# Your students or not?



## ATC (May 10, 2011)

There was something that peeked my interest and I just want to get a feel for what others think.

It was stated to me that because I am not the owner or Master Instructor of a school that none of the students that learn under me can be consider my students. Now I assist in classes that I don't head but do from time to time head some classes on my own.

Do you think that you can call students that you teach your students, or are they simply students of the Master instructor only?

I say we are all students of the Master of the school but those that we teach are also our students as well.

I think this is a very good topic and it will be interesting to see what others think.


----------



## K-man (May 10, 2011)

ATC said:


> There was something that peeked my interest and I just want to get a feel for what others think.
> 
> It was stated to me that because I am not the owner or Master Instructor of a school that none of the students that learn under me can be consider my students. Now I assist in classes that I don't head but do from time to time head some classes on my own.
> 
> ...


If you are the regular instructor then they are your students. If you are assisting in their instruction I feel that they would consider themselves students of the head instructor. How would the students think of you?


----------



## andyjeffries (May 10, 2011)

This came up recently on here.

Previous thread.

You might not get as much of a response here because of it (it's not people ignoring you specifically, just that it was two pages of discussion and people may feel they've already given their thoughts/feelings).


----------



## puunui (May 10, 2011)

ATC said:


> It was stated to me that because I am not the owner or Master Instructor of a school that none of the students that learn under me can be consider my students.



That's not what I stated to you, but that's ok. 




ATC said:


> Now I assist in classes that I don't head but do from time to time head some classes on my own.



When I was in your situation, I considered the people below me to be my juniors, and those above me to be my seniors. I never considered the people I taught on an assisting or fill in basis to be my students. I considered that to be part of what a good senior did, which is to help their juniors. The teacher was the teacher, with the sole exception being the soo suk sabum or head assistant, who was also considered a teacher, since they lead the class regularly, and to a certain extent set the curriculum.


----------



## ATC (May 10, 2011)

puunui said:


> That's not what I stated to you, but that's ok.


Sorry, that is how I percieved it. Not in a bad way.




> When I was in your situation, I considered the people below me to be my juniors, and those above me to be my seniors. I never considered the people I taught on an assisting or fill in basis to be my students. I considered that to be part of what a good senior did, which is to help their juniors. The teacher was the teacher, with the sole exception being the soo suk sabum or head assistant, who was also considered a teacher, since they lead the class regularly, and to a certain extent set the curriculum.


This statement tells me that we are on the same page.


----------



## terryl965 (May 10, 2011)

There can only be one head instructor, that is the school owner. Now with that being said we all have seniors and juniors, seniors are those a head of me in the pecking order and juniors are those that are below me. In your stituation those that you teach would be your juniors. 

ATC students belong to the school so I have always hated that word students. The only way a students is your if you own the dojaang or run the whole concept.


----------



## Tony49 (May 10, 2011)

terryl965 said:


> There can only be one head instructor, that is the school owner. Now with that being said we all have seniors and juniors, seniors are those a head of me in the pecking order and juniors are those that are below me. In your stituation those that you teach would be your juniors.
> 
> ATC students belong to the school so I have always hated that word students. The only way a students is your if you own the dojaang or run the whole concept.



Now, I know a lot of you get your certificates from KKW, but I look at it this way they are your students if you Sign their Certificate and not as a witness.  My Wife and I own a school and we offer three Styles TKD, Kenpo and Eskrima.  In Kenpo and Eskrima the students are both hers and mine.  However, in TKD they all hers since she has a TKD Blackbelt and I do not.

Another way to look at it is did you teach that student from white to black or did they just have one or two classes with you through out their progression to black.


----------



## StudentCarl (May 10, 2011)

I'm pretty junior as a cho-dan class assistant a couple nights a week with the younger kids' classes. When they grow and succeed I feel some pride for supporting that. I go to their testings and help coach those who join the competition team. 

They are mine like a little brother or sister is mine. I'm not dad or mom, but I have made a commitment to their growth. I don't claim to be the parent, but what they do reflects on me too, as I'm committed to my dojang family. I think that kind of "mine" is very appropriate.


----------



## msmitht (May 10, 2011)

I own a school and have 2 asst instructors. They are my students and instructors in training. The students belong to the school, regardless of who is teaching them. I am the chief master so I am the highest authority at my school. 
I guess that makes them my students. I am a student of the kkw tkd academy. My gm passed away many years ago and I have not found an honest korean gm to train under so I go to seminars and train with kkw instructors.


----------



## puunui (May 10, 2011)

terryl965 said:


> ATC students belong to the school so I have always hated that word students. The only way a students is your if you own the dojaang or run the whole concept.




I understand what you are trying to say and part of me wants to agree with you, especially as it relates to Kwan relationships. But to me, the teacher student dynamic is a personal relationship, and because of that the student is bonded to the teacher, not the school. So I wouldn't say that the students belong to the school, per se. Slightly different nuance, belonging to a Kwan and the teacher student relationship. I don't know if I am explaining this correctly.


----------



## puunui (May 10, 2011)

msmitht said:


> My gm passed away many years ago and I have not found an honest korean gm to train under so I go to seminars and train with kkw instructors.




Sorry to hear that. The way you phrased that says a lot.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 10, 2011)

At our school I would be considered the student of my actual instructor. I am currently training under a 7th dan and he is considered my instructor, and on any club paperwork I fill in I write that I am a student of his. There is a grey area though because a lot of people will say to me "whose black belt are you?", in which case I say my original instructors name because we are considered a black belt of whichever instructor gets you to black belt. When I received my 1st dan I bowed to our GM, then turned and bowed to my current instructor and then bowed to the instructor who got me to black belt. Even if I train under my current instructor for the next 20 years I will always be my original instructor's black belt.


----------



## Balrog (May 11, 2011)

When I first joined my current school, I was a colored belt and then a Black Belt trainee instructor under the school owner.  However, I was given responsibility for teaching specific classes and I always considered those students to be "my" students, predominantly from the feeling of happiness that I got in seeing them succeed and move up.  Officially, though, they were my instructor's students.

Now I own the school.  My instructor has moved, but he is still my instructor and I am his student.  The students in my school are officially my students, but he gets to count them in his "lineage".  I have a student who has opened his own school.  His students are officially his, but I get to count them in my lineage, as does my instructor.  Think of a family tree as the best visualization.


----------



## miguksaram (May 11, 2011)

At the school I attend, I teach classes regularly.  However, when it comes time to sign up for a tournament I have always told the student to put down Sensei Sharkey as their teacher.

The only time I have ever told them to put me down as the teacher is when they were my sword students (since that class is exclusively mine and is separate from the school), or if they were signing up for a TKD activity.  As I mentioned before, I have one student who is part of the school, but I do private lessons with him for TKD.  

I look at it this way.  If you are a public school substitute teacher stepping in every now and then for class, can you really consider those kids your students?


----------



## msmitht (May 11, 2011)

puunui said:


> Sorry to hear that. The way you phrased that says a lot.



Was not to meant towards all korean gms. I have tried, over the past 14 years, to find one to train under. They all either want to be in charge of my school or attend my testings ($). One wanted me to pay him 2500 for my 5th dan. Kkw charged 300. Another wanted me to learn the palgwe cause he didn't like taeguek. All wanted a ton of cash.
There were a few good ones but too far to travel to consistantly. I found a great one nearby but he is retired. Heard his golf swing is awesome...


----------



## puunui (May 11, 2011)

msmitht said:


> Was not to meant towards all korean gms. I have tried, over the past 14 years, to find one to train under. They all either want to be in charge of my school or attend my testings ($). One wanted me to pay him 2500 for my 5th dan. Kkw charged 300. Another wanted me to learn the palgwe cause he didn't like taeguek. All wanted a ton of cash.
> There were a few good ones but too far to travel to consistantly. I found a great one nearby but he is retired. Heard his golf swing is awesome...




Like I said, the way you phrased it says a lot.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 11, 2011)

I'd say the students probably know who is actually teaching them, and who is not, regardless of the formalities of who is the school owner/head instructor vs. assistant, whatever.


----------



## ATC (May 11, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> I look at it this way. If you are a public school substitute teacher stepping in every now and then for class, can you really consider those kids your students?


Ahhh...but if you are a sub that teaches 1 or 2 subject (classes) every day, assist all subjects (classes) every day, and also subs for all subject (classes) when the primary teacher is out, then what do you call the kids?


----------



## puunui (May 11, 2011)

ATC said:


> Ahhh...but if you are a sub that teaches 1 or 2 subject (classes) every day, assist all subjects (classes) every day, and also subs for all subject (classes) when the primary teacher is out, then what do you call the kids?




You call them your juniors.


----------



## JohnEdward (May 11, 2011)

I find it fascinating this aspect about martial arts that students are property and instructors have priority rights between one another. I am not sure where instructors priority rights comes from, why it happens or it exists.  It makes me uncomfortable and seems unnecessary. An illusionary sense of power over others I don't understand. Shouldn't the students make that call of which instructor they prefer?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (May 11, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> I find it fascinating this aspect about martial arts that students are property and instructors have priority rights between one another. I am not sure where instructors priority rights comes from, why it happens or it exists.  It makes me uncomfortable and seems unnecessary. An illusionary sense of power over others I don't understand. Shouldn't the students make that call of which instructor they prefer?


I think its instructors reaping the rewards of having instructed students well. I know that when Im watching a student spar at grading and the student is really good you will hear the seniors say "wow, whose student is that?". In my opinion it keeps the instructors honest, because a lot of people rate an instructor by the quality of their students. If an instructor is lazy and puts little effort into their students it will show, just as good instructors tend to have skilled students.


----------



## msmitht (May 12, 2011)

As a student of gracie barra I consider myself a student of carlos gracie jr. When I teach bjj I have jr's in my class. When I take classes it is with my professor(s). It is all very informal yet structured. You know who is senior and respect them. When a student does well it is the team that gets the win, not an individual instructor.
I do run a tkd school and what I said before is true, I just wanted to give a different view on the subject.


----------



## Bruno@MT (May 12, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> I find it fascinating this aspect about martial arts that students are property and instructors have priority rights between one another. I am not sure where instructors priority rights comes from, why it happens or it exists.  It makes me uncomfortable and seems unnecessary. An illusionary sense of power over others I don't understand. Shouldn't the students make that call of which instructor they prefer?



They should. And they do. But if you want to say 'XYZ' is my sensei (or whatever the appropriate name is in Korean), then that should be the person you train with.

The student - teacher relationship implies that the student acknowledges the superiority of the teacher in that art (otherwise he wouldn't be teaching the student) and thus also acknowledges that the student should obey the teacher in matters of training, grading, etc. It is not a matter of 'ownership' as you put it, but of authority in training matters.

It's like taking the bus to get somewhere. The bus driver makes the calls about where to stop or which route to follow. Your choices are limited to staying on the bus or getting off. And as long as you are on the bus, you are the bus driver's passenger.


----------



## miguksaram (May 12, 2011)

We are looking at the positive side of things here.  What if the student was very unruly or showed poor sportsmanship or, just sucked no matter how hard you try to teach him?  This reflects badly on the school but in particular to the owner of the school.  No one ever says "Yeah he is GM John Doe's student, but it is really Jeremy who is his teacher."  The owner of the school may get a lot of the glory but he gets all of the criticism for bad things as well.

When you teach a class in a school that is not yours, do you teach whatever you want, how you want?  Or do you teach the owner's curriculum how he wants it taught?


----------



## terryl965 (May 12, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> We are looking at the positive side of things here. What if the student was very unruly or showed poor sportsmanship or, just sucked no matter how hard you try to teach him? This reflects badly on the school but in particular to the owner of the school. No one ever says "Yeah he is GM John Doe's student, but it is really Jeremy who is his teacher." The owner of the school may get a lot of the glory but he gets all of the criticism for bad things as well.
> 
> When you teach a class in a school that is not yours, do you teach whatever you want, how you want? Or do you teach the owner's curriculum how he wants it taught?


 
I can only speak for me, my BB's only teach my curriculum, as far as thos ethat do not flurrish they are my students as well. No matter if they aree great, good or bad they all belong to me and I am proud of each and everyone of them. They each bring something to the table and all of them show what TKD is about the journey, the passion and the total package.


----------



## andyjeffries (May 12, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> When you teach a class in a school that is not yours, do you teach whatever you want, how you want?  Or do you teach the owner's curriculum how he wants it taught?



In previous discussions this point hasn't come and I think it's a very good one.  If you have control over what you teach then they are definitely your students.  If "the buck stops here" and no-one can overrule you, then they're yours.

Of course, this doesn't cover franchised dojangs but we don't really have any over here in the UK (or do we, anyone??).

A good point that came up previously was "would the student describe you as his teacher" or would he just refer to you as "one of the black belts", "some guy that helps me", etc.  That's another key factor.  If you are the top dog and decide what they learn and what they don't, then I don't think there'd be any hesitation in them referring to you as their teacher.


----------



## StudentCarl (May 12, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> We are looking at the positive side of things here. What if the student was very unruly or showed poor sportsmanship or, just sucked no matter how hard you try to teach him? This reflects badly on the school but in particular to the owner of the school. No one ever says "Yeah he is GM John Doe's student, but it is really Jeremy who is his teacher." The owner of the school may get a lot of the glory but he gets all of the criticism for bad things as well.
> 
> When you teach a class in a school that is not yours, do you teach whatever you want, how you want? Or do you teach the owner's curriculum how he wants it taught?


 
The price of being in charge is that the buck stops with you--that's life and the unique experience of being the master/owner. We all have contact with students whose effort and/or self-control is lacking--that's why they need to be students. The master of the school is rightly the one who decides who should represent his name. However, the loyal subordinate takes responsibility for his part as well as committing himself to the good of the school. It takes more than just the master to make a good school. What really makes a good school is when the master does not have to carry the load on his shoulders alone--his subordinates feel the kind of ownership and responsibility that they understand the master's intent and act independently to fulfill it. If you are a guest, you teach what you have agreed with the master that you will teach. It may or may not be the owner's curriculum.


----------



## miguksaram (May 12, 2011)

terryl965 said:


> I can only speak for me, my BB's only teach my curriculum, as far as thos ethat do not flurrish they are my students as well. No matter if they aree great, good or bad they all belong to me and I am proud of each and everyone of them. They each bring something to the table and all of them show what TKD is about the journey, the passion and the total package.



Agreed.  At Sharkey's Karate I teach Sensei Sharkey's curriculum.  After teaching martial arts going on 25+ years I still seek his advice on how he likes to teach things.  Yes, I throw in my "flavor" into the mix but ultimately it his lessons and his teachings that I passing on to the under belts.  This is why I say that they should always refer to him as the instructor whenever filling out tournament registrations.  (Just as a side note, Sensei Sharkey doesn't care who they put down as instructor.  He is not one to be anal over these formalities and laughs at me for being hard nosed about it).


----------



## miguksaram (May 12, 2011)

andyjeffries said:


> A good point that came up previously was "would the student describe you as his teacher" or would he just refer to you as "one of the black belts", "some guy that helps me", etc.  That's another key factor.  If you are the top dog and decide what they learn and what they don't, then I don't think there'd be any hesitation in them referring to you as their teacher.



It is interesting but at events or gatherings, students refer to the black belts as Sensei Jeremy or Sensei Micah or Sensei (first name here).  However when it comes to Sensei Sharkey they all just refer to him as Sensei.  None of them have ever referred to us a "one of the black belts".


----------



## StudentCarl (May 12, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> It is interesting but at events or gatherings, students refer to the black belts as Sensei Jeremy or Sensei Micah or Sensei (first name here). However when it comes to Sensei Sharkey they all just refer to him as Sensei. None of them have ever referred to us a "one of the black belts".


 
This comment and the one above where you will only accept students listing him as master tell me what you and the students think of your master.


----------



## miguksaram (May 12, 2011)

StudentCarl said:


> This comment and the one above where you will only accept students listing him as master tell me what you and the students think of your master.


Yes, all the students and parents like him.  He is a very blunt person and you will always know where he stands on issues and will never sugar coat anything to the students.  I admire that about him.  

Actually no one at the school EVER refers to him as Master. ha.ha.ha  He hates that.  We actually tease him calling him Master Sensei Hanshi Sharkey...which he returns punches us in the arm.ha.ha.ha..

He is just a humble guy who enjoys teaching.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 12, 2011)

Interesting topic

The topic of whether or not you have "your own students" at a school that doesn't belong to you has never really made much sense to me. When I taught at my own school, I had my own students. Before that I taught at my instructors' school, but I taught their students. They were my fellow students but there were plenty of times that I taught class or taught groups of students within a certain class session. In fact, teaching - or at least assisting - is a requirement for being promoted to senior ranks at my instructors' school. I still teach when I visit my instructors' school if they ask me to do so. But I wouldn never consider myself to be the instructor of my teachers' students. 

I've also been taught by students of my instructors who outrank me at times. But I certainly don't consider them my instructors. 

I can safely say that none of the students in my instructors' school considers anyone but them to be their instructors. The reason for this is because they are there at the school for every class, all the time, and they teach eleven classes a week. What's more, they are on the floor teaching every class. Heck, I've seen my Master Instructor on _many_ occasions take new white belts their first night and show them how to make a fist, how to punch, how to tie their belt, etc. The only time they miss is when they go out of town to attend a seminar or training for their own instruction, have a major health problem (such as recovering from a recent surgery for one of them), or a family vacation (which is like once every three years). 

I can't imagine training at a school where the head instructor isn't there enough to instill a feeling in every student that _he_ is their instructor. If I was ever in that situation I would have to reconsider training at that school, to be honest. 

TCA use a title system where people are referred to by familial titles. When I was training in Praying Mantis I was my sifu's student even if my si-hing happened to teach me something. I never would have referred to him as "sifu." Same thing with my sifu's father. He was my si-gung, even though he taught me on several occasions. I suppose it's akin to using sa-hyung to refer to someone who is your senior (or sa-je for someone who is your junior), as opposed to your sabum. Sunbae and Hubae can, of course, be used but IIRC sa-hyung and sa-je are specifically for people in your same lineage under the same sabum. 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 12, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> It is interesting but at events or gatherings, students refer to the black belts as Sensei Jeremy or Sensei Micah or Sensei (first name here). However when it comes to Sensei Sharkey they all just refer to him as Sensei. None of them have ever referred to us a "one of the black belts".


 
That is interesting.

Do the students know the meaning of the word "sensei"?

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram (May 12, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> That is interesting.
> 
> Do the students know the meaning of the word "sensei"?
> 
> ...


Yes they do.  I think it has just become a way that we have subconsciously pinpointed him as THE head of the school.


----------



## terryl965 (May 12, 2011)

I have never understood how something can be ours if you are not the head instructor of said school. Potocol is way off base now a days that it is not funny. All the years I trained at my instructor school I never once refered to any students as mine, it was always the schools.


----------



## StudentCarl (May 12, 2011)

terryl965 said:


> I have never understood how something can be ours if you are not the head instructor of said school. Potocol is way off base now a days that it is not funny. All the years I trained at my instructor school I never once refered to any students as mine, it was always the schools.


 
Terry, I don't think it's protocol. I think it's inexact use of language. None of the students I help are my students, but I feel a responsibility to them as a senior student and dad-aged athlete (most of them are young kids). When they succeed and I contributed to it in a measurable way, I feel pride. Put it back in a family model: it's like my little brother or my little sister, as opposed to my child. I don't think this is a tug-of-war where students are either yours or mine. If you're the master, of course they're yours. But if I'm an assistant, shouldn't I be making a difference? I have never claimed a student as mine, but when a kid who I've worked with extensively finally gets his form together and passes his test, you bet I feel a little mine-ness. I also feel proud to be part of a school team (led by my master) who helps people grow. If I don't have some hunger for that, why on earth would I ever go on to own a school? (Oh yeah...the giant income)


----------



## ATC (May 12, 2011)

So far this is what I am perceiving from many.
If you teach at a school you are not an instructor nor a teacher but just a Jr. or helper. Even though your title is Instructor and that is what you are called, and you get paid as a staff member to teach classes and instruct students.
You don't have any student's until you are the Master or owner of your own school. No matter if you teach every class and even have a 4th Dan ranking of Master. As long as the school is owned by a Master of equal or greater rank.
Students always only have one Master (the one they first started with) even if they go to another school even a longer time and learn more from that other school. So my current Master is not my true Master and I am not his student.
This is interesting indeed. So Every Master Instructor will have quite a few students that are being taught by him that are not his or her students. Becaus I am sure that there are many people (can't say student, because I don't even know what that means anymore) in every dojang/dojo that started with someone other than their current Master.

The whole concept Seems kind of egotisticle to me. If I walk into any school as a white belt and see 5 black belts that teach I 5 teachers of mine that I need to learn from. Yes I know who the Master is and he is the head teacher but the others to me are also my teachers.

It seems kind of deemening arrogant to tell me to teach something on a daily basis and then turn around and tell me no you did not teach them anything you just help out as were being a good student.

Teach is directly transfering knwoledge to someone that did not have that knowledge.

Helping out would be holding a bag or targets for someone to practice what someone else taught them.

The two are not the same. When I am asked to teach someone something I am told just that.

*{Master to Instructor}* Instructor (fill in name), help me teach the new student their first form. Once you are done let me know if he is ready for my classes.

*{Instructor}* Yes Sir!

*{Instructor to New Student}*OK do you know your form?

*{New Student}* No.

*{Instructor} *Well do it and I'll help you.

*{New Student} *But I don't know it.

*{Instructor} *Well I'm here to help you so do your form please.

*{New Student} *But I don't even know what it looks like?

*{Instructor}* Why?

*{New Student}* Because you did not teach it to me.

*{Instructor}* Oh I can't do that.

*{New Student}* Why?

*{Instructor}* Because I don't teach.

*{New Student}* So how can you help me.

*{Instructor}* Well once you do your form I can let you know what you did wrong.

*{New Student} *So you know the form?

*{Instructor}* Yes

*{New Student}* Then just show it to me.

*{Instructor}* I can't

*{New Student}* Why?

*{Instructor}* Because I don't teach.

*{New Student}* Then how can you help me?

*{Instructor}* Good question.

*{New Student}* Well then show me.

*{Instructor}* Only if you close your eyes.

*{New Student}* Then I wont see what the moves are.

*{Instructor}* Correct.

*{New Student}* But I need to see them so I can learn it.

*{Instructor}* You will learn it.

*{New Student}* When?

*{Instructor}* When the Master teaches it to you.

*{New Student}* But I don't go to his classes yet.

*{Instructor}* But you will.

*{New Student}* When?

*{Instructor}* When you learn this form.

*{New Student}* But you wont teach me.

*{Instructor}* Because I can't.

*{New Student}* Why?

*{Instructor}* Because I am not a teacher.

*{New Student}* But you are the instructor.

*{Instructor}* No I am the helper or Jr., they just call me the instructor.

*{New Student}* OK I quit, I'll just go somewhere where they have instructors that teach.

*{Master to Instructor}* Where's the new student?

*{Instructor}* He quit.

*{Master}* Why?

*{Instructor}* Couldn't learn.

*{Master}* What's wrong with todays people. No one wants to learn Martial Arts anymore. I remember when I was an instructor I had so many students to teach.


That just made me laugh. Maybe I'll send this in to Saturday Night Live as a skit suggestion. Ha ha ha.... :rofl:

Don't get me wrong. I do understand that the head guy is the head guy but he has people under him that help him just like the Pres of a company is the main guy. But the people under him have workers just as those workers under may have workers under them.

Just becasue an instructor calls someone his student does not mean that the student is not also a student of the school and the Master. Yes someone my be a Jr. to the Master and Sr. to others but if that Sr. is responcible for teaching that Jr. then for the Sr. to say he is a student that I teach is no different than saying he is one of my students. Yes he is ultimately the Master student as would be said Sr. No one is trying to disrespect the Master with the statement it is simply something said to communicate that you teach said student on a regular basis.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 12, 2011)

ATC said:


> If you teach at a school you are not an instructor nor a teacher but just a Jr. or helper. Even though your title is Instructor and that is what you are called, and you get paid as a staff member to teach classes and instruct students.


 Get paid to teach? Interesting. Helping out in class is just part of being a senior student at our school. 



> You don't have any student's until you are the Master or owner of your own school. No matter if you teach every class and even have a 4th Dan ranking of Master. As long as the school is owned by a Master of equal or greater rank.


 
If you teach _every_ class and the school instructor doesn't it's time to move on because you might not be those students' instructor but neither is he. It would be different if you were teaching at a school of your own that was under your instructor but the way you've described things here makes me get a very bad image of the work ethic of the school owner (and from what I recall of you saying about your own instructor that certainly doesn't seem to be the case in your situation).



> Students always only have one Master (the one they first started with) even if they go to another school even a longer time and learn more from that other school. So my current Master is not my true Master and I am not his student.


 
I've never heard this, nor do I recall seeing it in this thread. I know several people in Taekwon-Do who have changed their instructors over the years (due to moving, personality conflicts, etc.) and they consider the person they are training under at the time to be their instructor. They will certainly recognize former instructors, but the person they train under _currently_ that is their instructor.



> It seems kind of deemening arrogant to tell me to teach something on a daily basis and then turn around and tell me no you did not teach them anything you just help out as were being a good student.


 
I agree with you to a certain extent. But there is a difference, in my mind, between teaching someone something and being _their_ teacher. It's _something_ like having a professor in college who has a TA run a recitation. But even this analogy limps because the TA isn't a student of the professor at times whereas the black belt who is teaching should definitely be getting in line on a daily basis and training under the head instructor.

If someone is ever in a situation where they are teaching a regular class for the school owner and the owner never shows to class or only does so very rarely it's time to find a new school. The head instructor should be at, if not every class, the vast majority of them. 



> Don't get me wrong. I do understand that the head guy is the head guy but he has people under him that help him just like the Pres of a company is the main guy. But the people under him have workers just as those workers under may have workers under them.
> 
> Just becasue an instructor calls someone his student does not mean that the student is not also a student of the school and the Master. Yes someone my be a Jr. to the Master and Sr. to others but if that Sr. is responcible for teaching that Jr. then for the Sr. to say he is a student that I teach is no different than saying he is one of my students. Yes he is ultimately the Master student as would be said Sr. No one is trying to disrespect the Master with the statement it is simply something said to communicate that you teach said student on a regular basis.


 
The more I hear things like this the more I wonder if there are head instructors who aren't showing up to the classes that are being run in their school and, if so, why not? Really, it just seems odd to me.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## terryl965 (May 12, 2011)

StudentCarl said:


> Terry, I don't think it's protocol. I think it's inexact use of language. None of the students I help are my students, but I feel a responsibility to them as a senior student and dad-aged athlete (most of them are young kids). When they succeed and I contributed to it in a measurable way, I feel pride. Put it back in a family model: it's like my little brother or my little sister, as opposed to my child. I don't think this is a tug-of-war where students are either yours or mine. If you're the master, of course they're yours. But if I'm an assistant, shouldn't I be making a difference? I have never claimed a student as mine, but when a kid who I've worked with extensively finally gets his form together and passes his test, you bet I feel a little mine-ness. I also feel proud to be part of a school team (led by my master) who helps people grow. If I don't have some hunger for that, why on earth would I ever go on to own a school? (Oh yeah...the giant income)


 

Pride Joy and a feeling of helping someone grow into there own is normal. I had an instructor who believed every student he ever worked with was his. He was the man and tried to tell everybody how if not for him they would have failed, needless to say he is no longer with me. I believe the school is a family as a whole but like any family there is only one top dog per family.:asian:


----------



## ATC (May 12, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Get paid to teach? Interesting. Helping out in class is just part of being a senior student at our school.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My statement are perceptions with no reflection off myself or my school. Just perceptions based on situations that I do know exist.


----------



## Thesemindz (May 13, 2011)

In my opinion, the Master of the school claims the students. The other instructors are subordinate to him. Even if the majority of classes are taught by the other instructors. As far as belt heirarchy goes, the students are all in his lineage.

That aside, my students, your students, his students, who cares? They're students. You show up every day and teach the best karate you can. And you hope they show up too. Everything else is secondary. I don't worry about who gets the credit. 


-Rob


----------



## Thesemindz (May 13, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> We are looking at the positive side of things here. What if the student was very unruly or showed poor sportsmanship or, just sucked no matter how hard you try to teach him? This reflects badly on the school but in particular to the owner of the school. No one ever says "Yeah he is GM John Doe's student, but it is really Jeremy who is his teacher." The owner of the school may get a lot of the glory but he gets all of the criticism for bad things as well.
> 
> When you teach a class in a school that is not yours, do you teach whatever you want, how you want? Or do you teach the owner's curriculum how he wants it taught?


 
To your first point, it is the Master's responsibility to decide who is and is not involved with his school. That includes students and teachers. If there is an unruly person involved with his dojo, it _is_ his fault and he _should_ get the criticism.

To your second point, I am in this situation exactly. I am a paid instructor at the martial arts school of a friend of mine. I teach his curriculum, how he tells me to, in the order he desires. Because it is his school, with his name on the sign. I speak up when I think I have a good suggestion, and I offer my input on curriculum. He hired me to teach karate because he knows I am good at it, and part of what pays for is my perspective. But he's the owner and the head instructor. He get's final say on everything at all times and I make whatever adjustments to my instruction that he requires.

Basically, he has a set curriculum of techniques, class themes, drills, exercises, and training methods. I teach that, as he instructs, supplemented with my own knowledge and method. I send him copies of my class plans ahead of time so that I can make whatever changes he wants, and we go over any specific adjustments that need to be made from night to night based on attendance or tests or whatever else can come up.

In the end, he's the owner of the school. If I wasn't willing to teach things his way he wouldn't have me in his dojo and I wouldn't have any right to be there. It's the owner's _reponsibility_ to control what is taught in his home on his floor. If I owned the school I might do some things differently. _But I don't_. 

I think it's important to remember that.


-Rob


----------



## Thesemindz (May 13, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Get paid to teach? Interesting. Helping out in class is just part of being a senior student at our school.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


 
I get paid to teach. Because I'm good at it, and I can't afford to do it for free. If I wasn't getting paid to do it, I'd have to have some other job during that time and then I couldn't do it at all. There's nothing wrong with getting compensated for my time and effort. I recognize that teaching is part of being a senior student, in fact I require it of all my students to their juniors, but some of us are professionals too. Getting paid doesn't diminsh the value of what I do, it makes what I do possible. 

As to your other point, about head instructors not showing up, that can be a problem. The head instructor should always be involved. I think it's fine for other instructors to teach classes _under his direction_ but he should always have a hand in. That's what being a head instructor is. I also think he should personally teach all the material at black belt and above, but that's just me.


-Rob


----------



## bushidomartialarts (May 13, 2011)

I'm having trouble seeing why it matters.

You know how you've contributed to the growth of some people in your school. They know how you've helped them. 

It's one of the prime purposes of martial arts study to eliminate ego-based reasoning that makes this an issue to begin with?


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 13, 2011)

Thesemindz said:


> I get paid to teach. Because I'm good at it, and I can't afford to do it for free. If I wasn't getting paid to do it, I'd have to have some other job during that time and then I couldn't do it at all. There's nothing wrong with getting compensated for my time and effort. I recognize that teaching is part of being a senior student, in fact I require it of all my students to their juniors, but some of us are professionals too. Getting paid doesn't diminsh the value of what I do, it makes what I do possible.


 
Oh, I don't have a problem with people getting paid to teach. I just found it interesting that in the context of the post to which I was replying _students_ get paid to teach other students. If one wants to get paid to teach they could open their own school. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole getting paid to teach other students thing isn't at least partially contributing to the question of "whose students are these?"

YMMV

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Earl Weiss (May 13, 2011)

Thesemindz said:


> In my opinion, the Master of the school claims the students.
> 
> -Rob


 
Perhaps this is a fundamental issue.  What matters more? Who the instructor claims as a student, or who the student claims as an instructor?

I may elaborate more on why I asked this question.  

When I have had students screw up I tell them that if they ever mess up that bad training somewhere els and they ask "Who is your instructor?" That they should lie and say someone other than me


----------



## StudentCarl (May 13, 2011)

I still think the language of this whole discussion is the problem. A student is yours because you have spent regular time teaching them, not because they attend a school with your name on it.  There are levels of this and they don't conflict. I'm a junior assistant who doesn't teach classes; I work with individuals. The way I think of some kids as 'mine' is that I make a difference in their growth.  They are also the students of the regular instructor of their class who teaches them new curriculum; he's invested in them too and they are 'his'. My master runs the school and teaches too; obviously they are his too. To think that somehow you teach a student regularly but they are not your student is not real in terms of relationships and not logical within the language.

I do not claim to be the master. I don't speak or act for him except as he specifically delegates to me. Same with the instructors who run class. But within the tasks that are given to me, it's perfectly appropriate for me to feel pride and mine-ness. If my charges do poorly, it's a reflection on me and my master and it should bother me so I do better. When I'm given credit, I credit my instructor and master. I'm just the junior member of a well-led team.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 13, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> We are looking at the positive side of things here. *What if the student was very unruly or showed poor sportsmanship or, just sucked no matter how hard you try to teach him?* This reflects badly on the school but in particular to the owner of the school. No one ever says "Yeah he is GM John Doe's student, but it is really Jeremy who is his teacher." The owner of the school may get a lot of the glory but he gets all of the criticism for bad things as well.
> 
> When you teach a class in a school that is not yours, do you teach whatever you want, how you want? Or do you teach the owner's curriculum how he wants it taught?


Good point.  Personally, I don't think that the GM should get a ton of criticism for such a student *unless* he has willingly passed the student along in order to collect the testing fees.

At that point, it is the GM's responsibility.

Daniel


----------



## terryl965 (May 13, 2011)

Earl Weiss said:


> Perhaps this is a fundamental issue. What matters more? Who the instructor claims as a student, or who the student claims as an instructor?
> 
> I may elaborate more on why I asked this question.
> 
> When I have had students screw up I tell them that if they ever mess up that bad training somewhere els and they ask "Who is your instructor?" That they should lie and say someone other than me


 
Well I will add this to the above statement if the head instructor is not thought of as the student instructor, than he is doing one bad job. The students know who is really doing what, but a student should never feel the instructor is not his instructor.

Now for me I have always said GM Kim is my instructor but I train with Matser so and so as well and he has done alot for me. It is always in the wording with anything.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 13, 2011)

In response to the OP, the students are your responsibility while you are teachng them.  You are responsible for how you teach and what you teach.

If you are their regular teacher, then they may be coloquially refered to as your students, even though they are really students of the dojang.  Likewise, student will coloquially refer to the dojang as 'my dojang' even though they are not owners of it.

The students don't really belong to anyone.  They pay to train at the location where you teach.  If they move, they will pay to train at another location.  If they decide that they do not like the instruction, they will cease to train at the location where you teach and will either pay to train elsewhere or will simply quit.

If all instructors at your location teach on a volunteer basis and students are not charged a fee to train there, the dynamic still applies.

Daniel


----------



## ATC (May 13, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> In response to the OP, the students are your responsibility while you are teachng them. You are responsible for how you teach and what you teach.
> 
> If you are their regular teacher, then they may be *coloquially refered to as* _your students_, even though they are really students of the dojang. Likewise, student will coloquially refer to the dojang as 'my dojang' even though they are not owners of it.
> 
> ...


Someone that understands. :asian:


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

ATC said:


> Someone that understands. :asian:




But his explanation doesn't apply to you, because he said if you are their regular teacher. You are not. You said: 



ATC said:


> Now I assist in classes that I don't head but do from time to time head some classes on my own.


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> The more I hear things like this the more I wonder if there are head instructors who aren't showing up to the classes that are being run in their school and, if so, why not? Really, it just seems odd to me.




This happens in at least a couple/few situations that I can think of. One is where the head instructor has multiple schools. It's hard to show up and teach every class when you have five schools all over the place. Second situation is where the head instructor is semi retired or is about to retire and the first assistant does the bulk of the teaching. Third situation is where the head instructor is actively involved in the political aspects, travels alot or is otherwise engaged, and so again the first assistant does the majority of the teaching. Fourth situation is where the head instructor has actually sold the school to a student, but the head instructor is still referred as the head instructor. Fifth situation is where a student opens a dojang but asks his instructor to be the figurehead leader of the school, putting his picture, certificates, etc. up on the wall. So there are a lot of situations where the head instructor doesn't do the bulk of the teaching.


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> When I taught at my own school, I had my own students. Before that I taught at my instructors' school, but I taught their students. They were my fellow students but there were plenty of times that I taught class or taught groups of students within a certain class session. In fact, teaching - or at least assisting - is a requirement for being promoted to senior ranks at my instructors' school.



So does that mean that you won't be promoted anymore, because you no longer have your own school and/or no longer teach on a regular basis?


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> I suppose it's akin to using sa-hyung to refer to someone who is your senior (or sa-je for someone who is your junior), as opposed to your sabum. Sunbae and Hubae can, of course, be used but IIRC sa-hyung and sa-je are specifically for people in your same lineage under the same sabum.



I've never heard the term sa-hyung or sa-je used before. Generally we use the terms sumbae (sunbae means gentleman, different term) and hubae.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 13, 2011)

puunui said:


> So does that mean that you won't be promoted anymore, because you no longer have your own school and/or no longer teach on a regular basis?


 
It's good to see you so concerned about any future promotions I may or may not get, Glenn. Thanks.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 13, 2011)

puunui said:


> But his explanation doesn't apply to you, because he said if you are their regular teacher. You are not. You said:


I suppose in his case, they are 'his' students (coloquially speaking) for the time during which the responsibility for teaching them is given to him.

What they are called is unimportant. The students will have a relationship with their regular teacher and may also have a relationship with ATC, depending on how regularly he stands in. 

If one were to evaluate how the students were trained, the primary instructor is who I would identify as their teacher: Your form is excellent/in need of work. Who taught you? At which point the regular instructor would be the one to get the credit/criticism. 

ATC's role would be that of reinforcing the (hopefully) good training that the regular instructor is giving, but their relationship is really with the regular instructor.

Ultimately, it is that relationship that is important. Either you have it or you don't. If you don't, then you are just a trainer running a workout and participants cycle in and out as the classtimes change.   The cardio kickboxing instructor at the company gym is a great trainer with regards to running the class.  He calls the drills and the kicks and the participants get a great workout and burn calories.  If you (the general you, not you specifically) have no relationship with your students, then that is what you amount to.

Daniel


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

ATC said:


> If you teach at a school you are not an instructor nor a teacher but just a Jr. or helper. Even though your title is Instructor and that is what you are called, and you get paid as a staff member to teach classes and instruct students.



If you teach at a school, you are an instructor, but it is inappropriate to refer to the students as "your students". Slightly different than what you said. 




ATC said:


> You don't have any student's until you are the Master or owner of your own school. No matter if you teach every class and even have a 4th Dan ranking of Master. As long as the school is owned by a Master of equal or greater rank.



If you teach every class, regardless of your rank, then you would be the "soo suk sabum" or first instructor, and in this situation, you may consider the students to be "your students". Or more specifically, at that point, the students will refer to you as their instructor, along with the head instructor. For example, at the Chung Do Kwan main gym, GM UHM Woon Kyu was the Kwan Jang, but for many years GM PARK Hae Man was the Soosuk Sabum. So when I ask the students who their instructor was, they name both GM Uhm and GM Park as their instructors, even though they may have never taken an actual lesson from GM Uhm. 




ATC said:


> Students always only have one Master (the one they first started with) even if they go to another school even a longer time and learn more from that other school. So my current Master is not my true Master and I am not his student.



That's not true. I have many instructors that I have learned from over the years. My teachers consist of the head instructors of every school that I have been a member of.


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> It's good to see you so concerned about any future promotions I may or may not get, Glenn. Thanks.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris




Just asking. You don't have to get so defensive.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 13, 2011)

puunui said:


> I've never heard the term sa-hyung or sa-je used before. Generally we use the terms sumbae (sunbae means gentleman, different term) and hubae.


Wouldn't sa hyung mean forth form?

Daniel


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 13, 2011)

puunui said:


> Just asking. You don't have to get so defensive.


 
I was thanking you for your concern, Glenn. You've always been an exemplar of courtesy yourself on the board and have set a great example for others to follow so why you'd think I was getting defensive is beyond me.

Thanks again.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

ATC said:


> Just becasue an instructor calls someone his student does not mean that the student is not also a student of the school and the Master. Yes someone my be a *Jr. to the Master* and Sr. to others but if that Sr. is responcible for teaching that Jr. then for the Sr. to say he is a student that I teach is no different than saying he is one of my students. Yes he is ultimately the Master student as would be said Sr. No one is trying to disrespect the Master with the statement it is simply something said to communicate that you teach said student on a regular basis.




Junior to the Master. If you are talking about a student of the Master, then you wouldn't refer to that student as a junior. He would be a student. The teacher/student relationship is different from the senior/junior relationship.


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> I was thanking you for your concern, Glenn. You've always been an exemplar of courtesy yourself on the board and have set a great example for others to follow so why you'd think I was getting defensive is beyond me.
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> ...



whatever.


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Wouldn't sa hyung mean forth form?
> 
> Daniel




maybe, but I never heard of that used within the context of senior and junior relationships.


----------



## clfsean (May 13, 2011)

puunui said:


> I've never heard the term sa-hyung or sa-je used before.



Sounds like what we use in CMA from the Cantonese dialect. I don't speak Mandarin to know what they use. 

Sihing - older brother
Sidai - younger brother

Sijye - older sister
Simui - younger sister


----------



## Flying Crane (May 13, 2011)

I've got a situation that will take a little explaining.

My Sihing (older brother) runs a class where he teaches mostly Taiji, mostly to older folks.  He teaches some wushu to younger people, and he was originally my sifu (teacher) and taught me white crane.  He took me to his sifu (my sigung) about two years ago, and sigung allowed me to join his group, with his students (my sisuk [?] uncles).  I continued to call him "sigung" until about a year and a half later he told me clearly that he is my sifu, he is teaching me, i am learning things that my first sifu never taught me, and my first sifu is now my sihing, and my sisuk are now my sihing.  OK, that got it straightened out for me.

I've got one student who I train in white crane.  He is in Sihing's class, came in for the taiji and then wanted to train white crane with me.  So he does, and I teach him.  In all honesty, I'm teaching him the white crane, and sihing is not.  Sihing trained white crane a long time ago and has largely been separated from it, he taught me what he could but knew I needed to train with his sifu to advance.  So my student is really a student of Sihing's class, but I teach him, and Sihing only occasionally gives him pointers.

I respect my sihing and the fact that it is his class and my student came in to study under him originally.  Since a lot of the instruction takes place at Sihing's class, I consider my student really to be Sihing's student.  But really, I'm teaching him.  I only refer to him as "my student" when outside the context of class, and when talking with people not connected to the class, like the people here on Martialtalk.

Underneath it all, everyone knows who is teaching who.


----------



## JohnEdward (May 13, 2011)

I know Asian martial arts has student and master, and junior and senior structure. Be it cultural and centuries old in each art, it confuses me. Why does it have to exist, what was the purpose, and original context?  Who is teaching who in martial arts really shouldn't be the Crown Jewel should it?  

But students in general don't care that much who is teaching them. Unless, it is a famous teacher or fighter, i.e. a celebrity martial artist or someone really bad at martial arts for the most part in most places in the world.  

Why then should it matter to the teacher to have propriety rights over the students? Isn't it about sharing knowledge and passing on that knowledge.  I personally, have a loyalty to my instructor because he was my friend. But if he wasn't my friend then there wouldn't be any loyalty what so every. 

That parallels any coach, school or university teacher, I ever had.  Or anyone else who has instructed or gave me lessons. But in martial arts we create this "family" atmosphere, we have loyalties to instructors, we have instructors fighting over who teaches who. When this happens, students then are torn as a result of the politics of being unfairly put in the middle when teacher conflicts or attitudes arise.  


Instructors are not salesmen that are fighting and clawing over each other's clients /students. I am confused because it exists, which I feel is an archaic convention placed out of context. There would be much less issues and politics if there wasn't importance placed upon propriety teaching rights and the stigma of being a teacher.

I am not scolding or admonishing anyone, I just am confused this structure causes so many conflicts why is it still kept?


----------



## Thesemindz (May 13, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> I know Asian martial arts has student and master, and junior and senior structure. Be it cultural and centuries old in each art, it confuses me. Why does it have to exist, what was the purpose, and original context? Who is teaching who in martial arts really shouldn't be the Crown Jewel should it?
> 
> But students in general don't care that much who is teaching them. Unless, it is a famous teacher or fighter, i.e. a celebrity martial artist or someone really bad at martial arts for the most part in most places in the world.
> 
> ...


 
I think you make a lot of good points. I think it's a practice that has a lot of negative consequences. Instructors fighting over students, or threatening to withhold or remove rank, or trying to control who their students can work with or train with or teach. In many ways, it is just a technical school, and should be treated like that.

At the same time, I'm teaching people how to hurt and kill other people. I can't do that unless I trust them, at least some. And they can't learn unless they trust me not to hurt them in the process. I think from that natural trust level it is predictable that a kind of intimacy will develop. It is also natural to be grateful to our instructors for what they've shared with us, whether we bought that knowledge or not. From those two pillars, and the massive amount of time you're going to spend with your instructors, it doesn't seem all that unusual that close bonds would form.

As a student I felt a great deal of loyalty towards my seniors and my instructors. As an instructor I feel a great deal of loyalty towards my students. That can be a really positive force within a school. It can also be perverted and there's an entire forum here on Martialtalk called "horror stories" filled with examples of that. Many of us who've done martial arts for any length of time have seen it or heard of it happening. It's sad.

But that's humans for you. They can take anything beautiful and turn it to dross. I don't think there's anything wrong with creating bonds with the people you train with. We do something special. Those who don't practice will never really understand. But we have to make it something positive every time we step on the floor. We have to help each other, our juniors and our seniors. The Master and the Student learn together. It's a tradition passed down from teacher to student, hand to hand, generation after generation.

Could we _do_ without it? Sure. Some schools already are and I don't think it makes their karate any worse. But I'm not sure we're necessarily _better off_ without it.


-Rob


----------



## puunui (May 13, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> I know Asian martial arts has student and master, and junior and senior structure. Be it cultural and centuries old in each art, it confuses me. Why does it have to exist, what was the purpose, and original context?  Who is teaching who in martial arts really shouldn't be the Crown Jewel should it?



It is not so much who is teaching who as to what your relationship is to others, and based on that relationship, what your duties and obligations are. It comes from Confucius, who focused on correct behavior, depending on what your relationship is to the other person. Teacher - student and senior - junior are two of the relationships discussed. Parent - child is another important relationship according to Confucius. It is a very important part of the Korean Martial Arts, and all asian martial arts really. Some say that it is the most important part.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 14, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Wouldn't sa hyung mean forth form?
> 
> Daniel


 
Not necessarily. "Hyung" is the word that boys call their older brother. I believe it and the word your refer to are homophones. You'd really need to hear them both pronounced by a native Korean speaker and see how they are spelled in hangul to be sure; "hyung" is just a transliteration, after all.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (May 15, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> "Hyung" is the word that boys call their older brother.



It's not limited to what "boys" call their older brother. In my circle, junior males call their male seniors "hyung" or "hyung nim", no matter what their age.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 15, 2011)

puunui said:


> It's not limited to what "boys" call their older brother. In my circle, junior males call their male seniors "hyung" or "hyung nim", no matter what their age.


 
Odd that you didn't recognize the word as being part of sa-hyung, then. 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (May 15, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Odd that you didn't recognize the word as being part of sa-hyung, then. Pax, Chris



I didn't say that I didn't "recognize the word as being part of sa-hyung"; what I said was:

I've never heard the term sa-hyung or sa-je used before.

and 

maybe, but I never heard of that used within the context of senior and junior relationships. 		

We don't say "sa-hyung", younger males to older males as brothers we just say hyung, or hyung nim. For younger females addressing older males, it is oppa. 

The female term you posted, sa-je, I never heard that used either. For younger males addressing older females as sisters, it would be noona or noonim. For younger females addressing older females as sisters, it would be onni.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 16, 2011)

I thought you would've been able to puzzle it out, Glenn.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram (May 16, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Odd that you didn't recognize the word as being part of sa-hyung, then.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris


I have never heard the term Sa-Hyung used in meaning older brother especially when you consider 'Sa' can have two meanings in Korea.  One being '4' the other being 'death'.  When referring to an older brother hyung is the correct term but, depending on your relationship, using the suffix '-nim' may also be utilized.  For instance, when I address Glenn in private emails I refer to him as 'Hyungnim'.  This is my way of recognizing him as a close associate and my senior.  However, I have a good friend who I have known for many years and is older than me, I refer to him as just Hyung.  

I would be interested in seeing the Kanji of the term 'Sa-Hyung'.


----------



## puunui (May 16, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> I thought you would've been able to puzzle it out, Glenn.




Puzzle out what, that I never heard the term sa hyung or sa je used before? I already knew that. Let me ask you this: Does the ITF use the terms sa hyung or sa je when referring to seniors? Is this something that you used in your own school when you had it or at your instructor's school?


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 16, 2011)

No, I meant puzzle out the meaning of the word in the first place.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (May 16, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> No, I meant puzzle out the meaning of the word in the first place.



I don't care about puzzling it out. My comment only went to the fact that I never heard of those terms sa hyung and sa je being used in a Korean Martial Arts context. And frankly, it hasn't been established that the chinese characters for sa hyung and hyung or hyung nim are the same. That's why Jeremy asked to see the chinese character. Are you going to respond to him, given the fact that you are the only one who seems to use these terms, sa hyung and sa je?


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 16, 2011)

puunui said:


> I don't care about puzzling it out. My comment only went to the fact that I never heard of those terms sa hyung and sa je being used in a Korean Martial Arts context. And frankly, it hasn't been established that the chinese characters for sa hyung and hyung or hyung nim are the same. That's why Jeremy asked to see the chinese character. Are you going to respond to him, given the fact that you are the only one who seems to use these terms, sa hyung and sa je?


 
Nobody asked me to see the characters for the terms in question. Miguksaram said he'd be interested in seeing the kanji for them, but he didn't ask me for them. 

I also didn't say I used them, just that you could.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (May 17, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Nobody asked me to see the characters for the terms in question. Miguksaram said he'd be interested in seeing the kanji for them, but he didn't ask me for them.



In my opinion he did ask you, since you are the only one who uses those terms. Therefore you would be the only one who may know what the hanja (kanji is the Japanese term) looks like. I figured that you were ignoring his question, in the same way that you ignore mine.




chrispillertkd said:


> I also didn't say I used them, just that you could.


 
I suppose that you could use those terms if you really wanted to, but perhaps not in front of native Korean speakers.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 17, 2011)

puunui said:


> In my opinion he did ask you, since you are the only one who uses those terms. Therefore you would be the only one who may know what the hanja (kanji is the Japanese term) looks like.


 
Saying that you'd be "interested" in seeing the kanji, or hanja for that matter, hardly qualifies as asking a particular person to show them to you.  

I know kanji is the Japanese term. That's why I was a bit puzzled when Miguksaram said: "I would be interested in seeing the Kanji of the term 'Sa-Hyung'." Why do you think he said kanji instead of hanja? 



> I figured that you were ignoring his question, in the same way that you ignore mine.


 
I give all of your questions the attention they deserve, Glenn. 



> I suppose that you could use those terms if you really wanted to, but perhaps not in front of native Korean speakers.


 
I will pass along your opinion to the Korean gentleman who told me these terms.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Saying that you'd be "interested" in seeing the kanji, or hanja for that matter, hardly qualifies as asking a particular person to show them to you.
> 
> I know kanji is the Japanese term. That's why I was a bit puzzled when Miguksaram said: "I would be interested in seeing the Kanji of the term 'Sa-Hyung'." Why do you think he said kanji instead of hanja?


Hmmmm...why would I?   Could be a deep conspiracy to infiltrate the yakuza by showing off my keen knowledge of the term for Chinese characters in Japanese...OR it could be that before I met my wife I was studying Japanese so I have  always referred to the Chinese characters in this manner.  With that  said...I would be interested in seeing the hanja for these words.  I  personally have never heard them used in TKD or even in regular Korean  conversation (at least not with my family or Korean dramas I watch.   ).   

This is why I would be interested in seeing the kanj...oopps....hanja for the word.  No I did not directly ask you for this, but if you knew of where I could see it that would be peachy.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Hmmmm...why would I? Could be a deep conspiracy to infiltrate the yakuza by showing off my keen knowledge of the term for Chinese characters in Japanese...OR it could be that before I met my wife I was studying Japanese so I have always referred to the Chinese characters in this manner. With that said...I would be interested in seeing the hanja for these words.


 
And I used the term "kanji" because that's how you referred to the characters even though it's a Japanese term. 

So why do you think Glenn decided to "correct" my post and not yours? 



> I personally have never heard them used in TKD or even in regular Korean conversation (at least not with my family or Korean dramas I watch.  ).


 
Neither had I until recently. I knew hyung means "older brother" for males but had not heard of sa-hyung before. Guess you learn something new every day.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> And I used the term "kanji" because that's how you referred to the characters even though it's a Japanese term.
> 
> So why do you think Glenn decided to "correct" my post and not yours?


Well if I had to guess it was he addressing your post directly and put in Hanja then explained that Hanja=Kanji so that all people were clear on the terms being used.  So in essence correcting us both of the correct term to use while educating others on what hanja means in case they did not know. 




> Neither had I until recently. I knew hyung means "older brother" for males but had not heard of sa-hyung before. Guess you learn something new every day.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris


Right which is why I am curious as to the hanja of it all.  It may be some out dated term that no one uses anymore like sipsaram which was another way of saying wife way back when (according to my 18 year old Korean language text book.ha.haha)


----------



## andyjeffries (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> It may be some out dated term that no one uses anymore like sipsaram which was another way of saying wife way back when (according to my 18 year old Korean language text book.ha.haha)



I take it you mean Chipsaram?  And if so, whoah!  When did that get outdated and what's replaced it?  I found that one of the funniest sexist phrases in Korean (particularly when combined as in "uri chipsaram").


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Well if I had to guess it was he addressing your post directly and put in Hanja then explained that Hanja=Kanji so that all people were clear on the terms being used. So in essence correcting us both of the correct term to use while educating others on what hanja means in case they did not know.


 
I wonder why Glenn didn't just correct your post instead of mine, since you were the one who made the initial error. Any thoughts on that?

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

andyjeffries said:


> I take it you mean Chipsaram?  And if so, whoah!  When did that get outdated and what's replaced it?  I found that one of the funniest sexist phrases in Korean (particularly when combined as in "uri chipsaram").



Yes Sipsaram (sheep sah rahm)  The hangul '&#12613;' (siot) accompanied by '&#12643;' (ee) make the sound 'she'  I guess the new correct romanized way  to write it is 'ssi'. My text book...and I am being serious....translates it to 'Husband's humble use'.

My wife (girlfriend at the time) told me to drop the class.ha.ha.ha.


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> I wonder why Glenn didn't just correct your post instead of mine, since you were the one who made the initial error. Any thoughts on that?
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris



Again, he was in a conversation with you at the time.  So I am assuming he took that opportunity to make the correction.  Perhaps if I was in a conversation with him he may have corrected me then.  However, if you really want to know the true reason why...just ask the source.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Again, he was in a conversation with you at the time. So I am assuming he took that opportunity to make the correction. Perhaps if I was in a conversation with him he may have corrected me then. However, if you really want to know the true reason why...just ask the source.


 
Interesting. I don't think it's accurate, but it is interesting.

Glenn isthe one who brought up you asking for the hanja when he said: "That's why Jeremy asked to see the chinese character." He knew what you had posted, obviously, so why not just make a correction to you when he saw your post initially? 

As for asking the source, I'm sure if Glenn's interested he'll jump on in. He's always ready to courteously educate people about his thoughts, I've found, whether you ask him or not. But I was interested in what _you_ thought about his behavior. That's why I asked you directly.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## andyjeffries (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Yes Sipsaram (sheep sah rahm)  The hangul '&#12613;' (siot) accompanied by '&#12643;' (ee) make the sound 'she'  I guess the new correct romanized way  to write it is 'ssi'. My text book...and I am being serious....translates it to 'Husband's humble use'.
> 
> My wife (girlfriend at the time) told me to drop the class.ha.ha.ha.



Ah, OK.  I'm aware of siot-ee becoming she, but I thought you were referring to this word:

&#51665;&#49324;&#46988;

This translates as "house person" and when you use it you say "our house-person" rather than "my wife" which kinda makes her sound like a family servant.  My Korean teacher (female) didn't think it was as funny as I did   I'm fairly sure my wife would find it even less so...


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Interesting. I don't think it's accurate, but it is interesting.
> 
> Glenn isthe one who brought up you asking for the hanja when he said: "That's why Jeremy asked to see the chinese character." He knew what you had posted, obviously, so why not just make a correction to you when he saw your post initially?
> 
> ...



Actually what you asked me was why did he correct your post and not mine.  I gave you what I thought was his reasoning.  Now you are asking about his behavior on the manner?  Well I can tell you that he has the same behavior that I have known from him since 1999.  I can also tell you that it may come out as abrasive over the net because people already have a predisposition about him and as such already think he is trying to be abrasive.  However, if you meet him person and chat with him and he asks the same question you will find that it is not as abrasive as you might think.

So are directly asking me if I think his behavior is hostile towards you or are you wondering why he is picking on you and not me? Again, I think he was correct both of us but was posting the correction in a response to you.  I do not think he was just nit picking at you and leaving me alone.


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

andyjeffries said:


> Ah, OK.  I'm aware of siot-ee becoming she, but I thought you were referring to this word:
> 
> &#51665;&#49324;&#46988;
> 
> This translates as "house person" and when you use it you say "our house-person" rather than "my wife" which kinda makes her sound like a family servant.  My Korean teacher (female) didn't think it was as funny as I did   I'm fairly sure my wife would find it even less so...


Yep...that was the word and yes...the wife wasn't pleased with it.haha.ha


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Actually what you asked me was why did he correct your post and not mine. I gave you what I thought was his reasoning. Now you are asking about his behavior on the manner?


 
Not in general. His behavior in question, that's all. 



> Well I can tell you that he has the same behavior that I have known from him since 1999. I can also tell you that it may come out as abrasive over the net because people already have a predisposition about him and as such already think he is trying to be abrasive. However, if you meet him person and chat with him and he asks the same question you will find that it is not as abrasive as you might think.


 
Your comments about people's predisposition about Glenn is amusing, to say the least  But, like I said, my question was about his behavior of "correcting" my post, not yours. 



> So are directly asking me if I think his behavior is hostile towards you or are you wondering why he is picking on you and not me? Again, I think he was correct both of us but was posting the correction in a response to you. I do not think he was just nit picking at you and leaving me alone.


 
I stated what my question was. I ust find it odd that Glenn decided to "correct" my post instead of yours. Frankly, I don't need him to correct me when it comes to knowing the difference between Japanese and Korean :lol: And by your own admission you don't either as your use of "kanji" seems a kind of "short hand" for you. 

FWIW, I don't have to ask anyone's opinion about the hostility (or lack thereof) of Glenn's behavior. The very idea is funny since he's never been anything but courteous to everyone he's interacted with on this site.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> I stated what my question was. I ust find it odd that Glenn decided to "correct" my post instead of yours. Frankly, I don't need him to correct me when it comes to knowing the difference between Japanese and Korean :lol: And by your own admission you don't either as your use of "kanji" seems a kind of "short hand" for you.



Ok..then we'll just mark up his behavior as being odd and move on. 



> FWIW, I don't have to ask anyone's opinion about the hostility (or lack thereof) of Glenn's behavior. The very idea is funny since he's never been anything but courteous to everyone he's interacted with on this site.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris



Well then all is good in the hood.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Ok..then we'll just mark up his behavior as being odd and move on.


 
Yes, it is odd, especially since you've known him for so long. You'd think he'd have some inkling as to your knowledge on the subject, as well as, perhaps, your favoring of he term "kanji" for such things instead of "hanja." 



> Well then all is good in the hood.


 
Oh, sure. Obviously anything Glenn says can only be taken as being the most courteous possible behavior on his part. Any other thought is simply ridiculous. 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Yes, it is odd, especially since you've known him for so long. You'd think he'd have some inkling as to your knowledge on the subject, as well as, perhaps, your favoring of he term "kanji" for such things instead of "hanja."


Well I guess I never told him my deep dark secret about learning Japanese prior to learning Korean and hence the reason why I automatically just think Kanji instead of Hanja when referring to Chinese characters.  I rarely discuss Hanja with my wife much less other people.  

When Glenn and I have talked the topics revolve around TKD, Korean history, TKD books, "war" stories, different martial arts.  Can't say Korean language has ever been a topic that has come up very often.  Oh wait, he did ask if I could speak Korean fluently which I replied not fluently. 





> Oh, sure. Obviously anything Glenn says can only be taken as being the most courteous possible behavior on his part. Any other thought is simply ridiculous.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris


Wow...he must really be under your skin today.  So I have to ask, when you go to bed tonight will you still be this passive aggressive? Or will you just finally let it go that Glenn was correcting both of us and chalk it up to Oh...ok. hanja not kanji.?


----------



## puunui (May 17, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> I know kanji is the Japanese term. That's why I was a bit puzzled when Miguksaram said: "I would be interested in seeing the Kanji of the term 'Sa-Hyung'." Why do you think he said kanji instead of hanja?


 
Well, if I had to venture a guess, I remember he mentioned a long time ago in another forum that he had or was studying Japanese kanji, as part of his karate studies. I think at the moment his main martial arts focus is Karate, Sharkey's Karate (see his signature line) so he was probably thinking in Japanese when he was thinking about the characters. But you would have to ask him if you wanted to know for sure. 




chrispillertkd said:


> I give all of your questions the attention they deserve, Glenn.


 
ok.




chrispillertkd said:


> I will pass along your opinion to the Korean gentleman who told me these terms.



Good. While you are doing that, try asking him if he has ever used sa hyung or sa je in conversation before.


----------



## puunui (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Well I guess I never told him my deep dark secret about learning Japanese prior to learning Korean and hence the reason why I automatically just think Kanji instead of Hanja when referring to Chinese characters.  I rarely discuss Hanja with my wife much less other people.



Actually you did mention it, in another forum a while ago.  




miguksaram said:


> Wow...he must really be under your skin today.  So I have to ask, when you go to bed tonight will you still be this passive aggressive? Or will you just finally let it go that Glenn was correcting both of us and chalk it up to Oh...ok. hanja not kanji.?



I wasn't correcting anyone, I was simply mentioning it in passing. I don't know why it is such a big deal.


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

puunui said:


> Actually you did mention it, in another forum a while ago.


Cool...then I guess it is not a deep dark secret after all..pssst....just don't tell anyone I do Karate or they will think I know less about Taekwondo than they think I know already. 






> I wasn't correcting anyone, I was simply mentioning it in passing. I don't know why it is such a big deal.


Me neither.


----------



## puunui (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Well I can tell you that he has the same behavior that I have known from him since 1999.  I can also tell you that it may come out as abrasive over the net because people already have a predisposition about him and as such already think he is trying to be abrasive.  However, if you meet him person and chat with him and he asks the same question you will find that it is not as abrasive as you might think.




I don't think it is even that, because plenty of people have stated that what I write is blunt and to the point, but not hostile, at least not the way some people are digesting it. What I do think is that people feel hostile that someone would actually have the "nerve" to challenge their beliefs and opinions with facts, facts that they cannot refute with facts of their own. So they sit there all mad, and feeling that anger, project that on to me. It's the old describing other people while looking in the mirror thing. 

Remember recently when I mention the Psychology Today article about how masters in their study followed a similar path, which included the selection of three different teachers for different parts of their journey? The stage 1 teacher is what I would call a color belt teacher. This is your average normal dojang, which is geared almost completely towards the development of students to the 1st Dan level. Once students get past that, the curriculum gets very abbreviated. Most instructors can raise students to this level, no problem. The issue becomes what do you do if you want more? 

According to the article, at this stage, masters select a new teacher, which is very different than their first teacher. The focus at this stage, according to the article, is precision and perfection in all things associated with the given field. The teacher is a perfectionist, and what was acceptable at the lower level is no longer acceptable. Many times students/budding masters have to move and relocate to learn from their new teacher. This is similar to high school graduates moving away to go to college. 

I think the second level teacher is what is most needed today. It is where I have focused for the last I don't know how many years. It is the approach that I take in these online discussions. Most of the conflicts come from those that do not wish to explore things is such a detailed and precise fashion. They are comfortable with what they learned and are still learning from their level one teacher, even if their rank is higher than 1st Dan and they have not really learned anything new in a long time. And they get mad when someone challenges their beliefs and asks them to be more precise in their responses. 

Nothing wrong with that, just like there is nothing wrong with graduating from high school and stopping your formal education at that point. Not everyone is cut out go to college, much less grad school. But if that is where people are, then frankly, I don't see the need for higher dan ranks. Afterall, they don't give out college degrees to those who continue to hang out at their high school, long after the graduation commencement ceremonies have passed.


----------



## miguksaram (May 17, 2011)

Ok...So I spoke with my wife about the terms 'sa-hyung' & 'sa-jae'. As she explained it, these are terms used to address someone you feel a kin-ship with but not actually a blood relative. She mentioned that they are older terms that are not used as much as Hyung/Hyungnim or Dongsaeng. Older generations may use it more than the younger generation.

So mystery solved and I didn't even have to look at the kanji...darn...I mean hanja.


----------



## MJS (May 17, 2011)

Folks,

This section is getting to be just as bad as the study.  There're at least 2 people here who seem to have issues with each other.  Instead of taking shots back and forth, please use the ignore button.

Lets return to some civil discussion please.


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 17, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Well I guess I never told him my deep dark secret about learning Japanese prior to learning Korean and hence the reason why I automatically just think Kanji instead of Hanja when referring to Chinese characters. I rarely discuss Hanja with my wife much less other people.


 
That's odd. I thought you'd mentioned it on MT before. Perhaps I'm thinking of someone else.



> When Glenn and I have talked the topics revolve around TKD, Korean history, TKD books, "war" stories, different martial arts. Can't say Korean language has ever been a topic that has come up very often. Oh wait, he did ask if I could speak Korean fluently which I replied not fluently.


 
 Apparently.



> Wow...he must really be under your skin today.


 
Why would you say that you think Glenn is really under my skin since I just said, "Obviously anything Glenn says can only be taken as being the most courteous possible behavior on his part." You yourself said it was Glenn only comes off as abrasive because of people's "predispostion about him and as such already think he is trying to be abrasive." I totally agree with you: It's not Glenn. It's always the other guy. 



> So I have to ask, when you go to bed tonight will you still be this passive aggressive? Or will you just finally let it go that Glenn was correcting both of us and chalk it up to Oh...ok. hanja not kanji.?


 
It's passive aggressive to ask questions about someone's behavior? Interesting.

I don't need Glenn to correct me since I know the terms. I just find it odd that he'd skip over directly helping a friend like you and reply to my post. Odd, that.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## chrispillertkd (May 17, 2011)

puunui said:


> Good. While you are doing that, try asking him if he has ever used sa hyung or sa je in conversation before.


 
Yes he has.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram (May 18, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> I don't need Glenn to correct me since I know the terms. I just find it odd that he'd skip over directly helping a friend like you and reply to my post. Odd, that.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris


Seriously, cut yourself down from the cross you are nailing yourself to, use the wood to build a bridge and get over it.  

I see through your point that you feel Glenn does not correct friends, but the problem is that Glenn has corrected me before and we have been several heated debates in the past.  He already told you that it was just a general statement not even aimed at anyone.  To boot I already clarified your point that it is a real statement used by real Koreans...older generation mind you which is why I personally have not heard of it, nor has many others who have learned Korean in past decade.  

There is an old Buddhist story about a two monks crossing a river.  You should look it up and absorb it because it really does apply to you right now.


----------



## andyjeffries (May 18, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> There is an old Buddhist story about a two monks crossing a river.  You should look it up and absorb it because it really does apply to you right now.



Is it this one?  If so, I've heard it before (not sure it was buddhist monks in my story), and it is a good one.  In short though - the moral is "get over it"


----------



## MJS (May 18, 2011)

Admin Note

Apparently some people can't read.  Instead of returning to the OP, people still find it necessary to air their dislike for certain members.  If people can't follow the rules that're in place, they'll soon find themselves gone.

Thread Closed!


----------

