Go Ahead and Read The Book, Dudes

[Flying Crane]

In a past life, I used to be a management consultant for some wafer chip manufacturers. Part of the fabrication process included some intensive cleansing protocols both mechanically and physically, so the facilities and also workers needed to be made 'pristine' prior to operations proceeding again. I helped design and implement a successful CBT (computer based training) program which served to be the first step in the on-the-job learning process for new workers, prior to serving an apprenticeship with a senior floor leader. Six months after it rolled out, we measured an improvement of almost 14% in efficiency, which is quite good considering the limit resources invested into the CBT and then rollout training.

So while I understand your point about physical complexity, I don't believe it is an insurmountable problem to address. The goal of the CBT was to give workers enough private 'lab' experience so they could learn more meaningfully when they reached the apprenticeship section of the training. Likewise, I am trying to do something similar here and the project could be intelligently structured between class time and home study to reinforce each other. Just one simple example would be to use the video to only 'chain' the techniques together into an list of consecutive actions. The actual instruction of how to perform each action (down block, stepping, turning, etc) could be reserved for in-class time.

As for wanting to teach everything in person yourself, I can understand that desire. I have a traditional teacher who does the same mostly, or he relies on his senior students to help teach. I myself see a project like this as an effort to extend myself and my knowledge and skill for the benefit of my students. Technology lets us do a lot of things which would have been inconceivable even 50 years ago, and I am inclined to use it intelligently and judiciously where it can be of help.

There are certainly some topics that can be learned in the way you describe, I do not deny that. I simply do not believe that martial arts is one of them. People like to say, "well you can learn THIS in this manner, so why not martial arts too?" Because not everything is the same, not everything can be learned the same way.

here's another example. How about math. You can take a math book, read thru it, grasp the concepts, work thru the practice exercises, and then if the book has an answer key you can check to see if you did the exercises correctly. There is a definite answer, and this lets you know if you have grasped the information correctly. That feedback is immediate. If you got some wrong answers, you have the information you need to go back and rework the problems to see where you went wrong.

With the martial arts, you do not have this. You are simply doing the physical movements to the best that you can according to how you perceive the video. You have no way of knowing if you are really correct, even tho it looks TO YOU like you are. You need to wait until you get back to class to find out, and maybe undo everything that you thought you learned because it was really all wrong even tho you thought it was right. It's easy to watch a video, fool yourself into thinking that you've got it, when you really don't.

You are relying on later classtimes to fix these problems. OK, why not simply use the classtime to teach it properly in the first place?

Don't look for shortcuts in teaching. I do not believe they exist. Intelligent teaching, effective teaching, efficient teaching, sure. But shortcuts to teaching, no.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I am seeking a discussion about it. I do not seek validation or approval.

I understand it's a hot button issue for some, and they are welcome to participate or not as they please. I think it's healthy to hear all viewpoints and would enjoy material discussion. But it would be nice if everyone could respond to the discussion as it unfolds in a back and forth fashion rather than with, for a lack of a better word, a knee jerk reaction.

Please don't take this as an attack.

I didn't take it as an attack nor was my response, you asked for my thoughts and I gave them and it was not a knee jerk response nor was Flying Cranes form what I read and know of his background. Could be it is just a TCMA thing that does not carry over to modern TKD. However I doubt my TKD sifu from way back when would approve of DVD training or do it and from what I can tell of his website (yes he still teaches) he does not even have DVDs

 

[Flying Crane]

I think you are looking at it from and extreme point of view. He is not having a beginner come in to class on the first day then just give him a DVD to take home and learn from. At least this is not what I infer. I would think that the student would come to class and learn basic stances, blocks and strikes, while doing all of the repetition work and at some point simply understand that there is a school DVD that all should be using as a tool to learn his/her next form. So beginners as well as advanced student still do everything in class, including forms but simply are asked to practice at home with the DVD to learn the broad movements of the form to be prepared when in class and the details are being taught as well as the broad movements still.

The DVD is simply a tool for home study to keep the dojang/dojo time as efficient as possible.

Example: Say Monday is forms day. You begin by teaching the new form to a set of students as you normally would. Let's say you have already implemented the DVD at home study way also. You now notice that one student is not even getting the basic turn left and middle punch as he does not even know which way to turn or even if he is blocking or punching and what types of each. You then ask did you try using the DVD to learn the basic movements. He answers no. Then you ask the ones that are doing the basic turns and attempted stances correctly and they say yes. You then simply remind the class that they have DVD's that can help them have some understanding of what is being taught that would make learning in class faster and better as you don't have to waste the limited amount of time with just getting them to know the steps of the form. We can spend more time learning the details and the applications. You still correct incorrect form and techniques in class.

I think things can progress quicker and make a better student.

I fundamentally disagree. I do not believe it's a good idea.

I predict that you would spend at least as much time cleaning up what they had first learned from video, as you would simply teaching it correctly the first time. Avoid the confusion and don't waste the student's time. Just teach it correctly the first time.

 

[dancingalone]

I didn't take it as an attack nor was my response, you asked for my thoughts and I gave them and it was not a knee jerk response

Your first reply (Omar's too to be fair) felt like a knee jerk reaction to me. At the very least they gave the impression that you hadn't bothered to read the entire first post nor my subsequent one.

But enough on that. No biggie.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Your first reply (Omar's too to be fair) felt like a knee jerk reaction to me. At the very least they gave the impression that you hadn't bothered to read the entire first post nor my subsequent one.

But enough on that. No biggie.

You do of course realize you are about to derail you own thread you? And to be fair Omar's post was to the point.

If you don't like the answers don't ask the question.

 

[Omar B]

We are not talking about solo learning where there is no feedback nor correction from an instructor.

Oh I assumed it was a person who learned from tape then came in and became a student. After all, a roundhouse kick is first lesson stuff, why would a student with a real teacher need to learn it off of a tape ... and badly as you pointed out.

Seems like a problem with the instructor to me.

 

[dancingalone]

There are certainly some topics that can be learned in the way you describe, I do not deny that. I simply do not believe that martial arts is one of them. People like to say, "well you can learn THIS in this manner, so why not martial arts too?" Because not everything is the same, not everything can be learned the same way.

With the martial arts, you do not have this. You are simply doing the physical movements to the best that you can according to how you perceive the video. You have no way of knowing if you are really correct, even tho it looks TO YOU like you are. You need to wait until you get back to class to find out, and maybe undo everything that you thought you learned because it was really all wrong even tho you thought it was right. It's easy to watch a video, fool yourself into thinking that you've got it, when you really don't.

Two thoughts.

First, I have already stated that instructional media can be designed such that they reinforce or extend on things taught in live class. So, the example I gave was a given student might learn all the constituent actions in a form first from an instructor. The video could give him the linking or choreography of the form in a convenient reference. Surely you have no objections to this type of video tool from a pedagogical perspective?

Second, I've also mentioned by anecdote my student learning a RH kick from video. This might be a half glass full/empty thing, but I believe it's a successful use of technology for the student to have learned to that level, even with the correction I had to give them. Live corrections and more detailed explanations will always be needed. No one doubts that, least of all me. And if a student can learn something like a roundhouse kick, I believe TKD is full of 'simpler' physical actions with less simultaneous body coordination to them. All of these can be candidates for a similar reference and learning tool.

You are relying on later classtimes to fix these problems. OK, why not simply use the classtime to teach it properly in the first place?

There are myriad reasons to have corollary educational materials. Just some off the top of my head

• I am not available 24/7 for information
• Review of material learned in class
• a permanent record of the curriculum

Likewise, these are some of the reasons why I might ask a mature student to try to learn something from media I have prepared myself.

• A consistent 'lesson' of the base concepts I want to highlight each and every time for a given topic
• So that the in-class time can be spent making detailed explanations and corrections - unlike you I don't believe at-home study is a waste of time for the student if it is material I have provided myself. At the very least they should get some basic education for example what the purpose of a given strike is and what the correct targets are for the strike. Learning is all about repetition, repetition. Often times even just visualizing a technique is valuable for being able to perform it later. Surely I don't have to link some studies about using mental visualization and imagery to improve sports performance to argue this point.

Don't look for shortcuts in teaching. I do not believe they exist. Intelligent teaching, effective teaching, efficient teaching, sure. But shortcuts to teaching, no.

I don't see this as a short cut at all. It can't be a short cut if the learning process remains intact with extended contact/face time between teacher and students. I do not believe using adjunct tools and reference materials in learning to be a shortcut to teach or learning. Far from it. Constructed properly and use intelligently in a defined training curriculum, they are enhancements to the teaching method.

 

[dancingalone]

You do of course realize you are about to derail you own thread you? And to be fair Omar's post was to the point.

If you don't like the answers don't ask the question.

Sigh.

 

[Flying Crane]

There are myriad reasons to have corollary educational materials. Just some off the top of my head

• I am not available 24/7 for information
• Review of material learned in class
• a permanent record of the curriculum

in my opinion, good reasons to provide the video AFTER the material has been properly learned. Not the other way around.

Likewise, these are some of the reasons why I might ask a mature student to try to learn something from media I have prepared myself.

• A consistent 'lesson' of the base concepts I want to highlight each and every time for a given topic
• So that the in-class time can be spent making detailed explanations and corrections - unlike you I don't believe at-home study is a waste of time for the student if it is material I have provided myself

Oh, I never ever suggested that at-home study is a waste of time. It is critical, in fact. But, what ought to be the at-home study is practice of the material that has already been taught.

Granted, more advanced students might be working on their ability to use the material creatively and spontaneously, and that is a valid part of that practice. But when it comes to learning the codified curriculum, I believe it ought to be taught directly first, before it becomes a part of the student's at-home practice, and before they are given reference materials like video.

I don't see this as a short cut at all. It can't be a short cut if the learning process remains intact with extended contact/fact time between teacher and students. I do not believe using adjunct tools and reference materials in learning to be a shortcut to teach or learning. Far from it. Constructed properly and use intelligently in a defined training curriculum, they are enhancements to the teaching method.

I have serious doubts, but if you are doing this let us know how it turns out.

 

[ForeverStudent]

I think it's thing depending on many parameters: what age is student we talking about, what style is in question, who is the guy on the video or behind the book..and after all student and his intelligency and ability to incorporate what he saw with principles of his art and with what his teacher told him.

This last is main reason to put one straight answer, and it is that learning from book or videos is bad for beginners, since they don't understand principles yet.

I think, of the same important as information, is interpretation of information.

So, let's imagine a scale where left is bad and right is good. What student is younger, lower grade, and time spent in art, pointer moves to the left of the scale.

What student is older, higher grade (1. degree perhaps), and what time spent in the art is longer, scale moves to the right.

But, one more about books and videos..my, many times confirmed experience is...one seminar is worth as 10 books and videos.

 

[dancingalone]

Oh, I never ever suggested that at-home study is a waste of time. It is critical, in fact. But, what ought to be the at-home study is practice of the material that has already been taught.

Granted, more advanced students might be working on their ability to use the material creatively and spontaneously, and that is a valid part of that practice. But when it comes to learning the codified curriculum, I believe it ought to be taught directly first, before it becomes a part of the student's at-home practice, and before they are given reference materials like video.

That's a reasonable position to take.

 

[ATC]

I fundamentally disagree. I do not believe it's a good idea.

I predict that you would spend at least as much time cleaning up what they had first learned from video, as you would simply teaching it correctly the first time. Avoid the confusion and don't waste the student's time. Just teach it correctly the first time.

Why? no one has perfect technique when they first learn a form. Even after a couple of years you still may have students not doing techniques correctly. Also you would still be teaching the forms as well as everything else also. It is not a go home and learn this by itself, or is it? I did not take as such.

 

[dancingalone]

It is not a go home and learn this by itself, or is it? I did not take as such.

Clearly it is not, if people have been actually reading the thread.

 

[Flying Crane]

Why? no one has perfect technique when they first learn a form. Even after a couple of years you still may have students not doing techniques correctly. Also you would still be teaching the forms as well as everything else also. It is not a go home and learn this by itself, or is it? I did not take as such.

sure, learning this stuff is an ongoing process and it can often take a long time and a lot of work before it becomes solid and reasonably correct. No argument there.

Given that there needs to be ongoing in-class instruction in this stuff, in my opinion that is an absolute truth, I believe the best order of instruction is to learn it directly from the teacher as the first exposure to it. later other media such as video can be incorporated as reference. But starting with the reference material first, before receiving direct instruction from the teacher, in my opinion is going about it backwards. It's just not going to be nearly as fruitful an exercise as people might want to believe, and it's probabaly going to create problems that need to be undone in class.

What is really gained from it? Since you yourself state that it's an ongoing process of instruction, they why even try to twist it around this way? What amount of time and effort is really being saved by doing this? None, is my expectation.

 

[dancingalone]

What is really gained from it? Since you yourself state that it's an ongoing process of instruction, they why even try to twist it around this way? What amount of time and effort is really being saved by doing this? None, is my expectation.

I believe there is value in having 'pre-knowledge' before undertaking something new. This is backed up from the industry work I did in consulting with creating training materials for workers.

The learning tools/reference materials are the equivalent of taking a first pass at a particular problem. You (the student) hammer away at some of the problem (lack of knowledge or skill) with it. Later when you come into class, the instructor will hopefully peel away more of the shadow for you. And then when you get home you can watch the video again, hopefully getting a better level of understanding on the third pass.

This approach is what I am used to from my professional career. When I needed to learn something new, it's rare that anyone would simply sit down with a subject matter expert and have them regurgitate information for them to pick up. That's too unfocused to be beneficial. You need to conduct some basic research so that you even know what questions to ask.

 

[Flying Crane]

I believe there is value in having 'pre-knowledge' before undertaking something new. This is backed up from the industry work I did in consulting with creating training materials for workers.

The learning tools/reference materials are the equivalent of taking a first pass at a particular problem. You (the student) hammer away at some of the problem (lack of knowledge or skill) with it. Later when you come into class, the instructor will hopefully peel away more of the shadow for you. And then when you get home you can watch the video again, hopefully getting a better level of understanding on the third pass.

This approach is what I am used to from my professional career. When I needed to learn something new, it's rare that anyone would simply sit down with a subject matter expert and have them regurgitate information for them to pick up. That's too unfocused to be beneficial. You need to conduct some basic research so that you even know what questions to ask.

I do not believe that the nature of the martial arts lends itself to this kind of instruction. as I stated before, some things can be learned in that manner. But I do not believe it's an appropriate approach with the martial arts.

if you want to experiment with this, go ahead, I'm not gonna try to tell you that you cannot. Let us know how it turns out.

 

[oaktree]

Instructional videos often get bashed on MT. For the most part, the detracting points made are valid. Most seem to be able to converge on an agreement that books and videos are fine as references and should be used in conjunction with a live teacher.

I've related before that I have had a student teach themselves a roundhouse kick from a TKD video. This was someone who had had no prior martial arts experience at all, and I only had to make the correction that their kick should follow through the target. It's a fairly obvious and important correction, but the fact that their kick was fine otherwise gives me inspriration that some fairly specific and confined teaching/learning can be done outside of class. Why would we want to do this? Well, selfishly, I don't want to teach EVERYTHING. It would be nice if the student already comes to class with some preconceptions or 'pre-knowledge' that I have fed to them.

Case in point. I am telling 2 of my more mature TKD students to learn the choreography for Dan Gun, the second hyung, from a video filmed of myself performing it. That way when they come to class, I can make corrections instead of spending time on just teaching the form. Obviously, the source needs to be something I have created or approved of myself - I don't recommend picking out a random Youtube video or grabbing an unapproved text from the library for this.

Thoughts? If you were a relative beginner, would you mind your teacher putting this type of trust and responsibility upon you?

My thoughts are if I have to learn 50% of my material from a book or dvd because the teacher is selfish,lazy then I am going to find a different school.
To me as a student it speaks volume of what type of teacher this is.

This in my opinion is a half *** attempt at teaching if you need to refer to students to watch videos rather than teaching them maybe teaching is not for you.

I don't mind a teacher suggesting books or videos as references to help familarize me with concepts or forms I already learned from my teacher.

Basics and fundamentals should be taught straight from the teacher using dvds and books to teach relative beginners as you put it is lazy,reckless and in my honest opinion cheating a student of their money,time,and trust.

 

[ATC]

sure, learning this stuff is an ongoing process and it can often take a long time and a lot of work before it becomes solid and reasonably correct. No argument there.

Given that there needs to be ongoing in-class instruction in this stuff, in my opinion that is an absolute truth, I believe the best order of instruction is to learn it directly from the teacher as the first exposure to it. later other media such as video can be incorporated as reference. But starting with the reference material first, before receiving direct instruction from the teacher, in my opinion is going about it backwards. It's just not going to be nearly as fruitful an exercise as people might want to believe, and it's probabaly going to create problems that need to be undone in class.

What is really gained from it? Since you yourself state that it's an ongoing process of instruction, they why even try to twist it around this way? What amount of time and effort is really being saved by doing this? None, is my expectation.

Again I think you are looking at it from a go home and do this then come back and I'll see if it is correct or not point of view.

I will example how things would be done at my dojang.

We do not teach any beginners any forms at all. We do teach them basic blocks, strikes and kicks. 3 kicks to be exact and 9 blocks and strikes. We hone these techniques until we think they are ready for white belt. White belt is the first form. What is the harm in letting them try to learn the white belt form on their own, all the while we are teaching them their basics?

Then once it is time to learn their white belt form and we start teaching it, they have decent blocks and the kicks that we have been showing (teaching) them all along. The first from will have only 2 of the blocks that we have been working on and only one punch that we also have been working plus one kick.

So now when we start to teach the form it is a simple matter of correcting stance distance and transitions of the form instead of OK remember these first 6 moves. 90 left, 180 right, 90 left, 90 right, 180 left, and finally 90 right again. I will show you the rest once you learn that. They will know all the turn movements plus the techniques we have already been teaching them. So instead of taking a week to just learn the form (not even working on proper form) we use that week to help perfect things. Then spend the rest of the time making sure even smaller details are corrected or understood.

I think that given 2 months time and teaching only by teacher class and learn as he teaches vs. teach plus look a head, only to the end of your form at home on DVD, the two students would have noticeable differences in skill after the 2 month. You as an instructor can teach more students with better quality for all, at various levels.

I know you disagree, but if your mind is an open one you may give it some thought, if not a try just to prove it wrong. I may try it just to prove it right.

 

[Flying Crane]

Again I think you are looking at it from a go home and do this then come back and I'll see if it is correct or not point of view.

I will example how things would be done at my dojang.

We do not teach any beginners any forms at all. We do teach them basic blocks, strikes and kicks. 3 kicks to be exact and 9 blocks and strikes. We hone these techniques until we think they are ready for white belt. White belt is the first form. What is the harm in letting them try to learn the white belt form on their own, all the while we are teaching them their basics?

Then once it is time to learn their white belt form and we start teaching it, they have decent blocks and the kicks that we have been showing (teaching) them all along. The first from will have only 2 of the blocks that we have been working on and only one punch that we also have been working plus one kick.

So now when we start to teach the form it is a simple matter of correcting stance distance and transitions of the form instead of OK remember these first 6 moves. 90 left, 180 right, 90 left, 90 right, 180 left, and finally 90 right again. I will show you the rest once you learn that. They will know all the turn movements plus the techniques we have already been teaching them. So instead of taking a week to just learn the form (not even working on proper form) we use that week to help perfect things. Then spend the rest of the time making sure even smaller details are corrected or understood.

I think that given 2 months time and teaching only by teacher class and learn as he teaches vs. teach plus look a head, only to the end of your form at home on DVD, the two students would have noticeable differences in skill after the 2 month. You as an instructor can teach more students with better quality for all, at various levels.

I know you disagree, but if your mind is an open one you may give it some thought, if not a try just to prove it wrong. I may try it just to prove it right.

With the exeption of the video part, sounds to me like you are doing it the right way. Teach the basics, because those are fundamental and crucial to everything. Of course this makes sense. You must understand the basics before you can begin to learn the kata.

But it's all taught by the teacher. It's not introduced thru video first. If you want to use video, it should be used as a reference, after the material has been taught.

I don't do much teaching. I only teach a couple guys in my Sifu's class, I'm not running my own program. I teach under my Sifu's eye.

I don't know the TKD forms. All I can say is that the forms we train would be disastrous to attempt thru video as the first pass. It's not the movement itself. It's that the movement expresses and embodies a certain method and there is a lot going on underneath the surface, stuff that isn't obvious if you don't know what you are looking at. Sifu says, "the form itself doesn't matter, it's not important. What matters is every single movement within the form, that it be done CORRECTLY."

What he means is, if you just want to "do" the form, just complete the choreography, then you haven't learned anything. I do not dispute that one can use a video to mimick movement. You can learn the choreography and even make it look reasonably similar to the video if you work hard at it. But you haven't learned a thing, other than mimickry because you don't really understand what you are doing. This is what Sifu means when he says that every single movement must be done correctly. Getting thru the choreography in and of itself doesn't matter. Every movement within the form is teaching some very specific skills and you don't tap into those lessons by simply mimicking the choreography. You need very competent instruction to get those lessons. Telling your students "go ahead with this video and take a crack at it.." is doing them a disservice because you are really teaching them that mimickry is all that matters. Step here, punch here, block, whatever. But what are you really doing with that step, that punch, that block? Where is energy and power coming from? How are you using your stances, your footwork? A punch is not the same as every punch, nor block, nor step. There are different ways to do them, if you don't know the difference you won't even know what you are looking at.

I don't know TKD, maybe choreography is really what TKD forms are all about and there's nothing more to it. All I can do is speak for what I study, and the stuff that I do is much more than that.

Maybe our perspectives with our different systems just do not allow us to see eye to eye on this. That's fine. Like I said, I won't try to tell you that you cannot do this, that would be silly. I'm not your dad, I don't have any authority over you. But in the context of this discussion, I'll say very clearly that I absolutely do not believe it's a good idea to teach in this way.

 

[granfire]

Hm I think I see the point behind the initial question though.

It's one of my Mom's pet peeves: Progress is slow because people are reluctant to try a new method. The 'We have always done it this way' can be a problem.

I see a problem in martial Arts though with the book/DVD before the teacher explains the basics: The new student won't know what to look for.

Or does that mean we need better material, like a demo form, then repeated , with pointers to important sections drawn in and explanatory voice over?