# In praise of the Mcdojo - what a free market in education could look like



## Makalakumu (Sep 10, 2012)

This started as a joke, but as I started writing it, I began to realize that there might be a few glimmers of truth in it.  Anyway, I thought I'd post it for debate...and maybe a few laughs at my expense.



> *In Praise of the McDojo*
> What a Free Market for Education Could Look Like
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## kitkatninja (Sep 10, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> A McDojo, they say, is any school that lets students test for lots of belts, waters down the curriculum to make it easier for students to advance, and charges lots of money for everything, ie&#8230;uniforms, belts, tests, monthly fees, contracts, etc.  People need to realize that there is an upside to the existence of the McDojo.  First of all, it shows that martial arts schools change depending on what students need in order to stay in business.  Secondly, the schools can&#8217;t get too bad because other martial artists will identify them for their poor quality and they will cease to exist.  It&#8217;s an example of the kind of self regulation that the market would produce within the education industry as a whole and it required no laws whatsoever to accomplish.  The martial arts industry is peacefully and voluntarily regulated through this simple lampooning name.



I don't know about this one.  I know of one large "martial art" association/organisation (the style of karate is the same as the organisation name) that meets the three criteria that is mentioned, yet is growing due to their marketing strategy.

Not everyone joins the martial arts to learn to fight, some join for "fun", fitness, etc...  And some people are just interested in earning the belts, regardless of what they learn. 

Added to that regardless of what the reason is that one learns an art (from a McDojo or not), that person his/herself regards his/herself a MA practitioner so there will always be McDojos around.

<hopefully that made sense>


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 11, 2012)

Yeah, there are all kinds of reasons that people take lessons, but on the whole, if the business sucks, it goes under. Maybe that's quality control?


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 11, 2012)

Also, I've often thought that the bar we use to measure martial arts schools is too skewed by our own expectations. If we looked at how well the school was meeting the customers needs, that might be a better representation.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Sep 29, 2012)

Even, if this was meant as a joke, I think it has way more than a few gems of truths. May be biased because I'm a libertarian, who completely agrees with free-market education (along with free-market everything else), but i think it does a great job explaining martial arts, and can extremely easily be applied to education as well. Should be the direction we take education, rather than standardizing everything, and not being able to tailor education to the needs of the individual.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 29, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> Yeah, there are all kinds of reasons that people take lessons, but on the whole, if the business sucks, it goes under. Maybe that's quality control?



That's where you are wrong.

Businesses go under when they do not make a profit.  That's all.

Common sense tells us that when businesses do things badly, they go under; but in reality, that's a cause, but it may not be the entire cause.

We all know of auto shops that do lousy work; yet they remain in business.  Restaurants which have terrible service; but they remain in business.

And at the same time, we know of good restaurants that go under, great car mechanics that can't make it, etc.

Who knows when a McDojo produces poor product?  Not the students.  Half of them don't know good from bad, and the other half don't care as long as they get their promotions.

The fact is, I know of a bunch of dojos in my area that teach what I would consider crap martial arts.  And they are VERY successful.  I know a few that teach authentic, 'real' martial arts, and they're small, semi-profitable, basically run as hobbies.  While I'm sure that this is not always the case, I certainly have noticed it.

I have said before on MT that in my opinion, there are two basic issues in running a martial arts training business.  One is teaching martial arts.  The other is running a successful business.  And one does not have very much to do with the other.  This is what most business owners fail to grasp, and why they fail.  They think if they are really GOOD at what they do, they will succeed.  That is ********.  They can be crap at what they do, but if they know how to run a good business, they will succeed.  They can be good and fail, they can be bad and succeed.  Doesn't that just suck?  Yes, it does, but that's the way things go.

I learned a long time ago that most professional photographers are, at best, semi-skilled and seldom talented.  It doesn't matter.  As long as they can do the minimum required, what they REALLY need are business skills.  Talent means nothing when running a business.

I have no problem with McDojos as businesses.  I would not want to train at one, but that's an entirely different thing.

By the way, I posted something awhile ago on MT; can't find it now.  There is a new dojo just up the road from me.  They're doing fine; they have articles written about them in the newspaper, they're teaching seminars after school, etc.  The husband-and-wife team Senseis are 'qualified' instructors because they paid $50,000 for the franchise and got a six week training course, where they were awarded their black belts and began teaching.  Totally legal.  They absolutely do not know anything about martial arts.  It does not matter.  They are popular and know how to run a business; this has nothing to do with teaching martial arts.

Don't confuse the two; they are not the same.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 29, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> That's where you are wrong.
> 
> Businesses go under when they do not make a profit.  That's all.
> 
> ...



And yet, what if people want it? What if people want stupid dumbed downed martial arts? The same goes for any education. What if people want to be ignorant? What if they barely want to read and write, to the point where they can work for someone else, drink beer and watch football? 

A business is successful when they can give people what they want and I think that people need to start letting others make decisions without judgement...natural consequences will determine wisdom from folly in the end.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 29, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> And yet, what if people want it? What if people want stupid dumbed downed martial arts? The same goes for any education. What if people want to be ignorant? What if they barely want to read and write, to the point where they can work for someone else, drink beer and watch football?
> 
> A business is successful when they can give people what they want and I think that people need to start letting others make decisions without judgement...natural consequences will determine wisdom from folly in the end.



Yes, I agree with you.  Martial arts training is not a meritocracy; the best do not necessarily survive.

My point is that there are two completely separate requirements.  One is teaching martial arts.  One is running a business.  You have to be able to run a business to teach - at least good enough to pay the rent and keep the lights on if you intend to do that.  You do not have to be a good martial artist or a good teacher in order to run a good business; those skills are very different.

You are right that different people want different things from martial arts training.  And there are training centers that cater to all of those needs.

If I wanted to teach good martial arts, I would do that.  If I merely wanted to run a successful business, martial arts skills are not necessarily required.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Sep 30, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> And yet, what if people want it? What if people want stupid dumbed downed martial arts? The same goes for any education. What if people want to be ignorant? What if they barely want to read and write, to the point where they can work for someone else, drink beer and watch football?
> 
> A business is successful when they can give people what they want and I think that people need to start letting others make decisions without judgement...natural consequences will determine wisdom from folly in the end.


to be perfectly honest, the people in normal education the people who want to stay ignorant, do stay ignorant, so I don't think it would be much of a change in that aspect. Just easier for them to remain ignorant, instead of having to be forced an uphill battle they don't want to go.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 30, 2012)

However in education when you say 'people who want to stay ignorant' it doesn't mean people ie adults it means their children. For  most part the 'people' being taught in the McDojos are also children.


----------



## seasoned (Sep 30, 2012)

And these dojo learned long ago that the money is in teaching those kids. There are many good programs out there, but, a customer has to
seek out the quality ones. The free market is good because good or bad can make a living, but it is up to the consumer to educate themselves.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 30, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> However in education when you say 'people who want to stay ignorant' it doesn't mean people ie adults it means their children. For  most part the 'people' being taught in the McDojos are also children.



What if parents had more choices in education? Look at all the choice that exists in the martial arts industry. I think this could be a model for education as a whole.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 30, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> What if parents had more choices in education? Look at all the choice that exists in the martial arts industry. I think this could be a model for education as a whole.




I don't know enough to comment on your education system. I know as parents here we have a choice between private and state schools, church/faith schools plus the new free schools. Secondary education parents have a choice between private and state with the state schools being various academis specialising in various things ie science, sport, arts etc. Hard to know what other choices parents want.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 30, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> What if parents had more choices in education? Look at all the choice that exists in the martial arts industry. I think this could be a model for education as a whole.



Parents abdicate in general, and demand that society do what they will not.  You imagine a participative market where none exists.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 30, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Parents abdicate in general, and demand that society do what they will not.  You imagine a participative market where none exists.



Absolutely. This is pie in the sky idealism on my part. Parents and children think society owes them an education and the meaning behind getting an education is lost.

That said, if we did have a participatory market, I think education would differentiate to fit peoples needs. We'd see more innovation and we'd see people get better education than we see now.

Imagine if the government controlled martial arts and mandated standards that everyone had to meet without regard to individual difference. The institution would be a total charlie foxtrot.

Well, that's what we have now and it's terrible at meeting people's actual needs.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 30, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> Absolutely. This is pie in the sky idealism on my part. Parents and children think society owes them an education and the meaning behind getting an education is lost.
> 
> That said, if we did have a participatory market, I think education would differentiate to fit peoples needs. We'd see more innovation and we'd see people get better education than we see now.
> 
> ...



So, the how many millions of people in America all think alike? I'm sure a lot of people have a lot of different ideas on education!

A lot of martial arts organisations do mandate their standards and everyone who participates in that organisations activies has to fit in or leave. they make a lot of money. However in education money isn't everything.


----------



## CanuckMA (Sep 30, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> Absolutely. This is pie in the sky idealism on my part. Parents and children think society owes them an education and the meaning behind getting an education is lost.
> 
> That said, if we did have a participatory market, I think education would differentiate to fit peoples needs. We'd see more innovation and we'd see people get better education than we see now.
> 
> ...



The difference is that martial arts 'education' has no sociatal impact. Genereal education does. There needs to be a standard to adhere to. For mostly financial reasons, my kids went to public school. Had we sent them to religious school, those schools would have had to follow the provincial curriculum, religion and Hebrew being added on. I have a co-worker who home schools his kids. They still have to pass the provincial tests. 

There is already a wide range of private schools available. However, society in general benefits from an educated public, hence a 'free' system must be available, and the private sector must follow a standard curriculum.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 30, 2012)

CanuckMA said:


> The difference is that martial arts 'education' has no sociatal impact. Genereal education does. There needs to be a standard to adhere to. For mostly financial reasons, my kids went to public school. Had we sent them to religious school, those schools would have had to follow the provincial curriculum, religion and Hebrew being added on. I have a co-worker who home schools his kids. They still have to pass the provincial tests.
> 
> There is already a wide range of private schools available. However, society in general benefits from an educated public, hence a 'free' system must be available, and the private sector must follow a standard curriculum.



How well does a standard curriculum, enforced by the government, meet the needs of all learners?


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 30, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> Well, that's what we have now and it's terrible at meeting people's actual needs.



The only thing worse than what we have is everything else.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 30, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The only thing worse than what we have is everything else.



How do you know that?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Sep 30, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The only thing worse than what we have is everything else.


Do you have any examples of 'everything else' not working, or is it just pure conjecture? (not a sarcastic or rhetoric question, would love to see any sort of example so we have more than just hypotheses and rhetoric thinking to go by)


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 30, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> So, the how many millions of people in America all think alike? I'm sure a lot of people have a lot of different ideas on education!
> 
> A lot of martial arts organisations do mandate their standards and everyone who participates in that organisations activies has to fit in or leave. they make a lot of money. However in education money isn't everything.



One cannot simply ignore national standards in most countries. If I don't like WTF TKD standards, for example, I can find a different set of standards. Why couldn't that work with education as a whole? Imagine if we had a market where different sets of standards could compete? Then, we could actually have data on best practices! 

From an educational research perspective, this is the holy grail.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 1, 2012)

National standards are there for a purpose so that all schools meet a minimum standard, that children can read, write, do maths and science, subjects that are considered the basic that children need. Schools go beyond that, teaching a lot more subjects. You can choose what type of school you wish your children to go to, if you can afford it you can send your children to the top public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester or Cheltenham Ladies College and Marlborough. There's hundreds of less expensive private schools here, there's faith schools that are run with the local education authorities which are free and there's state schools. Now you can even get together with like minded parents and start your own school that is free. Standards are necessary to ensure schools aren't teaching poorly, aren't teaching stuff that will stunt pupils not expand them. Home schooling isn't that common here, but if you don't like what schools teach you have that option I believe even so standards must still exist otherwise parents could be just not bothering with their kids couldn't they?


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 1, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> National standards are there for a purpose so that all schools meet a minimum standard, that children can read, write, do maths and science, subjects that are considered the basic that children need. Schools go beyond that, teaching a lot more subjects. You can choose what type of school you wish your children to go to, if you can afford it you can send your children to the top public schools like Eton, Harrow, Winchester or Cheltenham Ladies College and Marlborough. There's hundreds of less expensive private schools here, there's faith schools that are run with the local education authorities which are free and there's state schools. Now you can even get together with like minded parents and start your own school that is free. Standards are necessary to ensure schools aren't teaching poorly, aren't teaching stuff that will stunt pupils not expand them. Home schooling isn't that common here, but if you don't like what schools teach you have that option I believe even so standards must still exist otherwise parents could be just not bothering with their kids couldn't they?



National Standards actually demand far more than a bare minimum of basic math, reading and writing. For example, the MCA in math, the federally mandated test for math in Minnesota demands that all students be proficient in algebra.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 1, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> National Standards actually demand far more than a bare minimum of basic math, reading and writing. For example, the MCA in math, the federally mandated test for math in Minnesota demands that all students be proficient in algebra.



I'd rather they have proficiency in Algebra than 'Diversity' or 'Why Your Parents Are Oppressors' or 'Being Sad When Called Upon' or 'Sensitivity Towards Complete Idiots' or 'Learning to Hate Your Own Country' or 'Why Humans Are All Evil'.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I'd rather they have proficiency in Algebra than 'Diversity' or 'Why Your Parents Are Oppressors' or 'Being Sad When Called Upon' or 'Sensitivity Towards Complete Idiots' or 'Learning to Hate Your Own Country' or 'Why Humans Are All Evil'.



I would rather have students be proficient in what makes them happy and learn how to make money from that.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 1, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> I would rather have students be proficient in what makes them happy and learn how to make money from that.



Happiness is optional and comes from within (or doesn't).  Learning how to support themselves, yes.  That's why voc-tech schools need to be coming back in this country.  We are no longer raising children who know how to fix or build or make anything, and we spent a generation looking down on those who work with their hands and insisting everyone go to college "if they wanted a decent job."  Now we're paying for that little social experiment.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Happiness is optional and comes from within (or doesn't).  Learning how to support themselves, yes.  That's why voc-tech schools need to be coming back in this country.  We are no longer raising children who know how to fix or build or make anything, and we spent a generation looking down on those who work with their hands and insisting everyone go to college "if they wanted a decent job."  Now we're paying for that little social experiment.



I agree with the vo-tec part, but I think that happiness is a bit more nuanced then you describe. Happiness does come from within, but I think by having the liberty to self express. Let's show students how to monetize that!


----------



## clfsean (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Happiness is optional and comes from within (or doesn't).  Learning how to support themselves, yes.  That's why voc-tech schools need to be coming back in this country.  We are no longer raising children who know how to fix or build or make anything, and we spent a generation looking down on those who work with their hands and insisting everyone go to college "if they wanted a decent job."  Now we're paying for that little social experiment.



Here in my part of Ga (so I'm guessing the remainder of the state, could be wrong), the kids in my county public school system in their freshman year are required to take some sort of "placement" type test.  After that they begin down a two path track: college or vocational training school. The college track kids get the benefit of 'magnet schools' that have a school within the school for directed study (engineering, pre-med/bio-tech, performing arts, comp sci, etc... along with the required GPA maintenance & course mandated events) and the votech kids, aim for votech schools & curriculum for trade skills.

This is in mind with when I was in the school system, we had nothing like this. We just worked our butts off. I have no kids in the school system, so I'm gathering this second hand.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 1, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> I agree with the vo-tec part, but I think that happiness is a bit more nuanced then you describe. Happiness does come from within, but I think by having the liberty to self express. Let's show students how to monetize that!



Nope.  Happiness is optional, survival is what matters.  If one can have both, that is optimal.  I certainly love my job, for example.  But training people to pursue their passion - and to potentially starve if they can't do that - is very bad.  Work on survival.  Then think about how to make yourself happy.  Some people do it in their jobs, some do it in their hobbies, some don't do it at all.  It isn't required.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Nope.  Happiness is optional, survival is what matters.  If one can have both, that is optimal.  I certainly love my job, for example.  But training people to pursue their passion - and to potentially starve if they can't do that - is very bad.  Work on survival.  Then think about how to make yourself happy.  Some people do it in their jobs, some do it in their hobbies, some don't do it at all.  It isn't required.



I understand where you are coming from, but I think you can combine the two more easily than you think. It's not a matter of simply pursuing your passions, it's about finding something inwhich you are passionate and also is economically viable. There are limitations that we all have to struggle with.

At any rate, our current system was designed to crank out factory drones and that has to change. Here's an option.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Nope.  Happiness is optional, survival is what matters.  If one can have both, that is optimal.  I certainly love my job, for example.  But training people to pursue their passion - and to potentially starve if they can't do that - is very bad.  Work on survival.  Then think about how to make yourself happy.  Some people do it in their jobs, some do it in their hobbies, some don't do it at all.  It isn't required.


I'd have to completely disagree with this. Survival is very important. However, happiness is more important, and generally requires some sort of survival, so if you focus on happiness, you'll make sure you're taking care of both. If you don't need happiness to survive, however, why force them to focus on it when they're not happy? Let them not 'survive' if it makes them happy, there are plenty of homeless men who traded their jobs to be homeless, and are perfectly satisfied with their new lifestyle.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 1, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> I understand where you are coming from, but I think you can combine the two more easily than you think. It's not a matter of simply pursuing your passions, it's about finding something inwhich you are passionate and also is economically viable. There are limitations that we all have to struggle with.



That struggle is for the individual to figure out for themselves, not the state.



> At any rate, our current system was designed to crank out factory drones and that has to change. Here's an option.



The problem is that we DON'T crank out enough factory workers.  We crank out a lot of college graduates and assorted shoe-gazing mopes who complain that they do not have a nice job given to them as an entitlement they think they were promised upon graduation and demand that those who have worked for their success hand it over to them since they're so unhappy and have been so misled.

What we need are more carpenters, plumbers, electricians, machinists, boatwrights, ditch-diggers, tent-makers, tailers, tinkers, candlestick makers, and skilled professionals of all sorts.  Instead, we have a nation of college-educated lumps who believe that happiness is a right they were promised and have not been given.

Screw that and screw them.  More voc-tech, more building things, less promising happiness as a given.  I could give two craps if people are miserable; I'd rather they were gainfully employed and paying taxes.  If they are also happy, then yay for them, but that's their concern, not mine and not the government's.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 1, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> That struggle is for the individual to figure out for themselves, not the state.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's the beauty of the free market...or the Mcdojo...if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it. Notice how fast we started talking about what other people need? What gives people the right to say what someone should learn? Does society own a piece on an individuals mind? 

I don't believe that and it's becoming increasingly apparent in research that you can't force anyone to learn anything. This is evidenced by studies on retention levels of material. On average 90% of content is forgotten after one year...unless an individual constantly practices or is otherwise interested. The bottom line is that people learn things because they want to, not because others want them to.

The root of education is to educe, which means to draw out. I wholeheartedly agree with your first statement. That's what education actually means.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 2, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> That's the beauty of the free market...or the Mcdojo...if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it. Notice how fast we started talking about what other people need? What gives people the right to say what someone should learn? Does society own a piece on an individuals mind?



Yes, to put it bluntly.  Society owns the right to continue to exist.  This means producing citizens who perpetuate that society through productive work and other material contributions.  Notice that I did not say that society deserves the right to exist; it merely owns it.  That doesn't make it right or wrong, it makes it what is.



> I don't believe that and it's becoming increasingly apparent in research that you can't force anyone to learn anything.



I guarantee you that I can.



> This is evidenced by studies on retention levels of material. On average 90% of content is forgotten after one year...unless an individual constantly practices or is otherwise interested. The bottom line is that people learn things because they want to, not because others want them to.
> 
> The root of education is to educe, which means to draw out. I wholeheartedly agree with your first statement. That's what education actually means.



Let me just blow up that ridiculous nonsensical notion that left to their own devices, parents will just naturally educate their children in the best possible way.

We are a nation of fat-asses.  Why?  Because parents feed their children in the ways they think best.

Ta-freaking-da.

Leave it to Beaver and we'll have a bigger generation of ignoramuses and booger-eatin' morons than we currently do.

Put 'em in school, teach 'em how to be productive citizens, and let the parents teach them any add-ons that involve feeling good about the environment or thinking deeply about social injustice that they feel is necessary.

In the old days, we called this The Three R's.

It works.  We need it.  End of discussion.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 2, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Let me just blow up that ridiculous nonsensical notion that left to their own devices, parents will just naturally educate their children in the best possible way.
> 
> We are a nation of fat-asses.  Why?  Because parents feed their children in the ways they think best.
> 
> ...


Couple of problems with what you said here. In the end, you say it works. However, we've been doing it for a while, and it's created a 'nation of fat-asses' and many of us are apparently 'ignoramuses and booger-eatin' morons', but that's making us productive citizens? How?

 And if it is making us those things, shouldn't we try to change it somehow? Maybe free-market education would work, maybe it wouldn't, but we can't know until we try. It's better than maintaining a status quo that isn't working, because if we try to fix it, eventually we'll find one that works. 

In other words, you know the phrase "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?" Well it is broke, so now we have to fix it.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 2, 2012)

kempodisciple said:


> Couple of problems with what you said here. In the end, you say it works. However, we've been doing it for a while, and it's created a 'nation of fat-asses' and many of us are apparently 'ignoramuses and booger-eatin' morons', but that's making us productive citizens? How?
> 
> And if it is making us those things, shouldn't we try to change it somehow? Maybe free-market education would work, maybe it wouldn't, but we can't know until we try. It's better than maintaining a status quo that isn't working, because if we try to fix it, eventually we'll find one that works.
> 
> In other words, you know the phrase "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?" Well it is broke, so now we have to fix it.



Fix it?  Yes.  By getting back to what we used to do, which worked.  Our education system was not always broken.  Lots of things are better - no more segregation, for one thing.  But lots of things are worse - like dumbing down education so that every child feels good about themselves even if they cannot read and write when they graduate.

And turning over education to parents to do whatever they please?  Absolutely not.


----------



## punisher73 (Oct 2, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> I agree with the vo-tec part, but I think that happiness is a bit more nuanced then you describe. Happiness does come from within, but I think by having the liberty to self express. Let's show students how to monetize that!






Too bad somewhere along the lines, we turned into an "everyone gets a trophy" society, that is the same for everyone.  I'll have to find the test results but basically, the US was one of the top in "self esteem" for school kids and almost bottom in education in the world.  Everyone is special, everyone is....  True self confidence comes from meeting adversity and challenges and getting through them and developing the tools to do again in the future.

As far as martial arts go, most people don't really know what they want or what is out there.  They go for what is close by their house, or what is affordable to them.  Before he died, there was a top level Uechi Ryu instructor that only taught in a community education program in school.  Most people never knew how highly ranked he was or what it would have cost to study with him if he operated a school.  But, he often lost students to the local TKD place because they could get fast tracked through the levels (just lots and lots more of them) and had a good kids program.  Uechi Ryu doesn't look like what's on the Power Rangers (or insert your own new fad MA kids show) and TKD looks alot more like what they see on TV.  Also, heard stories of parents saying that they wanted to try this out before they put their kid in a "real school".

When you make your living doing MA, then you make compromises with the art to attract more bill payers.  Some schools will offset and appear to be a McDojo, but then have a smaller private class for the hardcore students that want to learn a martial art and not just a hobby.  There is no easy answer, but the schools I have visited that had the highest standards were all ones that the owner/instructor did NOT make his primary living only through teaching. As a caveat, I know that there are some schools that are very high level with a famous instructor who teaches full time (Gracies come to mind, many of the top MMA gyms or MT gyms).


----------



## oftheherd1 (Oct 2, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> ...
> 
> In the old days, we called this The Three R's.
> 
> ...



Maybe it was the method of teaching the 3 Rs that had more to do with it?  ;-)



kempodisciple said:


> ...
> 
> In other words, you know the phrase "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?" Well it is broke, so now we have to fix it.



Yeah, but any good tradesman will tell you that you first have to know what is broke. If you can get a concensus on that you are good!


----------

