue of someone having to do techniques without having a foundation for them. And sadly, some people have totally gone the other way. I have heard of some schools that block the entire curriculum, so that you might have a beginning student starting with a brown or red belt form!

Aaaarrgghhh! I'll climb down off my soapbox. As you may have gathered, I do not support block teaching. :soapbox:

 

[Dave Leverich]

No arguments here
I think it also adds confusion because you ask someone what the Yellow belt form is, and they go hmmmm (for me it's S3).

 

[wade]

Zdom, I don't agree with you about forms being such an important part of Taekwondo. At least not the TGs and the PGs. Now, that being said, I do require all my students to be able to all the Tae Guks up to their belt level. I require all BB's to know all the forms under them up to their belt level. I do this because it is part of the KKW testing requirements. I do think forms help a player clean up their stances, their technique, focus, breathing, ect, ect, on and on and on. Plus it gives a player who is not a strong fighter a chance to compete and win at another level and still be doing Taekwondo. But! To do forms for the sake of doing forms, no. Besides, my opinion, every time a player does a sparring combination, IE: round kick, dbl punch, round kick, that is a form. It's short but it is still a form. Look at most of the traditional Japanese sword forms, they are extremely short in duration but still very effective in what they teach. So, if it works there, why not in TKD. So although helpful I do not believe they are the central part of TKD. Once again, "my opinion".

 

[zDom]

Zdom, I don't agree with you about forms being such an important part of Taekwondo. At least not the TGs and the PGs. Now, that being said, I do require all my students to be able to all the Tae Guks up to their belt level. I require all BB's to know all the forms under them up to their belt level. I do this because it is part of the KKW testing requirements. I do think forms help a player clean up their stances, their technique, focus, breathing, ect, ect, on and on and on. Plus it gives a player who is not a strong fighter a chance to compete and win at another level and still be doing Taekwondo. But! To do forms for the sake of doing forms, no. Besides, my opinion, every time a player does a sparring combination, IE: round kick, dbl punch, round kick, that is a form. It's short but it is still a form. Look at most of the traditional Japanese sword forms, they are extremely short in duration but still very effective in what they teach. So, if it works there, why not in TKD. So although helpful I do not believe they are the central part of TKD. Once again, "my opinion".

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, then

But to explain what I mean:

What is the difference between ITF TKD, WTF TKD, Tang Soo Do, or even Shotokan?

We all do front stances, roundhouse kicks, side kicks...

Forms are the most consistant indicator among these similar arts. Excepting the forms, a TSD practitioner could probably pass himself off as a TKD practitioner and vice versa. Maybe even pull it off in a Shotokan school.

It is, IMO, the FORMS that make it TKD or TSD or Shotokan or insert any other style, as opposed to just generic "kickboxing."