The purpose and value of testing

[Kacey]

I originally wrote this in response to another thread, 5 year old black belts?, but I have decided it deserves a thread of it's own.

Please take these as the serious questions that they are; I am asking for clarification, not attempting to be negative about your system or your opinion.

The tests are the same for everyone, but weighted differently for different people. You certainly cannot expect a 45 year old woman to perform at the same level as a 22 year old athletic male.
I do agree with the idea that martial arts is a journey.

If the test is "different" for each person, depending on his/her physical ability, then what does that do for your "standard" for black belt? I'm not saying that more athletically able people shouldn't be pushed to improve, and I'm not saying that less athletically able people shouldn't be able to earn a black belt - but if the test is different, then what is the standard that they are all demonstrating? And taking this back to the topic of the thread, could a 5 year-old then, by that same individualization, demonstrate the age/gender/size appropriate skill to be a black belt in your system?

However, I also believe that if students have to wait 5 years or more to test for black belt, the motivation to improve themselves dramatically decreases. Every organization tests for higher rank. However, if you know that a testing will take place within 2-3 months, chances are you will put more time and energy into mastering the techniques and forms to be ready for testing. If testings are every 8-9 months, there is no sense of urgency and less motivation to master the techniques since you have to wait 9 months.

My class tests every 3-4 months - but not every student tests. If a student is ready to test, then s/he test; if not, then s/he has to wait for the next testing cycle. Some of my best students are those who missed 1 or more testings because of lack of effort, who kept coming to class and working harder; one of my very best students is a woman who got excessively nervous, failed her first black belt test, stayed in class, and tested again, successfully.... having waited an additional 9 months for the next black belt test.

In this sense, a Taekwondo instructor and a school teacher are similar. Both operate under a timeframe, so to speak, and if the student isn't learning eventually it comes down to how is he being taught?

Is testing the only way student learning can be evaluated? I don't think so. Testing shows big steps - but little steps are taken, and evaluated by the instructor, every time the student comes to class. As a middle school teacher, I evaluate my students every day by watching their performance in class, looking for skills that they are improving, so I can move them up to the next level, and looking for skills that they are having difficulty with, so I can provide more in-depth instruction. As a TKD instructor, I do the same thing. Day-to-day instruction is a continual evaluation, used for formatively (to guide instruction); the actual testing is summative, used to demonstrate mastery of certain skills at certain levels, so that students can move to the next level. But there are plenty of arts where belt ranks don't exist; how do those arts keep students? And there are others where promotions are informal, in class, as the instructor decides the student is ready for the next level; how do those arts keep students? And then, too, I've met a few students who didn't want to test - they were happy where they were, getting out of the art what they wanted from it.

 

[Ybot]

Coming from Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu I can't fathom this idea that the only way to keep a student training is to offer them different colored strips of material every few months. There is no rush for me to get to the next belt level, I enjoy training, and will be training to improve my Jiu-Jitsu game long after I reach black belt. Where I train there are no tests. You are given your belt when my instructor sees that you are at that level.

 

[Twin Fist]

testing serves a vital role in a martial arts system.

Think of it as a "stress test"

to see if they can perform under pressure.

 

[terryl965]

Testing has two primary goals for most Martial Arts:

1) they serve as a common goal and a bar for each and every student in whatever association you are with. Withen that association it is mainly a minimum standard, ot a norm for all.

2) They serve as a way for most to judge there success in the Arts, for whatever reason here in the western part of the world we need recognition that we are improving and that said belt gives it to some.

 

[KELLYG]

At my school everyone takes the same test, especially at black belt level, young old male and female. We are tested in front of a board of Masters from other schools. These tests are extremely taxing mentally, and physically. From what I understand a person is not invited to test unless they have already met the minimum requirements. That does not mean automatic pass. I being an older person am not held to the same standard as an elite sparing team member, but that does not mean that the level of effort that I am giving is any different that the next person. It will look different. For example due to lack of flexibility my round house kick my not be as high as the next persons but the technique should be just as clean. Even with that said the techniques or skill level from fist to second and second to third should be noticeable even to the untrained eye. I think tests are important just like a previous poster stated it is a "Stress Test". I also think that it helps the instructors to see what there students are doing as a group so that they can make improvements that they will share with the entire student body. So I think that everyone involved gains something from testing.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Coming from Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu I can't fathom this idea that the only way to keep a student training is to offer them different colored strips of material every few months.

I think that a student who requires constant belt tests to keep interested is either a child or is being pushed so little in their training that they need the test to 'tell' them that they've progressed, in which case, they probably haven't.

Funny how its only in the martial arts that a belt is required for people to feel that they've improved. I don't think that it is a western phenomenon, so much as it was packaged with the belt system when it came here and comercialization has altered it from meaning that you'd attained a certain level of skill to meaning that you've merely trained a certain number of months. Giving belts originally was only done to indicate a student's progress beyond a measured quantity. Now, they're given to 'build confidence' and make little Johnny feel good about himself.

Athletes, be they school age, high school, college or pro, do not need to be reaffirmed with a belt. If they're good, the coach starts them. If they're not, they're either benched, cut from the team, or never make the team in the first place. Ability and skill are rewarded by time on the field.

Kicks and punches are measurable in their effectiveness. When you kick the target correctly, it makes a certain sound. When you don't, it makes a different sound. When you notice that you get sound A more often than sound B, or instead of sound B, then you know that your kick has improved. When you can see that you're kicking higher, then you know that your kick has improved. Blocks and punches can, likewise be measured quite easily, even by a novice.

I see great value in a test; as Twin Fist said, it is a stress test, kind of like a recital is for a violin student. What testing does, in my eyes, is provide all in the dojang with a visible indicator of how far each student has progressed and what material they should know. It grounds the student in reality, not just telling her that she improved, but exactly how she has improved and with an indication of where she needs to work. In short, it lets you know that you aren't there yet.

It also allows a student to have a point of reference, markers along the journey, if you will. The test also challenges the student, and it is in overcoming the challenge that the student's confidence is bolstered, not the mere reception of a belt. The belt should signify the difficult challenge that the student faced and overcame, for it is therein that the belt's value lies. The test must be uniform for each student at each level, for then the student knows that he or she has truly gone where their more advanced classmates and their masters have gone.

But if the test is pathetically easy, or the belt and certificate merely the inevitable afterbirth of attendence and payment, then it has no value, for it represents nothing. 'Sound and fury signifying nothing', so to speak.

Daniel

 

[igillman]

I think that testing can be weighted according to age very easily. The standard for most of a black belt test does not need to change. Basic TKD knowledge and terminology, the ability to perform and teach the forms, step sparring etc... can all be the same. The physical ability (not TKD ability but things like push ups, sit ups and running) can change based upon age. After all, the 18 year old kid is supposed to be fitter than a 65 year old person. If you set the standard to be what the 18 year old can do then anyone who starts TKD in their 30's has almost no chance of becoming a black belt no matter how well they teach, spar and know their stuff.

I think you have to ask yourself, what is it important for a black belt to able to do? Is it really necessary for them to be able to do 100 push ups in 1 minute or not? If it is necessary to be that fit then how often do they need to be retested to keep the belt? The standard is in place for the new belts, no matter what their age or expertise so why shouldn't it be an annual thing? If a black belt needs to be able to teach moves, techniques, forms and sparring then that is what they should be tested on. After all, it can be argued that a black belt should be intelligent as well so you could set questions on differential calculus and chemistry as part of the test.

Maybe a black belt should not be able to be achieved by everyone but only by a select few who are young and train 5 days a week for 2 hours a day. If that is the case then the bar can be set very high as only those people will ever be able to make it. But now the question of money rises up. If you set the bar too high then you discourage the average guy on the street who takes his money elsewhere. If you set it too low then you cheapen the idea of a black belt as anyone is now able to get one.

Personally, I am happy at green belt. I am in it for the fitness and, as a green belt, I get to do everything that everybody else is doing (running, jumping etc...) so I see no reason to pay more money to get a different coloured belt around my waist. The green is dark enough so that I look like I am not a new guy and I get to do the more complicated kicks with the higher belts. To go higher in rank would simply mean that I do the same stuff but my belt has a different colour to it.

 

[ChingChuan]

In my art, there are no 'real' ranks. We've got an instructor, an assistant instructor, several people who have trained for a long time and several people that have just joined - and that's it.
However, we do have tests because it's a good way to see how someone performs under stress. My instructor even said it, when he asked who wanted to participate - a test is just a way to see how you cope with stress.
When you've passed a test, you get a nice certificate (no belt or something) and on it, there's a rank, but those ranks aren't the true goal of the test - no-one looks at it, and I bet that even the instructor himself forgets who has what rank - it isn't important at all. This is also because not our entire curriculum is tested during a test. You only need to show the jurus (short forms) and a few practical applications, though we cover a lot more in the lessons. So, having passed a test in my art doesn't say anything apart from the fact that you know your jurus well and that you know how to defend yourself against one or two attackers - but it doesn't show how well you know the art itself.

The test also challenges the student, and it is in overcoming the challenge that the student's confidence is bolstered, not the mere reception of a belt. .

I agree with you.
A couple of months ago, I tested for the first time, and I really enjoyed the process. It's because of this atmosphere, the extra training I got - usually we're not really perfectionistic - as long as it works and looks okay, then it's all right - but prior to the tests, I had to get every detail right, every hand in exactly the right position, etc. It was nice to see the jurus from a different perspective.
Also, I did a test in 12 jurus (usually it's only 6, but I asked and my instructor said that it was okay) and it was a real challenge to get them perfect - I practised a lot at home etc. etc. So, the test indeed challenged me, it was just fun to do something different.

Anyway, I'm happy with the way we do it... We don't focus on the tests - they're not even properly planned (the test in March was supposed to be in january) - but when they're near, there's a sudden focus on getting all the details right and that is very refreshing. Not that we're sloppy all the time, but there's a difference in correctly excuting a technique and making the technique look both 'nice' and effective. (after all, doing a jurus / form on your own is also a bit of a stage play)

However, I don't think that the people that need tests to reassure them of their level are being childish. After all, what do we do in schools? I guess that the educational systems of the Netherlands and America are roughly the same - they rely on tests and marks to measure the student's progress and skill. Most people do want to get nice marks etc - it motivates them into studying.
So, we're all used to that kind of a society, in which marks serve as an incentive to do something. How can we blame the people that think of belts and tests that way?
Of course, I don't think it's right - but I think I'm a bit hypocritical there, as I did exactly the same in school for a long time..

 

[Xue Sheng]

Testing is important to MA they show what you have learned they show what you have to work on (your strengths and weaknesses) but it is not always an official test and there are not always ranks or belts involved

I train CMA and for example my Taiji Sifu will test me but I do not know it is coming, to see how I respond to his attack and my Sanda Sifu works exactly the same way. Today I was tested; today I got thumbed in the chest today. I was tested again and this time I did not get thumbed but I did not pass with flying colors either I need to listen more closely.

No rank, no schedule, no belt awarded just a lesson learned from a surprise test... and all tests are a surprise (and some are painful) in what I train.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Testing, in any disipline, is a bench mark. It's a way of seeing where the student is at that given moment. In that reguard it's of great value if the test is a good one (and worthless if the test is a poor one!)

As for belt ranks, let's be honest. If the student is not a 'true believer', that is one that is dedicated and does not care all that much for belt ranks (it's real easy for me to tell students don't worry about the rank, me being already a 5th dan...), then they do need a bit of encouragment.

Sounds hokie? Well even Napoleon Bonaparte commented on the value of ribons to denote valor and how they encouraged soldiers to do more. Same for belt ranks.

As for how many years to make Dan rank. It all depends on the art. I remember John Chu saying it takes 10 years to make Dan in Kung Fu (I don't know what version of it he was talking about), but as long as the student sees bench marks to denote their progress, I'm sure they will be encouraged.

It's not having any idea what level of skill you are at that makes students doubt the value of what they are doing.

Deaf

 

[Sigung86]

Having started in Shotokan Karaté, in 1963 and still actively teaching, I have, what I suspect is not a clear, concise opinion on testing. When I was being tested, I was always pumped for it, but at the same time, full of trepidation regarding my ability to “please the teacher”. Fortunately, in those halcyon days, there weren’t nearly the number of colors to have to test for – White, Brown, Black. So test anxiety didn’t occur that often. LOL

Nowadays, some 45 years after the fact, and having gotten my Black with degrees in Kenpo, I’ve run the gamut of testing conditions. My personal feelings on the subject are different than my actions. As I have a very small, non-commercial, come and train for free, type of school, I would be quite content to simply test for the first three levels, just so the student has the experience, and then after that, pass the belt out as the student qualifies. However, the students seem to enjoy the testing procedure, and so I test. The issue here, is quality control. Am I as strict when testing as I would be otherwise? I’m the only instructor these students have, and I know each of them, both as student, and as family. Does this negate the testing? For me it does, but then my situation is “relatively” unique.

In the original Chinese systems, the ‘”belts”/sashes were to support the back through violent movement, hold the pants up, and keep the tops closed. The Japanese system of belt grading (Kyu, and Dan ranks) are, or were, awarded in Judo, Karate, literature, Parcheesi, chess, and so on. So, it was carried to the Western versions of the arts with the later addition of many “in-between” graded steps and a rainbow of belt colors.

The testing has also, over the years, become a vast source of extra income for the school/instructor. I hear of expensive belt test fees with rates for Black Belt testing going from the standard expensive to sublimely exorbitant … When, it seems that as the student advances, sh/he ought to get some type of back patting instead of back stabbing for her or his effort. Even the military now offers graded belts (I assume with tests, or perhaps contests) for proficiency in their particular brand of art. And I’m not too sure how appropriate a camouflaged belt is…

Personally, I think that the testing phase is slightly useful as a stress creator, but I am not so very sure that it is useful as a method of determining a student’s rite of passage, and capabilities regarding advancement. I guess, bottom line is that I do it, because it’s expected, not because it’s necessary, oh... And I don't charge testing fees, either.

 

[bowser666]

I think tests are important because it gives everyone a sense of accomplishment. IMO it is a great feeling to pass a test , join in the Tea ceremony, and be awarded your certificate. I take pride in that fact that I accomplished it. That is just me though.

 

[Empty Hands]

The Belt system is deeply embedded in the collective imagination of the Western world as to what makes a martial art. It isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

However, I don't think that the people that need tests to reassure them of their level are being childish. After all, what do we do in schools? I guess that the educational systems of the Netherlands and America are roughly the same - they rely on tests and marks to measure the student's progress and skill. Most people do want to get nice marks etc - it motivates them into studying.
So, we're all used to that kind of a society, in which marks serve as an incentive to do something. How can we blame the people that think of belts and tests that way?
Of course, I don't think it's right - but I think I'm a bit hypocritical there, as I did exactly the same in school for a long time..

I agree with you; needing the test for reassurance is not at all childish. It is only childish if you need constant testing to maintain interest. It is lack of maturity in the art if you need the test to tell you that you've improved at all. The test should reveal the level of improvement to the student, not its mere presence.

The school analogy is good, and in that scenario, more for the teachers to measure the student's progress than the other way around; The student knows if they know the material and if they've properly prepared before they ever sit down to test. What the school room test does most for the student is to help them to overcome choking when put on the spot. Since you need the test grades to graduate, and since you have no choice regarding school attendence, you learn to take tests. This is good; every day, life presents us with tests. Failure in life's tests has greater repercussions than merely a poor letter grade or the denial of a belt.

Great post, by the way, ChingChuan

Daniel

 

[Phoenix44]

After years of thinking about this, I've come to the conclusion that testing and rank do serve a purpose. They acknowledge the fact that the student has achieved a certain level of skill and knowledge, and point him/her in the direction of the next collection of tasks to be tackled.

It isn't a matter of "a piece of colored cloth" being necessary to keep a student training. Even kids realize that you can buy any colored belt you want online--but that doesn't mean you've achieved anything. They have a pretty good sense of what's "fair." And even adults appreciate validation and direction. At work, you expect raises and advancement for a job well done.

Whatever discipline or goal you're pursuing, reaching some designated landmark feels good. A sense that you're not advancing, or a loss of direction, increases the likelihood that you'll quit. And that's true at any age, whether or not it involves a belt or rank.

And by the way, at our school, the 20 year old men and the 45 year old women (and even the 12 year old kids) get the same gruelling test, and neither totally outperforms the other. We've found that they each have different strengths and weaknesses.

 

[shihansmurf]

http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2006/10/09/when-to-test/

http://www.24fightingchickens.com/category/ranks-exams/

These are the best articles I have ever read on the subject of testing. I encourage ALL instructors to read and apply.


For me I think a test should be a short display of skill. More of a formality.
The experience gives the student a feeling of having completed a rite of passage, but in truth I know beforehand if they are ready. I constantly evaluate my students progress as they train and would personaly feel comfortable with dispensing with the test but it is one the traditions that seem to be a sacred cow.

I also don't charge testing fees above the cost of the belt so that my color my position, and as I promote through Yellow, Green, Brown and Black it doesn't amount to more than about 20-25 dollars in testing fees all the way up. I use stripe rank but there is no charge for those tests.

I really like the way most BJJ schools handle promotions. When you can consistantly compete with people the next rank up, then you promote.

Mark

 

[Shicomm]

What bothers me about testing that in theory it should be something that's always the same.
As it's something 'by the book'
A bit strange since we're al humans and therefor we all vary.

Then there is also the point of people that are affraid of testing.
It could be of various reasons but in some cases it's just too bad that it stresses some people that do just fine in training and at competitions but just "freeze" when they have to test.

Imho every training is a test and a teacher is very well able to judge you on your training.

Just some toughts

 

[tshadowchaser]

Testing:
builds confidence in the person being tested.
it makes some practice harder
it allows one to evaluate their progress
shows that the instructor recognizes your efforts and abilities
makes big money for some schools

all may take the same test but not all are judged or expected to perform at the same level. example: if you have a 20 year old in top athletic condition he will be able to do things differently than a 40 year old that has a handicap. both will do the same requirements but are viewed upon their own ability

 

[Kacey]

What bothers me about testing that in theory it should be something that's always the same.
As it's something 'by the book'
A bit strange since we're al humans and therefor we all vary.

Then there is also the point of people that are affraid of testing.
It could be of various reasons but in some cases it's just too bad that it stresses some people that do just fine in training and at competitions but just "freeze" when they have to test.

Imho every training is a test and a teacher is very well able to judge you on your training.

Just some toughts

If you freeze in testing... what will happen in a truly high stress situation, such as self-defense? If you cannot demonstrate what you've learned in a high-stress but safe environment - what good will it be to you if it's really needed some day?

Testing:
builds confidence in the person being tested.
it makes some practice harder
it allows one to evaluate their progress
shows that the instructor recognizes your efforts and abilities
makes big money for some schools

all may take the same test but not all are judged or expected to perform at the same level. example: if you have a 20 year old in top athletic condition he will be able to do things differently than a 40 year old that has a handicap. both will do the same requirements but are viewed upon their own ability

Indeed. There are minimum standards that must be observed by all students, such as knowing all the moves correctly in required tuls - but there are other things, such as how high you can jump when doing jump kicks, and how long you can keep doing them, that will depend on age, size, gender, and physical condition.

 

[Shicomm]

If you freeze in testing... what will happen in a truly high stress situation, such as self-defense? If you cannot demonstrate what you've learned in a high-stress but safe environment - what good will it be to you if it's really needed some day?

Well not all arts / styles are there for self defence , arts like kyudo or bajutsu for example.
I'm not very well known with those arts but i think they also test.

Everybody could freeze up in a real life situation , there are tons of stories about even competitive people that couldnt use their skills.
I think that's just human , nothing wrong with that