Last one....errr...what do you think of my website again?

[Cruentus]

Paul M.,

Thanks for the input again.

I have done some research on Medievel Craftsmen/tradesmen structures. I found it hard to find reliable sources on the internet, so I took a trip to the library a while ago on it. The books I have gone through at the library are "Merchant and Craft Gilds" by E. Bain, "An Introduction to English Economic History" W.J. Ashley, and ". "On the History and Development of Gilds" by Brentano, and "Influence and Developement of English Gilds," by Hibbert.

A good site for a brief reference is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gild
I thought they had a good little brief description.

So, I have done research. I know my history based on my sources. Now, of course as I learned in elementary school, "History" is really "His Story." So, if you have some sources that tell a different story then what I have read and been discussing for the reason that you think that my perceptions would cause a problem of some kind, then I would be happy to look at them, as I am always open to learning.

However, I clearly am not trying to "misuse" or "misinterpret" history to fit my own needs.

What I am clearly doing is taking an old structure with a rich history behind it, and tailoring it to fit the needs of my group. This only makes sense, as we are not under a medievel oligarcy, nor do we live in "medievel times, nor is there as much of a need for a "martial craft" as there was in medieval times. This would be why my little slogan isn't "fighting for survival," or something like that, but is, "bettering ourselves through the continuous process of combative education." It's not all about "as*kickin'," it's about doing something that we enjoy to better ourselves. So, considering this, I see nothing wrong with tailoring the structure to fit the needs of my group, and the times we live in.

Now you said,

In your website, the mission/philosophy comes off as more "anti-martial arts structure" and less about the positive intent of your chosen titles, ranking/certification and structure. I say ditch the "they are lying and doing it wrong" message and stick to the "I find this a positive structure for me" message. Otherwise your respectability/credibility as a 'master' because you have trained in that structure is undermined, along with the conflicting message of respecting your teachers but being critical of the culture of martial fantasy they came from and perpetuated.

Very eloquently put, and there is some truth to that. As I had said before, the problem we are having is due to a poor explaination on my part, rather then a problem with the structure itself.

Now, as I have a habit of "pointing out pink elephants," I will state that my critique of our current state of affairs in martial arts holds true, and I am going to say so in my explaination on my site. However, as I said before, I need to better explain where/how it fits with history, and "real world" structures. Also, and I had noticed this before you pointed it out, my focus DOES need to be on the positive aspects of what I am doing rather then the critique of our current state of affairs.

Having said that, as I said before, I will be updating my site again within the next few days, and I will be making these changes.

Thanks again for the feedback. Like I said, feedback is good because it alerts me to changes that I may need to make, if any. It also gives me an opportunity to better explain myself for those who might misunderstand.

Yours,
Paul Janulis

 

[Cruentus]

Tulisan, I have a question. Is being an instructor full time a future goal of yours, or do you intend to carry it on as a part-time thing? Do you intend for the site to act as a draw for more students (advertising), or more as a public information type thing, as in, buddy asks your student, "what's this martial art you do? who teaches it, what are the details?", and student says "check out the website, its all there."

I think that the intent of the site is an important factor to consider when critiquing the message.:asian:

Good questions.

I do not intend to make "martial arts" my full time career, nor do I intend to open up a school. I do intend to suppliment some income for it, however. There is nothing better then getting paid for what you love, IMHO.

My site is really to inform, but by informing, I advertize. I am not aiming to put forth a bunch of catchy phrases to bring in clientel. My goal is to be informative, with the idea that if people read, see, and understand, then they can make an educated decision on if what I offer is for them or not.

I hope that I answered your questions, and that I adequetly explained my stance on "advertising."

Thanks again!
:asian:
Paul Janulis

 

[Flatlander]

Honestly, Paul, kudos to you for putting this out there for everyone to kick around. Takes stones, brother. Keep up the good work.

Respectfully,
Dan

 

[Cruentus]

Honestly, Paul, kudos to you for putting this out there for everyone to kick around. Takes stones, brother. Keep up the good work.

Respectfully,
Dan

Thank you sir!

:asian:

 

[loki09789]

As to Journeymen/women not being teachers, this may be true, on the average. Yet there were many a case when a senior Journeyman would take on an aprrentice to not only help but to also learn what the journeyman could teach him. Agree that said apprentice may not learn as much or as fast as he would under a master of the craft, yet the apprentice could still be taught and still learn.

Just my thoughts
:asian:

My father went through the tradeskill program at the local Ford Plant and I worked there for a bit part time while in college as well so I know of where you speak. He learned alot from the Journeymen level guys, but as mentors and job/task/team leaders guiding and directing the job, not formal instructors. Actual instruction was under the guys/girls who lead and taught the classroom/practice applications before he was allowed on the floor. Interestingly enough, Erie Community College has established a relationship with the UAW tradeskill programs to transfer that training into an associates degree program in industrial engineering as recognition for their skill and abilities.

My point is not to say that learning is exclusively in the hands of 'formal teachers' but that instruction is a separate craft/trade unto itself that needs special training to be mastered.

 

[loki09789]

Paul M.,

Thanks for the input again.

1. I have done some research on Medievel Craftsmen/tradesmen structures. However, I clearly am not trying to "misuse" or "misinterpret" history to fit my own needs.

2. What I am clearly doing is taking an old structure with a rich history behind it, and tailoring it to fit the needs of my group.

3. the problem we are having is due to a poor explaination on my part, rather then a problem with the structure itself.

4. Now, as I have a habit of "pointing out pink elephants," I will state that my critique of our current state of affairs in martial arts holds true, and I am going to say so in my explaination on my site. However, as I said before, I need to better explain where/how it fits with history, and "real world" structures.

5. Also, and I had noticed this before you pointed it out, my focus DOES need to be on the positive aspects of what I am doing rather then the critique of our current state of affairs.

1/2/3. Glad you did some research, that is important. The problem is that the inconsistencies reduce the clarity of your meaning to readers so that further explanation is necessary. This is the same as writing a thematic essay basically and any incosistency will weaken your stance on the theme. You have already stated that you will be revising this rough draft for more focused, thematic consistency so I will wait to see the revisions.

That is one of the elements of your implied mission - to combat 'martial fantasy.' If you want to be consistent in thought, word and deed then that does need to be clearer to avoid or to make less less substantial the possible negative criticism of your structure. I think the structure is a good idea and might be easier to understand for some western trained minds.

4&5. This is no problem as long as, as I have mentioned in position/persuasive writing, the purpose of your referencing these 'pink elephants' is to strengthen your position/mission/structure. If you spend too much dwelling on it, the percieved implication, or inferred meaning could be bashing.

Looking forward to the revisions. It might be helpful to check out some business plan format to make it more concise and focused. Usually these are broken down into Philosophy/Mission/Application/..... makes for a quicker, clearer read and a more structured format. This would leave more room for the visuals/animations and such that appeal to the shorter attention span of most readers today and the natural accuity of the human eye/brain.

 

[Cruentus]

My point is not to say that learning is exclusively in the hands of 'formal teachers' but that instruction is a separate craft/trade unto itself that needs special training to be mastered.

I agree with you completely. As a teacher, I know that you know this to be true!

I actually worked at Rochester Community Schools, and I approved curriculum for the Math program at the Alternative Center for Ed. with the board, as well as taught it in the school.

For those being certified "instructors" under me, they will have a hand in working with junior classmates for one-on-one instruction, teaching larger groups in the class setting, and creating programs. I have a specific guideline that works well for creating material that they can use to create their own.

Skill comes first, but skill in teaching is also important.

 

[Cruentus]

1/2/3. Glad you did some research, that is important. The problem is that the inconsistencies reduce the clarity of your meaning to readers so that further explanation is necessary. This is the same as writing a thematic essay basically and any incosistency will weaken your stance on the theme. You have already stated that you will be revising this rough draft for more focused, thematic consistency so I will wait to see the revisions.

That is one of the elements of your implied mission - to combat 'martial fantasy.' If you want to be consistent in thought, word and deed then that does need to be clearer to avoid or to make less less substantial the possible negative criticism of your structure. I think the structure is a good idea and might be easier to understand for some western trained minds.

4&5. This is no problem as long as, as I have mentioned in position/persuasive writing, the purpose of your referencing these 'pink elephants' is to strengthen your position/mission/structure. If you spend too much dwelling on it, the percieved inplication, or inferred meaning could be bashing.

Looking forward to the revisions. It might be helpful to check out some business plan format to make it more concise and focused. Usually these are broken down into Philosophy/Mission/Application/..... makes for a quicker, clearer read and a more structured format.

Cool man!

I will repost when I make my revisions, and I look forward to your input.

Thanks again!
:asian:
Paul Janulis

 

[Rich Parsons]

My father went through the tradeskill program at the local Ford Plant and I worked there for a bit part time while in college as well so I know of where you speak. He learned alot from the Journeymen level guys, but as mentors and job/task/team leaders guiding and directing the job, not formal instructors. Actual instruction was under the guys/girls who lead and taught the classroom/practice applications before he was allowed on the floor. Interestingly enough, Erie Community College has established a relationship with the UAW tradeskill programs to transfer that training into an associates degree program in industrial engineering as recognition for their skill and abilities.

My point is not to say that learning is exclusively in the hands of 'formal teachers' but that instruction is a separate craft/trade unto itself that needs special training to be mastered.

Paul M,

First, I do understand the UAW apprenticeship program, had an Uncle who was a journeyman and I took the tests myself. Yet, this was not what I was talking about. I was refering to the Blacksmith and Cooper and any other tradesman who sufficiently from the large guilds, who had no choice but to teach his apprentices what he could.

Now as to you comment about mastering a trade, I would have to agree that one would have to be exceptional, a "Phenom", or taught by someone else of Master skill, or near master skill. Yet, to say that A journeyman could not teach at all, is out of the question in my opinion. Now, if you or Paul J or anyone else wishes to make it otherwise in their trade inside Martial Arts or otherwise, then so be it, I am just saying that it was not an absolute that one had to be a master to teach. I agree by being a master of a trade you are more apt to be a better teacher, not always, and thereby have students who will learn from you your skills of the trade.

 

[Cruentus]

I just wanted to mention here that I don't pigeon hole my members. If a member takes one class and decides to go out and call himself Grandmaster, and teach, then what am I to do to stop him? This is true in ANY program, for that matter.

The difference between myself and many others is that many others want you to believe the illusion that you "Can't" go off and do whatever you want, whenever you want. This is, as I say, an illusion. The fact of the matter is, YOU can't STOP someone from doing what they want!

People can do what they want, however, there will be consequences to those actions. And...those are on them. I am simply not trying to create an illusion here, and I am willingly recognizing that people can and will do what they are going to do.

So, my certification program is just that; me "certifying" or "vouching" for someone elses ability to perform a skill. If it is a Journeymans certificate, I am vouching for their ability to perform a skill in a particular specialty. I am not saying that they CAN'T teach that specialty; on the contrary, they can teach it if they want. I am just not willing to vouch for the ability to teach the subject after only a few months of private lessons. If it is an "apprentice" certificate, then I vouch for their ability to perform the basics of the art. They can go teach if they want...but I am not vouching for that ability yet. "Instructor and Craftsman" is a certification where I vouch for their skill AND ability to teach.

So my certification program doesn't say that you can't teach something, or can't do something. It only says that this is what I am willing to vouch that YOU CAN do. Make sense?

Furthermore, in my opinion, teaching happends when you know a skill that someone else doesn't know, and you show it to him. This occurs at almost every seminar or even class that you go to by the students. So, people in my class start "teaching" within the class very early. If they are doing 6-count with a 1st timer who doesn't know it, then they get to now teach that movement. This works out great because not only can I guide my members to attaining higher levels of skill, but I can guide their teaching ability as well. This builds and builds. As they get better at their martial craft, I let them work with more people, and even teach portions of the class. Before their certification, I guide them in lesson planning and the creative process of designing programs. So, by the time I can certify them to instruct, I KNOW that they have that ability.

Sorry for the lengthy post again...Rich's comments just brought attention to a few things that I thought needed clarification.

:ultracool
PAUL

 

[Cruentus]

It's Official!

I officially changed the name of my group to "Tulisan Eskrima Gild"!

Furthermore, I modified somethings on the information page for "The Gild" to better illustrate the historical references, and to better illustrate my intent with the certification process.

I also modified the E-zine, so it has a little bit better visability. I like the black background better!

There are a tone more edits and modifications that I need to do; particualrly spelling/grammatical changes, and illustration changes to help the flow of the site.

However, I listened to some of your critique's that I liked, and made some changes accordingly.

Thanks again...I'll let you know when I do more!!

:asian:

 

[loki09789]

Paul M,

First, I do understand the UAW apprenticeship program, had an Uncle who was a journeyman and I took the tests myself. Yet, this was not what I was talking about. I was refering to the Blacksmith and Cooper and any other tradesman who sufficiently from the large guilds, who had no choice but to teach his apprentices what he could.

Now as to you comment about mastering a trade, I would have to agree that one would have to be exceptional, a "Phenom", or taught by someone else of Master skill, or near master skill. Yet, to say that A journeyman could not teach at all, is out of the question in my opinion. Now, if you or Paul J or anyone else wishes to make it otherwise in their trade inside Martial Arts or otherwise, then so be it, I am just saying that it was not an absolute that one had to be a master to teach. I agree by being a master of a trade you are more apt to be a better teacher, not always, and thereby have students who will learn from you your skills of the trade.

Rich, I couldn't make out exactly what you were trying to say with this post because of missing words and such but I will respond to what I think you are talking about:

Never said that a journeyman could not teach at all. I did make the point that a journeyman would not be able to take apprentices within the guildhouse model with any measure of legitimacy or pay/compensation. Only master class craftsman were legitimately allowed to take on apprentices.

Were situational necessities like a lack of a local master craftsman, the urgent need of a craft/trade skill realistic problems that required that the Guildhouse structure was modified or adjusted based on that need? Yup. Just like the 90 day wonder commisioned officers of the Vietnam era earned them the same 'rank' as their predecessors even though the requirements were different or the current change in Army Special Forces requirements and standards of entry have changed given the increase in demand and change in operational use that Special Forces face.

Journeyman class tradesman would not have taken on apprentices - they might be assigned them by either their direct master or the guild how senior masters to pass on what they know at some point (how to make nails, wire, horseshoes if you were a blacksmith for example). Just like students do internships with different businesses over the summer that are endorsed by the school. The businessman they are working for isn't a teacher, but they do have stuff to teach by experience and guided, supervised application.

It would not be uncommon for a tradesman to teach his own son, but that would only mean speeding up his learning curve once he was able to send that child to a master craftsman for official training if he was not ranked as a master himself yet. Did/do junior ranked folks instruct under the supervision of seniors/masters? All the time, it happens in martial arts programs and in the trade skills as an effective learning tool for both the instructor and the student. But the junior rank/journeyman isn't the principal instructor or head instructor/master who is planning and outlining the training program for the apprentice.

Being a master of your craft by no means implies that you would be a better teacher than a journeyman. It just means that you have mastered your craft. Teaching is a different thing. Some of the WORST teachers are master craftsman/artists because they don't relate/connect/sympathise with the beginner mindset and skill level anymore. Or they can become threatened when they see a novice demonstrating talent or understanding at an early phase that rivals their own.

Like I have said in the past, I disagree with the "Martial Fantasy" idea that Paul J is basing his chosen structure on because it isn't the institution that is the problem IMO - whether guilds, politics, martial arts, corporate/industrial workplaces, families or what ever - it is people.

People who abuse/corrupt the institution by manipulating any power or influence they have to pick on someone, satisfy personal agendas or create a cult of personallity that puts them at the top of the heap/or eliminates any competition for that title is the problem and they are all over the place.

 

[Cruentus]

Like I have said in the past, I disagree with the "Martial Fantasy" idea that Paul J is basing his chosen structure on because it isn't the institution that is the problem IMO - whether guilds, politics, martial arts, corporate/industrial workplaces, families or what ever - it is people.

People who abuse/corrupt the institution by manipulating any power or influence they have to pick on someone, satisfy personal agendas or create a cult of personallity that puts them at the top of the heap/or eliminates any competition for that title is the problem and they are all over the place.

I agree with the notion that "people" are the problem. I happened to also believe that problems are more prevelent with "people" due to the capitalist structure (and no, this is not a slam on capitalism) added with the lack of value for the martial craft, added with the tendancy for martial arts to attract people with needs to fill voids or ego.

For a good article to read on the subject, I linked an article from Macyoung's site that discusses "martial cults" on my E-zine.

But all of that is a moot point. I didn't develop my structure solely to combat a problem, I created it because it fits my group well. Also, I never state that my way is the only way to go, or the only way to combat the systematic problem that we have in martial arts. I clearly state that this is just what our group is doing. There are other structures that can work well.

I just thought I'd clear the air on that...

thanks!

PAUL

 

[James Patrick]

I just wanted to say that we just made some major changes to our site recently. We are still using Geocities, but that will change before the summer. The changes and updates were mostly made to the content. We did a lot of cleaning up and tightening up of our image and programs.

So please, stop in again and take a look!

Thanks,

James

 

[James Patrick]

Updated again, again.

Figured it needed pics.

Okay...uh...NOW LOOK!

lol
James

 

[James Patrick]

A few more clarifications worth mentioning;

The name has officially been changed to "TULISAN Tactical Training" from "Tulisan Eskrima Gild."

Since the launching of our own training group, a lot of changes have been made.

#1. We have gotten away from the "martial artie" image in favor of a more professional one.

#2. We have moved in more of a 'tactical and practical' direction with most of our programs, with the exception of the historical fighting arts division.

#3. The historical fighting arts division aims to take an academic approach to the fighting arts; studying the historical aspects of a portion of the martial art as well as the physical aspects. This helps put the physical aspects in a better perspective.

#4. The structure of The Gild (Now just called "The Instructors Gild") and the Journeymen programs have basically remained the same.

#5. All the programs have been better defined and streamlined.

Basically, this whole deal started out with Paul Janulis deciding to restructure his own training group, which was a small, private club. That was basically what the The Gild originally was. Paul got to do some work on the tactical side of things with some operators and some basic self-defense with civilians. He was also still creating, researching, and developing on the "martial arts" side. So, Paul had to start TEG Corp. as a separate entity for the tactical and self-defense based programs.

Then, as some of us involved put our heads together with input and opinions, Paul was able to streamline all of this under one brand - TULISAN Tactical Training.

What is neat, for me at least, is to see how Paul has been evolving as a martial arts instructor all here on Martial Talk. Most guys who are out there and already famous, you don't really know how they got there. I had no idea how much Paul has evolved until I logged on here. It's neat to be involved with something from the ground floor. It is also interesting just to read the history on martial arts stuff on this site; I hope this site always remains strong, as it is a great archive for so many things.

Anyways, some more things to come from us, hopefully by this summer if things go right:

#1. Launching of a new Logo.

#2. Getting rid of Geocities in favor of a new domain name and design.

#3. Purchase of property to build a new training facility.

#4. Continued training, research, and development. Particularly on adrenaline response training, and firearm tactics over the next few months.

#5. Continuing to build reciprical relationships with other tactical and martial arts schools and groups in our region. We have been a WMAA member for sometime now, Paul trains at FMAC Flint weekly, Paul has recently joined Great Lakes Self Defense Association and hopes to help them boost their membership, and Paul has recently linked up with LiveSafeAcademy (who is also associated with Gunfighters Ltd.) as support staff and is building a reciprocal relationship with them. Also, supporting MT is a good thing for everyone as far as we are concerned, because we feel that it is run very professionally, and it acts as a good archive for anything martial.

#6. Boosting attendant numbers to events, and boosting numbers for The Instructors Gild.

#7. Doing more work with Local LEO.

Hopefully, things will continue to progress as well as they have, with no major hiccups.

So stay tuned!

Yours,

James