# "Rotating curriculum"



## IcemanSK (Dec 14, 2009)

At the very AWESOME Foreign Instructor's Course in Chicago in October, one of the course instructors says he teaches a "rotating curriculum" for all his gup rank students. In this style, all gup students (10th gup-1st gup) do the same form for 3 months, & then they change to a different form. So yellow belts will do Tae Guek Yuk Jang with blue & brown belts. The instructor asked if anyone else in the room teaches this way & a few (5-6 as I recall) raised their hands. 

I can think of all sorts of reasons why this is a terrible idea for students. Starting with the fact that poomsae obviously means nothing for this instructor.

Has anyone else heard of or employed this sort of "rotating curriculum?" How did it work for you? Would you use this idea in your school?


----------



## Laurentkd (Dec 14, 2009)

IcemanSK said:


> At the very AWESOME Foreign Instructor's Course in Chicago in October, one of the course instructors says he teaches a "rotating curriculum" for all his gup rank students. In this style, all gup students (10th gup-1st gup) do the same form for 3 months, & then they change to a different form. So yellow belts will do Tae Guek Yuk Jang with blue & brown belts. The instructor asked if anyone else in the room teaches this way & a few (5-6 as I recall) raised their hands.
> 
> I can think of all sorts of reasons why this is a terrible idea for students. Starting with the fact that poomsae obviously means nothing for this instructor.
> 
> Has anyone else heard of or employed this sort of "rotating curriculum?" How did it work for you? Would you use this idea in your school?


 
I have never actually spoken with anyone who implements this curriculum style (except listening to the seminar), so I am hoping some here have. 
To me it seems the huge obvious flaw would be working on material for 3 months and then not doing it again for a year (at least).  I wonder how anyone tests for black belt and knows all the schools requirements unless only the current form is required to pass (which could be any form).
I hope someone here with some more hands on experience can chime in.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 14, 2009)

IcemanSK said:


> Has anyone else heard of or employed this sort of "rotating curriculum?" How did it work for you? Would you use this idea in your school?



My niece is an ATA black belt.  Her school uses this extensively, but they call it 'block teaching'.  They arrange classes by groupings of 3-4 colored ranks, and it's true enough that you could learn a more advanced pattern before a more basic one, depending on the calendar date you started training.

I don't like the idea myself, but it's a convenience for schools with large amounts of students and few instructors to spread around.  One of the unfortunate side effects can be an insufficient grounding in basics which only hurts the student as they progress upwards.

The master of the school argues block teaching can be successful.  Maybe he's right - he does have at least a hundred students, so he's got that going for him.  I have much fewer so I've never needed to streamline my instruction in such a fashion.


----------



## dbell (Dec 14, 2009)

I'm not sure how one would get the basics learned in order to do the more advanced forms that they come upon if they start in the middle of the curriculum?  I would think this is a bad way of doing things, even if it is only for the Gup level students, regardless of how big the classes are.

The purpose and design of the early forms is to teach the student the basic moves, and progress to adding moves of greater complexity and mixing things together.  How do you teach that, when you start at something more advanced, and don't know the basic stances, punches, kicks, etc?


----------



## stone_dragone (Dec 14, 2009)

When I trained in the ATA, the school I was in hadn't yet gone to the block system, but when I went back a few years later, they had.  The ATA's forms tend to be fit well into blocks, actually.  Each belt has it's own form - white through advanced dan ranks.  

The white, orange and yellow forms are all simple enough to be taught to white belts and are comprised of basics that are in the beginning curriculum of most systems.

The same goes for the next three and the following belts.  It works with the ATA, but I wouldn't want to teach it in any other system.


----------



## Archtkd (Dec 14, 2009)

IcemanSK said:


> At the very AWESOME Foreign Instructor's Course in Chicago in October, one of the course instructors says he teaches a "rotating curriculum" for all his gup rank students. In this style, all gup students (10th gup-1st gup) do the same form for 3 months, & then they change to a different form. So yellow belts will do Tae Guek Yuk Jang with blue & brown belts. The instructor asked if anyone else in the room teaches this way & a few (5-6 as I recall) raised their hands.



If I recall right, Grandmaster Bill Cho  -- to the amazement of some course participants and parents of his students -- said this method of teaching can boost private lessons revenue. i.e. students who missed one of the blocks pay instructors extra to catch up. The method, he seemed to suggest, could be useful if you are a Taekwondo instructor with plans of owning a Bentley.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 14, 2009)

Archtkd said:


> If I recall right, Grandmaster Bill Cho  -- to the amazement of some course participants and parents of his students -- said this method of teaching can boost private lessons revenue. i.e. students who missed one of the blocks pay instructors extra to catch up. The method, he seemed to suggest, could be useful if you are a Taekwondo instructor with plans of owning a Bentley.



Is this the gentleman you are referring to?  http://www.billcho.com/stcharles/cho.php

The articles says he has 1000 families and students enrolled at his school.  Assuming an average tuition of $100 per student, that's enough to buy more than 1 Bentley.  Wow.  He's very successful financially and very young too.


----------



## Archtkd (Dec 14, 2009)

That's him and if you note he's states he's a 6th Dan. He's not as young as he looks, though.


----------



## Archtkd (Dec 14, 2009)

dancingalone said:


> Is this the gentleman you are referring to?  http://www.billcho.com/stcharles/cho.php
> 
> The articles says he has 1000 families and students enrolled at his school.  Assuming an average tuition of $100 per student, that's enough to buy more than 1 Bentley.



Only $100 per month? The good grandmaster might consider that to be an an insult.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 14, 2009)

Archtkd said:


> That's him and if you note he's states he's a 6th Dan. He's not as young as he looks, though.




Dunno anything about his rank, but this article excerpt would put him at around 39, which is young to me.  

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-6137183/Son-s-dream-father-s.html

I guess St. Louis is an expensive city to live in.  Most schools in my area seem to charge around $100-$120 a month.


----------



## Laurentkd (Dec 14, 2009)

dancingalone said:


> Dunno anything about his rank, but this article excerpt would put him at around 39, which is young to me.
> 
> http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-6137183/Son-s-dream-father-s.html
> 
> I guess St. Louis is an expensive city to live in. Most schools in my area seem to charge around $100-$120 a month.


 

I bet Bill Cho charges a lot more than that.... and signs his students on 7 year contracts.  
But let's not hijack the thread, does anyone here train at a school with the rotation curriculum?


----------



## Laurentkd (Dec 14, 2009)

Archtkd said:


> If I recall right, Grandmaster Bill Cho -- to the amazement of some course participants and parents of his students -- said this method of teaching can boost private lessons revenue. i.e. students who missed one of the blocks pay instructors extra to catch up. The method, he seemed to suggest, could be useful if you are a Taekwondo instructor with plans of owning a Bentley.


 
I had forgotten about the private lesson part of the rotation :shrug:


----------



## Archtkd (Dec 14, 2009)

dancingalone said:


> I guess St. Louis is an expensive city to live in.  Most schools in my area seem to charge around $100-$120 a month.



Dancingalone. You are right about the average prices. St. Louis would be about the same, but Grandmaster Cho is a different story. At the FIC course in Chicago, he seemed to suggest such figures are too low. I think a three-year contract for $7,000 or higher was more like the figure he mentioned. Other folks who attended the seminar can correct me if Iam wrong.


----------



## Miles (Dec 14, 2009)

I don't utilize the rotating curriculum and frankly don't understand how it can work regardless of the number of students.  I think the student is better served by having them split in groups of beginner/intermediate/advanced or by keup/belts if you you have a huge number of students.

I can't recall what GM Cho was charging students-I was so fixated on the hot chocolate machine example that I must have zoned out...sorry!


----------



## terryl965 (Dec 14, 2009)

Rotating the curriculim is a bad ideal, except you are trying to make a million of of the school.


----------



## Andrew Green (Dec 14, 2009)

I'm not involved in TKD in any way, but a couple things on the idea of rotating curriculum.

It is a good idea, but one that I think is easy to get wrong.  Most schools have a sort of "core" curriculum that has to go in a specific order, and a bunch of other stuff that is less dependent.

In a TKD school I could see this being self-defence material, weapons, grappling (if your school does any)

Those thing it might make sense to rotate, and possibly even some of the forms, but roing the entire curriculum I think would be a mistake.  Things do build off of previous material and students like to feel they are learning more advanced things.  If the Brown belts are being taught the same things as the white belts something has likely gone wrong.  It could possibly even give a poor impression to the whites as they would see people that have been training for a couple years struggling with the same things, and in the case of a natural athlete might even be doing better then the browns.

But, lets say your school does 3 weapons: Staff, Sai & Nunchaku.  It doesn't really matter what order they learn them in.  If you take the 3 rank groups that should be learning those and group them together you simplify teaching as you have 1 group instead of 3.  You also have more people to pair up for partner drills, also a plus.

It does come with draw backs though, everyone has to move at the same pace.  Which is where that private lessons thing comes in.  If you miss a few classes the class doesn't wait for you, so the school uses that as a means to catch you up.  Might even increase retention, as people would hopefully be less likely to skip a few classes if they knew they would actually fall behind, rather then just picking up where they left off.

It's almost more of a academic model to teaching.  Where you need to complete x number of credit hours to graduate.  While there are some prerequisites a lot of the courses can be taken in any order, at least within some sort of grouping (ex 1st year courses, 2nd year courses, etc)


----------



## xfighter88 (Dec 15, 2009)

Archtkd said:


> If I recall right, Grandmaster Bill Cho -- to the amazement of some course participants and parents of his students -- said this method of teaching can boost private lessons revenue. i.e. students who missed one of the blocks pay instructors extra to catch up. The method, he seemed to suggest, could be useful if you are a Taekwondo instructor with plans of owning a Bentley.


 
I can't say I am a fan of this method especially if that is the motivation behind it. A white belt learning hwa-Rang before Chung Ji is a bad idea. It's so weird. What is the point of a belt system when the black belt forms could be introduced to yellow belts and black belts at the same time.

The only redeeming thing that I could see in this is that a lower belt can see how sharp the movements should be by watching the other higher belts.


----------



## bluekey88 (Dec 15, 2009)

This is an interesting discussion.  I definitely see the inherent flaws of rotating or blocking the entire curriculum.  However, in my school, the system is also flawed.  We split the classes up by relative rank (beginner, intermediate advanced) and then split those classes up by rank.  for each rank there is a set list of material they have to master to test.  When a student does a technique well enough they would pass at a grading, they get a piece of tape on their belt.  When they get all their tape, they can request to test.  

I like this system in that it lets me know what students need to work on from class to class (I don;t always work with the same group from week to week).  It lets the kids know what they need to work on as well.  

However, it has flaws.  I find that physically gifted students tend to get tape pretty quickly ( Try to limit that by not handing out more than 2 pieces of tape when I teach...not all other instructors do that though).  The kids get the idea that once they have the tape that they"got it" and the stop practicing.  No matter how often I tell them to keep practicing....they won't.  As things progress, a cohort of students will tend to working the missing tape and not review as much.  This isn't a big deal if they all get their tape quickly and there is a lot of time between when this happens and the next test...then we spend a few classes reviewing.  However, if one student struggles with a technique or two...those get focused on in the group...and the stuff that they got early on doesn't get the same level of review.  I find this to be problematic.

So, I think the solution is to rotate certain aspects of the instruction (Focus on forms one week, sparring the next, one step the net week, etc.)  rotate the focus of instruction from week to week maybe e over the course of the month.  So Everyone focuses on forms and form related stuff one week but they do so at their rank level (No one is learning a form that's above their rank/experience level).  If the don't get it, it'll roll around again later.  This would slow down the advancement,ent for many students, but I think would help guarantee that stuff gets reviewed more often.

Thoughts?

Peace,
Erik


----------



## granfire (Dec 15, 2009)

bluekey88 said:


> So, I think the solution is to rotate certain aspects of the instruction (Focus on forms one week, sparring the next, one step the net week, etc.)  rotate the focus of instruction from week to week maybe e over the course of the month.  So Everyone focuses on forms and form related stuff one week but they do so at their rank level (No one is learning a form that's above their rank/experience level).  If the don't get it, it'll roll around again later.  This would slow down the advancement,ent for many students, but I think would help guarantee that stuff gets reviewed more often.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> ...



We have a break neck speed between tests. there is a lot of stuff to cram into 8 weeks, so we 'rotate' content during the cycle. first we prioritize forms then sparring or one/three steps etc.

and 8 weeks go by quick! 

the ranks are also split, so you have the beginners (white and yellow) intermediate (green and blue) and advanced (brown through black) together. Though with kids ranging from 6 to 14, I'd prefer a split in age over the rank...

Adult classes are usually mixed, there are not as many of us.

(and everytime the Bentley is mentioned I feel the urge to giggle...awesome)


----------



## dortiz (Dec 15, 2009)

This is complete problem focused on a business model and not a teaching one. 

Sad.

Dave O.


----------



## dortiz (Dec 15, 2009)

"It's almost more of a academic model to teaching. Where you need to complete x number of credit hours to graduate. While there are some prerequisites a lot of the courses can be taken in any order, at least within some sort of grouping (ex 1st year courses, 2nd year courses, etc) "

Yes, but you cant take French III until you have taken basic French. And taking a business economics class has nothing to do with your Volleyball elective course.

Its not the same thing. Martial Arts are about foundation and building skills through muscle memory. People have a natural learning cycle of 4 steps. Novice, good enough to be dangerous, I got it to I can teach it. It applies to everything. The school model works because you can go through the cycle of learning in each class as its different. This is about one process that needs to be learned in a way that builds upon it self.

Dave O.


----------



## Andrew Green (Dec 15, 2009)

dortiz said:


> "It's almost more of a academic model to teaching. Where you need to complete x number of credit hours to graduate. While there are some prerequisites a lot of the courses can be taken in any order, at least within some sort of grouping (ex 1st year courses, 2nd year courses, etc) "
> 
> Yes, but you cant take French III until you have taken basic French. And taking a business economics class has nothing to do with your Volleyball elective course.
> 
> ...



If you think French 1 -> French 2 -> French 3, then you are right.  But does martial arts work like that?

Year 1
------
Forms 1
Sparring 1
Self-Defence 1
Weapons 1
Grappling 1

Year 2
------
Forms 2
Sparring 2
Self-Defence 2
Weapons 2
Grappling 2

etc.

Now each of those could probably be broken down into chunks that are not dependent on each other.  Break each into 3  ex (Grappling = Takedowns, Top & Bottom)  Perhaps with a core set of things that are always taught and you have 15 "chunks" right there.

3-weeks on each chunk and you have 3 years worth of curriculum for 3 different levels.  So to do that you would need 3 sets of classes.

White / Yellow / Orange
Green / Blue 
Brown

Students spend a year in each class then move to the next one, having been through all the material regardless of when they actually started.

I've also seen some people that push this idea suggest a separate "intro" program. A separate class that a new students is in for 3-months or so, to learn the basics so that they can jump into the "regular" classes.

That's rather simplified, but is the basic idea.  You can do shorter cycles and repeat them, or overlap your "chunks", etc.  Whatever suits the curriculum.

It's really not that different from what most people are already doing for most of the class, just a little more structured.

If you have a class full of people for most of the class they will be doing the same thing, but won't all have been their the same amount of time. 

If I go in tonight and teach throws / takedowns off a underhook I will have people that have been training a short while doing them, and I will have people that have been training for a couple years doing them.  I've never sat down and drawn up a full curriculum & schedule, but we definately do things in small chunks.  Depending on when someone starts they get those chunks in a different order.


----------



## granfire (Dec 15, 2009)

dortiz said:


> This is complete problem focused on a business model and not a teaching one.
> 
> Sad.
> 
> Dave O.



which are you talking about?

the breakneck speed of testing or the need to buy private lessons to keep up?


----------



## Andrew Green (Dec 15, 2009)

granfire said:


> which are you talking about?
> 
> the breakneck speed of testing or the need to buy private lessons to keep up?




Both of those can be done regardless of how you manage your class and have nothing to do with this model.  Any model, that is actually structured around teaching a group will give you the opportunity to try and push private lessons.

Suppose I have a straight linear progression with specific start dates.  You join, then miss 3 weeks of classes at some point, should the whole group go back for you?  Even if we repeat, it's really not fair to the rest of the group who have already spent 3-weeks working on something to then have you come back and slow down the group trying to get caught up.  Same thing would happen if you missed 3-weeks in a academic class, when you come back you are behind, you have missed material that is likely required before you can move forward.

There are other ways to deal with this sort of thing, but private lessons is probably the most profitable.  But it has to do with group classes, not rotating vs linear.

For example, if you join a group guitar class.  You miss a few weeks where some chords are learnt and practiced, then come back as the group is working on a song using those chords.  What should the instructor do?  Let you fall behind? Offer private lessons to catch you up? Slow down the group while you catch up?

You might even get the benefit of increased attendance, if missing classes actually effects your training.  On the flip side you might lose more if they feel they have fallen behind due to missing classes and decide to just not come back.


----------



## granfire (Dec 15, 2009)

well, yes and no, because academical classes are aiming to get you out of the school. You pay for a limited amount of time.

If you have folks from beginner to advanced BB in one group, you have a different problem. 

If I miss 3 weeks (which has happened) I am exactly where I was before. I might miss one grading, but that is about it. 

The again I have no experience with schools that have 1000+ families enrolled. I think ours is a big fish in the market with around 100 students.

But with a school that is open 6 days a week, you get plenty of chances to catch up without being pushed for extra private lessons.


----------



## Dusty (Dec 15, 2009)

I teach a rotating curriculum at my school. If you have any questions, ask away and i will try my bes to answer them.
Dusty, kj


----------



## msmitht (Dec 15, 2009)

While I believe that a rotating curriculum on poomsae is ridiculous, I do rotate kicking techniques and combination on a weekly basis. For example :
Week 1 Chun-gin/Il Bo Chun-gin foot work with rear leg attacks. Week 2 Hoo-Gin/Il bo Hoo-gin foot work with rear leg attacks. I then switch back to week 1 but with lead leg attacking kicks...etc. It works for those type of techniques.


----------



## sadantkd (Dec 15, 2009)

The rotating curriculum is the worst thing I've ever seen.  I'm exagerating maybe just a little bit, but it really is awful.  I hope to God you misunderstood the way this guy uses the rotating curriculum though.  Every school I know of that uses it, changes every two months, and there are basically 3 levels that do 3 different forms.  Plus white belts who always do the first kibon form.  This program is still completely horrible though.


----------



## IcemanSK (Dec 16, 2009)

sadantkd said:


> The rotating curriculum is the worst thing I've ever seen.  I'm exagerating maybe just a little bit, but it really is awful.  *I hope to God you misunderstood the way this guy uses the rotating curriculum though.*  Every school I know of that uses it, changes every two months, and there are basically 3 levels that do 3 different forms.  Plus white belts who always do the first kibon form.  This program is still completely horrible though.



I heard him say, "every student regardless of rank does the same form for 3 months. Then they rotate to another form." Is that what the rest of you folks who went to the FIC heard him say, or did I get it wrong?

Sandantkd, I may have miss heard him over his diatribe on how he screws students out of large sums of cash...in front of them & their parents!


----------



## Archtkd (Dec 16, 2009)

IcemanSK: I think I heard GM Cho say the same thing you heard.


----------



## Laurentkd (Dec 16, 2009)

Archtkd said:


> IcemanSK: I think I heard GM Cho say the same thing you heard.


 
Ditto


----------



## StudentCarl (Dec 16, 2009)

1.    In my experience with high school soccer, where some athletes have been playing since age 5, way too much of our coaching time is spent trying to teach correct technique after they've learned and used bad technique (habits) for years.  Lower level students can 'do' the higher forms, but aren't they more appropriate for students who have the fundamentals in place.  I think it would be harder, not easier, to try to teach advanced techniques while also teaching basics to the same student.  Doesn't something get neglected?
2.    Aren't poomsae also intended to teach stance, movement, and the fundamentals of power (including use of hips, momentum, reaction force, and focus), and probably other lessons I've yet to learn?  Can a student fully benefit from the principles of higher poomsae without the foundation?
If not, then the instructor will need to teach each student higher aspects of each poomsae each time it comes around in the rotation?  Seems like it would fragment learning and make teaching harder too. I've been taught that there are principles underlying the poomsae and the sequence of their instruction.
3.    Doesn't this make it hard for students to compete in poomsae at tournaments?  Does a green belt perform Chil Jang if he hasn't learned Sam Jang yet?
4.    This thread makes me thankful I chose my instructor carefully.
StudentCarl


----------



## dortiz (Dec 16, 2009)

"Suppose I have a straight linear progression with specific start dates. You join, then miss 3 weeks of classes at some point, should the whole group go back for you? Even if we repeat, it's really not fair to the rest of the group who have already spent 3-weeks working on something to then have you come back and slow down the group trying to get caught up. Same thing would happen if you missed 3-weeks in a academic class, when you come back you are behind, you have missed material that is likely required before you can move forward."

Here lies the problem..or difference. For many learning TKD has been about the individual, not a team sport. So to us its been a place where each person learns as they learn. Some faster some slower most at the same pace. But they learn from basics up. At a point dictated by belt level (in our world now). They find equal ground. Again someone may get to that level in 2 months, some in 4 but at that point wearing that green belt they all have learned and can show that same general abilities. 
Those levels are measurings sticks in progression. NOT TIME. 
Roatating a curriculum confuses this basic concept.

Dave O.


----------



## Miles (Dec 16, 2009)

msmitht said:


> While I believe that a rotating curriculum on poomsae is ridiculous, I do rotate kicking techniques and combination on a weekly basis. For example :
> Week 1 Chun-gin/Il Bo Chun-gin foot work with rear leg attacks. Week 2 Hoo-Gin/Il bo Hoo-gin foot work with rear leg attacks. I then switch back to week 1 but with lead leg attacking kicks...etc. It works for those type of techniques.


 
I do the same thing with the same material except week 3 is combination kicks and week 4 is spinning and jumping kicks.  I ad-lib when I get a month with 5 weeks.


----------



## dortiz (Dec 16, 2009)

I think rotating a schedule of rpactice is not the same thing as what was being proposed. I like knowing one week or weekday is X kicking techniques and another sparring drills etc.
I would bet that you guys also still tailor the coaching to the individuals level. 
Just as you dont expect the white belt to pada chagi flying off the target you dont expect them to do a form 4 levels above.
Yes?

Dave O.


----------



## Miles (Dec 17, 2009)

dortiz said:


> I think rotating a schedule of rpactice is not the same thing as what was being proposed. .....
> 
> Just as you dont expect the white belt to pada chagi flying off the target you dont expect them to do a form 4 levels above.
> Yes?
> ...


 
Correct!  I have a set schedule in which we are introducing (or reinforcing for more experienced students) techniques and concepts.


----------

