Doc, do you discount the value of curiosity? In my teaching, I've found that when a student asks a question, it can mean any combination of a number of things:
1. I've not been clear in my presentation.
2. I've not motivated the material properly to give them context.
3. They are not ready for the material being presented.
4. They require a different presentation to understand the material.
5. They are seeking to make connections in their mind between the present lesson and other lessons.
6. They are using their brains and see possibilities and implications of the material beyond the context of the lesson at hand.
And it is my experience when one student asks a question, others have the same question but are too timid to ask. A good answer to a well asked and/or well timed question can make the difference between a great class and just another drill.
No argument with anything you said. However, our curriculum is unique academically and physically, initially geared to one purpose - to the students benefit in developing physical skills. Nothing else, and anything else comes later.
So, "really good and knowledgeable teachers" can decide. But in your lineage, students are not allowed to ask why. Does that mean in your lineage you don't have "really good and knowledgeable teachers"? I mean no disrespect by that question. I mean only to bring to your attention a valid inference that one can draw from your statement.
No need to qualify. My teachers are the best and most well educated group of Kenpo people around. They come to me with vast amounts of education, and I shape their intelligence to teach the skills, and watch them grow in the process - but it is all measured. However i put not only the skill of my students against anyones of comparable level, but their intelligence as well.
Your rule sounds like a good one in a group class dedicated to physical training or first-level instruction. It might even be appropriate in other settings depending on the personalities and goals of your students -- i.e., if they lack discipline or seek only to be fighters.
It sounds like a horrible rule for private lessons, advanced classes, and seminars. And it would run counter to nourishing real students of the art.
You need to reread my posts on the subject sir. Anyone who has ever had an advanced class with me, or a very rare private, (don't believe in them in general), will tell you otherwise.
Wow, Doc. I'm sorry to hear you say that. It seems you think a question is a challenge to your authority instead of an exploration of ideas. If that's the case, then that is sad.
That's probably as far from who I am as you can get. I have written into our curriculum, (which I write in its entirety), something I call a "Challenge Test." Any student at anytime has the right to challenge the "how" of anything to check its efficacy against another method. I feel this is important so that students will believe in material, and therefore will not hesitate to utilize it. But you may only challenge test something that you can do, not things that you cannot, and until you can actually do, you certainly have no need for why.
That is not the attitude I would expect to hear coming from someone who holds a PhD and runs an organization named "The Martial Science University". It is my understanding that the foundation of both the sciences and universities is to always allow the questioning of ideas. I also thought Mr. Parker believed there was always room to challenge what we know or are taught.
You should read what I wrote. Sprinkled throughout are words like, "beginners," or phrases like "in the beginning." I have professional musicians, more than several doctors, a plethora of lawyers, top level government project computer geeks and code writers, college professors, a slew of gun totin' macho cops, federal agents, sheriff's, a fireman or two who run into burning buildings for a living, and more than a couple corporate executives. High powered hard charging people accustomed to giving orders and having people jump. They all get their questions answered at the appropriate time, but I have to admit sometimes I have to stop and ask them if they are going to challenge me on some of the things I've said. Most of the time they just look at me at say, "No, we know better by now. We'll just wait."
Information overload is a more likely scenario, than withholding answers to simple "why's."
Anyone who has ever had a class or seminar with me will attest to this, but in the beginning, I give you the "why's" as I teach, because I know "where" they are. I'll give you an example. I'll watch Bode or someone do something, and their body language will change, and they'll look at me and begin to speak. Before they can get a word out I will say, "Because ........" and answer their question. It easy when you know the question before the student thinks to ask it.
Until someone actually studies with us, they have no idea of the level of sophistication of what we do, and the teaching method. It is not like any other "martial art" class. It is indeed actually, "Martial Science" lecture sprinkled with biomechanical physical performance training.
