What do you guys think about this?
Checklist for a great self-defense school:
-Instructors crossed-trained between different systems
-Sparring sessions in class
-Encouragement [towards experienced students] to bring in material that might add value to the classes
-Covers material in terms of principles, not adherence to perfecting specific techniques
-Classes focusing on martial arts fundamentals, including but not limited to MMA, FMA, and Silat
-Retention curriculum for all relevant weapons
-Instructors are knowledgeable in local use of force law
-Instructors either have experience in Human Behavioral Pattern Recognition and Analysis, or at least provide relevant resources like āLeft of Bang.ā
-Anti-surveillance and deescalation drills: acknowledging and politely dismissing potential predators
-Covers anatomy of criminal ambush
-Does āFenceā drills (Geoff Thompson)
-Covers the difference between social and predatory violence, what it takes to avoid either
-Covers basic firearms manipulation, movement, and mid-fight footwork, SIRT if they have the budget, and brings in specialized instructors
-Revolver work in clinch
-Does pig or meat labs to demonstrate weapon effectiveness
-Seminars on how criminals procure/manufacture/carry weapons
-Stop the Bleed/TCC curriculum
-Runs full scenario drills, testing students ability to appropriately use force or deescalate, and talk to authorities under pressure post-incident
-Brings in specialists who can cover anti-abduction
-Discusses physical security and brings in specialists who can teach lockpicking/entry
-Open gym hours for practicing absolutely anything, whether thatās sparring or study groups
Ideal for whom? For most students wanting to improve their odds in a self-defense situation, even including touchpoints on all this would dilute their focus on core material.
Also, taking the focus away from "perfecting" specific techniques seems to imply not drilling them over and over, over time. That repetitive drilling is what makes them functional in chaotic situations.
You also mention specific arts (Silat) and generic competition description (MMA) as requirements in the same sentence, which is odd. While I'd assert MMA competition training is a good base to work with, you can get a solid base without needing to reference MMA. And what you can get from Silat or FMA that is most useful for self-defense can be had from other sources. My point here is that requiring specific arts or competition focus isn't as useful as wanting coverage of specific concepts or approaches.
And some of what you suggest is a edge-case material (lockpicking, anti-abduction) or just interesting but not useful for SD (how criminals make and procure weapons).
Any role-playing scenarios (talking to authorities, de-escalation, etc.) can get really sketchy. I've been to communication skills seminars where the instructor couldn't get role-plays to stay realistic (people don't react in a role-playing scenario the way they would in reality), so I'm really leary of anyone claiming they can do these well with highly stressful situations like you describe.
To me, an ideal SD school has a focus on SD applications, encourages some level of competition for the core skills, has some coverage of SD law, de-escalation, situational avoidance, and other "knowledge" segments by people who use them regularly, and fits the needs of those attending within the time commitment their priorities support. That last part is very important, and isn't at all the same across all people interested in SD.
I'll also add that while I prefer instructors who have experience in multiple arts, that's not at all necessary. Someone who is very experienced in BJJ, and has played with folks from other arts (but not trained in those arts), and has some job-related experience, is likely (but not necessarily) better equipped than someone who has done some BJJ and some Karate, but lacks those other points.
