Recieving rank or earning rank

[StudentCarl]

Visible symbols of rank are interesting for what they do AND don't show. This is much more real if you have lived in a world where the rank affects more of your life, such as in the military.

Visible rank tells you what the giver of rank in that organization believes that person's knowledge, skill, and ability level to be--it labels what group you belong to. It often relates to experience/time served, as most modern organizations include time as a component of promotion.

It is NOT a reliable indicator of anything unless you know what the rank-giver's values and standards were when the rank was given. It usually means that someone of higher rank has had more training or more experience, but does not guarantee they learned, can apply, or can teach it. Experienced soldiers evaluate new arrivals by what they can do, not the rank they wear, and real authority is based in proven ability.

The #1 biggest problem with rank is the popular notion that promotion is the goal--that being high ranked is better than lower rank. That comes from uneducated people who think rank is what garners respect.
That notion causes the Peter Principle: promotiong people beyond their true ability, and it puts all of the responsibility on the master to decide when to promote (I'm sure the pressure to promote fast is real).

Instead of working to become the best blue belt you can, the goal becomes to promote quickly. In hopes of getting respect by getting a black belt, the student does not dig for the richness of growth at each level of learning, and builds a weaker foundation. It is possible to be treated with great respect as a blue belt if your depth of learning is genuine and you know your limits (yes, there's much of the curriculum you don't know yet).

By extension: it's as though people believe that the way to become a master is to get as many embroidered bars as possible on your black belt. Perhaps it's worth asking how an unkown master would act as a student in class and with peers and juniors if we dressed him or her with a blue belt. His/her role would be different, but what would we see?

Instead of rank, maybe it's important to ask what it means to work toward mastering an art. Not that I think it's possible to be a master, but how does that change your behavior if mastery is your goal? Maybe it's easier to believe in the pixie dust of getting lots of embroidery!

As always, thanks for leading me to think.

Carl

 

[igillman]

Sometimes it can depend upon the school. In the school I used to go to I became a green belt. It was while I was trying to decide how I can juggle some finances so that all of us could test for the next belt level that I thought about how our classes are structured. Over the next few weeks I kept an eye on what the higher belts were doing during class and it turned out that they were doing the same stuff that we were. I figured that was the case but I had not been paying enough attention to be certain. Yes the higher belts learn a different form and some different step sparring but that was the only difference. I then kept an eye on the black belts and guess what? They spent less time doing training and more time teaching everybody else. We had someone who had been a brown belt for 3 months and had not learned their form yet because every time we did forms he was told to teach some lower belts their forms.

In our school rank didn't mean anything. It did not matter what colour your belt was you all did the same stuff in classes. That meant I could stay a green belt, save money and still learn what I needed to know. In fact, being a higher rank was sometimes worse because it meant that you did not get to participate in the classes every time. Sometimes you had to teach either groups of lower belts or whole classes instead of participating in the class.

I think that if they took the basic kicks, front, side, turning, back, axe, hook etc... and grouped them into a few different groups they could have taught one group per belt level. That way each belt colour would have made a difference and you would have been interested in moving up through the ranks. It also would have helped because at each level you would learn to perfect the kicks before you moved up.

 

[igillman]

My view on a belt colour is this. The belt colour is an indicator of the minimum amount of knowledge or skill a student is expected to have. They may know more than their belt colour but they should not know less. One example is if Bruce Lee walked through our door to start training he would be given a white belt. Just because he is wearing a white belt does not mean he has no skills, it simply means that he has not tested for yellow belt yet. I would not expect anything of him due to his white belt but I know that he would beat my expectations. Once he earned his yellow belt I would expect him to know basic dojang etiquette, a couple of simple kicks and his white belt form but not much else. Once again he would surpass expectations and so it would continue up the ranks.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Martial arts rank is utterly unimportant. What should matter is knowledge and skill. However, many schools formally tie the transmission of knowledge into their ranking system, making the syllabus rigid, so material is not taught until a person has reached a certain threshold. In situations like those, it's not realistic to ask why doesn't someone just stay at a [low] rank.

Oh, sure it is. Just keep practicing the basic punches, kicks, and blocks that you learn as a white belt. Mastering basic techniques and putting them in different combinations should be enough to keep a person occupied for literally years.

Correct me if I am wrong, but that's the case with the ITF right? There is still material reserved for the ranks up to 7th dan, so there is indeed good incentive to hunger for higher levels.

Actually, in the ITF the last thing you learn according to the official syllabus is Tong-Il, the last tul, at VI dan.

But I know plenty of instructors who teach different things to students of different ranks. For example, my instructor holds off on teaching people a flying two-direction kick until II dan since that's when it shows up in Ko-Dang tul and the student has a good grasp of basic flying kicks, flying double kicks, and flying combination kicks. Once those things are covered the student finds it relatively easy to get a flying two-direction kick down. But I know an instructor who teaches a flying two-direction kick to 1st gups since he says they need a long time to practice it before being able to do it well enough for the tul.

Contrast that to the Okinawan karate system that I study and teach. At fourth dan (really at third) I have learned the entire body of material that my teacher wanted me to learn. Now it is just a matter of continuing to deepen my understanding of the material. I have no real desire to jump up in rank. It would have no real impact on my daily life and would be entirely ornamental to begin with.

Then don't bother to test if you don't want to. But your statement above doesn't actually indicate that rank isn't important, just that you've ceased learning additional techniques. It doesn't mean you haven't stopped learning about those techniques, which is certainly part of advancing in rank. Part of testing in Taekwon-Do includes reviewing lower techniques and tul to demonstrate that one has continued to improve.

Large organizations such as the KKW might have a real hierarchical need for ranks, if the rank corresponds to one's expected responsibilities.

I have no clue as I'm not really sure what the KKW does except issue rank.

Pax,

Chris

 

[dancingalone]

Oh, sure it is. Just keep practicing the basic punches, kicks, and blocks that you learn as a white belt. Mastering basic techniques and putting them in different combinations should be enough to keep a person occupied for literally years.

What you are describing is "kickboxing" which doesn't have belt ranks. All of the karate-based arts, tkd included, can and should have more depth to them in terms of physical technique. Now whether you want to teach this inside of a belt system or not is up to you.

Actually, in the ITF the last thing you learn according to the official syllabus is Tong-Il, the last tul, at VI dan.

Reason enough to want to pursue VI dan if Tong-Il is supposed to teach you something substantial. If it is just another set of combination movement, perhaps not so much.

But I know plenty of instructors who teach different things to students of different ranks. For example, my instructor holds off on teaching people a flying two-direction kick until II dan since that's when it shows up in Ko-Dang tul and the student has a good grasp of basic flying kicks, flying double kicks, and flying combination kicks. Once those things are covered the student finds it relatively easy to get a flying two-direction kick down. But I know an instructor who teaches a flying two-direction kick to 1st gups since he says they need a long time to practice it before being able to do it well enough for the tul.

Good. These teachers are not static. They teach material to students when they need it, not when a arbitrary requirement sheet says to.

Then don't bother to test if you don't want to. But your statement above doesn't actually indicate that rank isn't important, just that you've ceased learning additional techniques. It doesn't mean you haven't stopped learning about those techniques, which is certainly part of advancing in rank.

Perhaps I need to say it another way: The number of stripes on your belt doesn't matter. It's the knowledge in your head, grooved into physical memory. You assume the two go hand in hand. I do not. They may but there is no guarantee of it.

And I only brought up myself to give an example of someone with a modicum of rank who doesn't care about rank advancement. By the way, I don't "test" anymore at yondan. If my instructor feels like promoting me, he simply will. He's been at the same rank for at least 20 years, so he's in the same boat as I am in this. A few extra stripes on my belt isn't going to make me any better. It's primarily an ego and money thing.

Part of testing in Taekwon-Do includes reviewing lower techniques and tul to demonstrate that one has continued to improve.

OK.

 

[chrispillertkd]

What you are describing is "kickboxing" which doesn't have belt ranks. All of the karate-based arts, tkd included, can and should have more depth to them in terms of physical technique. Now whether you want to teach this inside of a belt system or not is up to you.

No, I'm not describing kickboxing at all. Like I said, if you learn basic punches, kicks, blocks, etc. then you should have material enough to last years. That's especially true if you practice a system that includes bunkai. aren't there stories of karate men in the past who spent years practicing one or two kata? Even if you don't get some of the concepts that are present in some kata because they were simplified and/or split into several kata instead of one long one you can spend time practicing technique and studying strategy yourself.

Reason enough to want to pursue VI dan if Tong-Il is supposed to teach you something substantial. If it is just another set of combination movement, perhaps not so much.

Perhaps. But you can learn the concepts in the tuls even if you don't learn the tuls. I'd hazard to say the same would be true for many if not most systems. But, hey, yes I agree rank is important in this instance.

Good. These teachers are not static. They teach material to students when they need it, not when a arbitrary requirement sheet says to.

I'm not really sure how you're able to say a certain set of requirements is arbitrary that you don't follow.

Perhaps I need to say it another way: The number of stripes on your belt doesn't matter. It's the knowledge in your head, grooved into physical memory. You assume the two go hand in hand. I do not. They may but there is no guarantee of it.

Reread my post, please. I specifically stated the rank system was open to abuse (just like any other system, really). That means people will get promoted without knowing enough. Just like they do in school, in business, in the military, etc. I'm not sure many people would say a high school diploma is meaningless just because some people graduate who are functionally illiterate.

And I only brought up myself to give an example of someone with a modicum of rank who doesn't care about rank advancement. By the way, I don't "test" anymore at yondan. If my instructor feels like promoting me, he simply will. He's been at the same rank for at least 20 years, so he's in the same boat as I am in this. A few extra stripes on my belt isn't going to make me any better. It's primarily an ego and money thing.

Testing or getting promoted by instructor "fiat" is irrelevant, IMO, to this conversation. I would have no problem if someone simply gave their students rank without a test if they wanted to do so. But if you don't think rank is important and your instructor promotes you do you tell him, "No thanks, rank isn't important"? If that is, in fact, the case, it just raises the question: why get any rank in the first place? If it is "utterly unimportant" do you tell your instructor that? Do you rank your own students? Why would you?

Pax,

Chris

 

[ccultrara]

What I have noticed from teaching is that many people use the ranking system to keep their training in check. If one's sidekick and poomsae at white belt rival that of a brown belt and he/she is not promoted that becomes discouraging. I have also noticed that once our students hit Semi-Black belt( a transition year and prep year from red to black) they stop caring about rank because no new belts are awarded just stripes. They train and train and when we say they are ready to test they go about it. Whether they recieve or earn the belt, they have put the work in regardless and the receive/earn debate is put on the instructor's disgression

 

[dancingalone]

No, I'm not describing kickboxing at all. Like I said, if you learn basic punches, kicks, blocks, etc. then you should have material enough to last years. That's especially true if you practice a system that includes bunkai. aren't there stories of karate men in the past who spent years practicing one or two kata? Even if you don't get some of the concepts that are present in some kata because they were simplified and/or split into several kata instead of one long one you can spend time practicing technique and studying strategy yourself.

Ah, but the study of bunkai goes considerably beyond what you originally stated. "Just keep practicing the basic punches, kicks, and blocks that you learn as a white belt. Mastering basic techniques and putting them in different combinations should be enough to keep a person occupied for literally years." So no throws, no locks, no grappling, no kyusho, etc. Advanced bunkai generally contains at least one or more of those elements in it.

Respectfully, the punchy, kicky practice you described does fit the term "kickboxing" to a great extent. The point I am making is that karate and TKD can and should incorporate more physical technique than that and if it means you have to reach a certain level of rank before being exposed to it, then desiring higher rank is not unreasonable. It's when rank serves as nothing more than a "I'm cool" statement that I begin to discount its attainment.

Perhaps. But you can learn the concepts in the tuls even if you don't learn the tuls. I'd hazard to say the same would be true for many if not most systems. But, hey, yes I agree rank is important in this instance.

Yes, but this is actually uncommon in my experience of meeting other martial artists. Most teach the FORM itself on a fairly superficial performance level without delving into the principles (or deviations from principle) each pattern teaches.

I'm not really sure how you're able to say a certain set of requirements is arbitrary that you don't follow.

Perhaps you are personalizing too much? I can definitely say a set of requirements is arbitrary when a teacher refuses to deviate from it even when his students would benefit from a more flexible course of instruction. That's a true enough statement when we look at it from a general level.

Reread my post, please. I specifically stated the rank system was open to abuse (just like any other system, really). That means people will get promoted without knowing enough. Just like they do in school, in business, in the military, etc. I'm not sure many people would say a high school diploma is meaningless just because some people graduate who are functionally illiterate.

Not sure how things are in your area right now, Chris, but I've traveled all over the country in my youth. I seen many martial artists in a variety of systems with more rank than skill or knowledge. It's so bad that I am largely unimpressed by a high dan without seeing the person move on the floor myself. Sure, there might be some older seniors who might lack the physical attributes they formerly had and they can still contribute by being excellent teachers. IMO however, the number of paper tigers far exceed this group.

Testing or getting promoted by instructor "fiat" is irrelevant, IMO, to this conversation. I would have no problem if someone simply gave their students rank without a test if they wanted to do so. But if you don't think rank is important and your instructor promotes you do you tell him, "No thanks, rank isn't important"? If that is, in fact, the case, it just raises the question: why get any rank in the first place? If it is "utterly unimportant" do you tell your instructor that? Do you rank your own students? Why would you?

The rank system is important up to the point that the system has been fully transmitted. If that takes place at 3rd or 4th dan or 6th dan, so be it. That's where the relevance ends for me. Higher ranks than that are either honorary or based on organizational politics/responsibilities, even if there can be a testing component to it.

And yes I would tell my sensei rank is utterly unimportant in the sense that I am talking about it here. To me, being promoted by my sensei is a recognition of his approval which is very important to me, but that would be true if he was ranking me as a yellow or as a yondan. The actual number on the certificate is fairly unimportant to me since I have reached the point of full transmission and being recognized as a full instructor by my teacher. If I still had some material to learn as say a shodan, I doubtlessly would be very interested in learning more and thus gaining higher rank, as the two hopefully are intertwined.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Ah, but the study of bunkai goes considerably beyond what you originally stated. "Just keep practicing the basic punches, kicks, and blocks that you learn as a white belt. Mastering basic techniques and putting them in different combinations should be enough to keep a person occupied for literally years." So no throws, no locks, no grappling, no kyusho, etc. Advanced bunkai generally contains at least one or more of those elements in it.

Sure, but that doesn't argue at all against my initial position. Frankly, I've learned keupso chirigi from almost day one and I include that in what I was talking about originally. It is, in fact, part of mastering basic technique, IMHO. I figured someone who practiced a system that emphasizes bunkai would've, too.

Respectfully, the punchy, kicky practice you described does fit the term "kickboxing" to a great extent. The point I am making is that karate and TKD can and should incorporate more physical technique than that and if it means you have to reach a certain level of rank before being exposed to it, then desiring higher rank is not unreasonable. It's when rank serves as nothing more than a "I'm cool" statement that I begin to discount its attainment.

Should? Maybe. Lots of people always talk about getting rid of "what isn't effective." My point is that you can learn a ton by engaging in in-depth study of some pretty basic technique. No need to promote at all, really. Just learn a few beginner patterns, or even just some individual techniques and combinations. No need for rank, especially if it's "utterly unimportant."

Unless it might not be...

Yes, but this is actually uncommon in my experience of meeting other martial artists. Most teach the FORM itself on a fairly superficial performance level without delving into the principles (or deviations from principle) each pattern teaches.

Commonality isn't really an issue. As I said, the issue is simply whether or not rank is important. I think it is. You think it is "utterly unimportant." And yet you seem to stick to having it. I just find that an interesting position.

Perhaps you are personalizing too much? I can definitely say a set of requirements is arbitrary when a teacher refuses to deviate from it even when his students would benefit from a more flexible course of instruction. That's a true enough statement when we look at it from a general level.

No, I wasn't personalizing things. I was asking how you can state a system is arbitratry when you don't use it. Nothing more. I'd also question you're use of the term arbitrary given your statement above. But those things arfe neither here nor there as they aren't really germane to the main topic.

Not sure how things are in your area right now, Chris, but I've traveled all over the country in my youth.

Me, too. Still am, in fact. I've even been to some foreign countries for Taekwon-Do stuff. You see all sorts of things, don't you?

I seen many martial artists in a variety of systems with more rank than skill or knowledge. It's so bad that I am largely unimpressed by a high dan without seeing the person move on the floor myself. Sure, there might be some older seniors who might lack the physical attributes they formerly had and they can still contribute by being excellent teachers. IMO however, the number of paper tigers far exceed this group.

Could be, I don't know. The problem with generalizing from personal experience is that one's experience never really raises above the level of anecdotal evidence. I mean, I could list all the VII, VIII, and IX dans I've trained with (and there have been several of each rank). The majority of them I have been very impressed with. I'm usually busy working when I'm at a seminar or visiting a school so it's hard to recall the people I find less than impressive (although I have seen a few demonstrations that can only be described as horrible; a certain Tai Chi demo holds a very special place in my loathing).

The rank system is important up to the point that the system has been fully transmitted. If that takes place at 3rd or 4th dan or 6th dan, so be it. That's where the relevance ends for me. Higher ranks than that are either honorary or based on organizational politics/responsibilities, even if there can be a testing component to it.

Well, then I dare say the rank system is decidely not "utterly important."

And yes I would tell my sensei rank is utterly unimportant in the sense that I am talking about it here. To me, being promoted by my sensei is a recognition of his approval which is very important to me, but that would be true if he was ranking me as a yellow or as a yondan. The actual number on the certificate is fairly unimportant to me since I have reached the point of full transmission and being recognized as a full instructor by my teacher. If I still had some material to learn as say a shodan, I doubtlessly would be very interested in learning more and thus gaining higher rank, as the two hopefully are intertwined.

Hmm, I very much doubt I'd ever tell my instructor I didn't value the rank he awarded me. The fact that he has recognized that I possess a certain level of proficiency is reason enough for that. To do otherwise would be discorteous,

But I have to say that you now seem to be saying something a bit different from rank being "utterly unimportant." But hey, I'm probably wrong and probably am (wouldn't be the first time, of course).

Pax,

Chris

 

[dancingalone]

Sure, but that doesn't argue at all against my initial position. Frankly, I've learned keupso chirigi from almost day one and I include that in what I was talking about originally. It is, in fact, part of mastering basic technique, IMHO. I figured someone who practiced a system that emphasizes bunkai would've, too.

Not what you said above at all when you referenced only practicing basic techniques. And if kyusho is something you've been exposed to from day one, you are outside of the norm, frankly. Unless you consider stuff like 'hit him in the jaw' to be kyusho, in which case, I won't say anything more.

Should? Maybe. Lots of people always talk about getting rid of "what isn't effective." My point is that you can learn a ton by engaging in in-depth study of some pretty basic technique. No need to promote at all, really. Just learn a few beginner patterns, or even just some individual techniques and combinations. No need for rank, especially if it's "utterly unimportant."

Unless it might not be...

Again, if that is what you are referencing, this is not the practice of karate or even taekwondo as I understand it. It is punchy, kicky martial arts. Unless you want to now say that kyusho, grappling, etc are all 'basic' techniques...

Commonality isn't really an issue. As I said, the issue is simply whether or not rank is important. I think it is. You think it is "utterly unimportant." And yet you seem to stick to having it. I just find that an interesting position.

There should be no contradiction in your mind. The rank itself is unimportant. It's when people tie rank into curriculum and performance standards that rank takes the stage... when it shouldn't.

No, I wasn't personalizing things. I was asking how you can state a system is arbitratry when you don't use it. Nothing more. I'd also question you're use of the term arbitrary given your statement above. But those things arfe neither here nor there as they aren't really germane to the main topic.

So why do you drag out this point, especially if it seems to be something you believe non-germane?

Me, too. Still am, in fact. I've even been to some foreign countries for Taekwon-Do stuff. You see all sorts of things, don't you?

Sometimes unfortunately so.

Could be, I don't know. The problem with generalizing from personal experience is that one's experience never really raises above the level of anecdotal evidence. I mean, I could list all the VII, VIII, and IX dans I've trained with (and there have been several of each rank). The majority of them I have been very impressed with. I'm usually busy working when I'm at a seminar or visiting a school so it's hard to recall the people I find less than impressive (although I have seen a few demonstrations that can only be described as horrible; a certain Tai Chi demo holds a very special place in my loathing).

True enough. But we are talking about a non-scientific topic after all so anecdotes are all we have. We also come from different martial backgrounds and I am sure there would be plenty you find impressive that I would not and vice versa. It's a matter of what one values. We've differed enough on a variety of topics to where I know that's true.

Well, then I dare say the rank system is decidely not "utterly important."

See above.

Hmm, I very much doubt I'd ever tell my instructor I didn't value the rank he awarded me. The fact that he has recognized that I possess a certain level of proficiency is reason enough for that. To do otherwise would be discorteous,

Don't think I said that. Quite the opposite actually. I value my instructor's recognition of my skills and maturity as an instructor in my own right. I do NOT value the concept of martial arts rank outside of this aspect when it moves beyond a useful construction in terms of connection to curriculum. In other words, if rank is primarily a deal about politics or longevity in the martial arts or even simple money, no, I don't think it's a big deal at all, particularly if the subject can't demonstrate a reciprocal level of martial skill.

But I have to say that you now seem to be saying something a bit different from rank being "utterly unimportant." But hey, I'm probably wrong and probably am (wouldn't be the first time, of course).

I hope I have clarified my stance somewhat.