"Rotating curriculum"

[dortiz]

"It's almost more of a academic model to teaching. Where you need to complete x number of credit hours to graduate. While there are some prerequisites a lot of the courses can be taken in any order, at least within some sort of grouping (ex 1st year courses, 2nd year courses, etc) "

Yes, but you cant take French III until you have taken basic French. And taking a business economics class has nothing to do with your Volleyball elective course.

Its not the same thing. Martial Arts are about foundation and building skills through muscle memory. People have a natural learning cycle of 4 steps. Novice, good enough to be dangerous, I got it to I can teach it. It applies to everything. The school model works because you can go through the cycle of learning in each class as its different. This is about one process that needs to be learned in a way that builds upon it self.

Dave O.

 

[Andrew Green]

"It's almost more of a academic model to teaching. Where you need to complete x number of credit hours to graduate. While there are some prerequisites a lot of the courses can be taken in any order, at least within some sort of grouping (ex 1st year courses, 2nd year courses, etc) "

Yes, but you cant take French III until you have taken basic French. And taking a business economics class has nothing to do with your Volleyball elective course.

Its not the same thing. Martial Arts are about foundation and building skills through muscle memory. People have a natural learning cycle of 4 steps. Novice, good enough to be dangerous, I got it to I can teach it. It applies to everything. The school model works because you can go through the cycle of learning in each class as its different. This is about one process that needs to be learned in a way that builds upon it self.

Dave O.

If you think French 1 -> French 2 -> French 3, then you are right. But does martial arts work like that?

Year 1
------
Forms 1
Sparring 1
Self-Defence 1
Weapons 1
Grappling 1

Year 2
------
Forms 2
Sparring 2
Self-Defence 2
Weapons 2
Grappling 2

etc.

Now each of those could probably be broken down into chunks that are not dependent on each other. Break each into 3 ex (Grappling = Takedowns, Top & Bottom) Perhaps with a core set of things that are always taught and you have 15 "chunks" right there.

3-weeks on each chunk and you have 3 years worth of curriculum for 3 different levels. So to do that you would need 3 sets of classes.

White / Yellow / Orange
Green / Blue
Brown

Students spend a year in each class then move to the next one, having been through all the material regardless of when they actually started.

I've also seen some people that push this idea suggest a separate "intro" program. A separate class that a new students is in for 3-months or so, to learn the basics so that they can jump into the "regular" classes.

That's rather simplified, but is the basic idea. You can do shorter cycles and repeat them, or overlap your "chunks", etc. Whatever suits the curriculum.

It's really not that different from what most people are already doing for most of the class, just a little more structured.

If you have a class full of people for most of the class they will be doing the same thing, but won't all have been their the same amount of time.

If I go in tonight and teach throws / takedowns off a underhook I will have people that have been training a short while doing them, and I will have people that have been training for a couple years doing them. I've never sat down and drawn up a full curriculum & schedule, but we definately do things in small chunks. Depending on when someone starts they get those chunks in a different order.

 

[granfire]

This is complete problem focused on a business model and not a teaching one.

Sad.

Dave O.

which are you talking about?

the breakneck speed of testing or the need to buy private lessons to keep up?

 

[Andrew Green]

which are you talking about?

the breakneck speed of testing or the need to buy private lessons to keep up?

Both of those can be done regardless of how you manage your class and have nothing to do with this model. Any model, that is actually structured around teaching a group will give you the opportunity to try and push private lessons.

Suppose I have a straight linear progression with specific start dates. You join, then miss 3 weeks of classes at some point, should the whole group go back for you? Even if we repeat, it's really not fair to the rest of the group who have already spent 3-weeks working on something to then have you come back and slow down the group trying to get caught up. Same thing would happen if you missed 3-weeks in a academic class, when you come back you are behind, you have missed material that is likely required before you can move forward.

There are other ways to deal with this sort of thing, but private lessons is probably the most profitable. But it has to do with group classes, not rotating vs linear.

For example, if you join a group guitar class. You miss a few weeks where some chords are learnt and practiced, then come back as the group is working on a song using those chords. What should the instructor do? Let you fall behind? Offer private lessons to catch you up? Slow down the group while you catch up?

You might even get the benefit of increased attendance, if missing classes actually effects your training. On the flip side you might lose more if they feel they have fallen behind due to missing classes and decide to just not come back.

 

[granfire]

well, yes and no, because academical classes are aiming to get you out of the school. You pay for a limited amount of time.

If you have folks from beginner to advanced BB in one group, you have a different problem.

If I miss 3 weeks (which has happened) I am exactly where I was before. I might miss one grading, but that is about it.

The again I have no experience with schools that have 1000+ families enrolled. I think ours is a big fish in the market with around 100 students.

But with a school that is open 6 days a week, you get plenty of chances to catch up without being pushed for extra private lessons.

 

[Dusty]

I teach a rotating curriculum at my school. If you have any questions, ask away and i will try my bes to answer them.
Dusty, kj

 

[msmitht]

While I believe that a rotating curriculum on poomsae is ridiculous, I do rotate kicking techniques and combination on a weekly basis. For example :
Week 1 Chun-gin/Il Bo Chun-gin foot work with rear leg attacks. Week 2 Hoo-Gin/Il bo Hoo-gin foot work with rear leg attacks. I then switch back to week 1 but with lead leg attacking kicks...etc. It works for those type of techniques.

 

[sadantkd]

The rotating curriculum is the worst thing I've ever seen. I'm exagerating maybe just a little bit, but it really is awful. I hope to God you misunderstood the way this guy uses the rotating curriculum though. Every school I know of that uses it, changes every two months, and there are basically 3 levels that do 3 different forms. Plus white belts who always do the first kibon form. This program is still completely horrible though.

 

[IcemanSK]

The rotating curriculum is the worst thing I've ever seen. I'm exagerating maybe just a little bit, but it really is awful. I hope to God you misunderstood the way this guy uses the rotating curriculum though. Every school I know of that uses it, changes every two months, and there are basically 3 levels that do 3 different forms. Plus white belts who always do the first kibon form. This program is still completely horrible though.

I heard him say, "every student regardless of rank does the same form for 3 months. Then they rotate to another form." Is that what the rest of you folks who went to the FIC heard him say, or did I get it wrong?

Sandantkd, I may have miss heard him over his diatribe on how he screws students out of large sums of cash...in front of them & their parents!

 

[Archtkd]

IcemanSK: I think I heard GM Cho say the same thing you heard.

 

[Laurentkd]

IcemanSK: I think I heard GM Cho say the same thing you heard.

Ditto

 

[StudentCarl]

1. In my experience with high school soccer, where some athletes have been playing since age 5, way too much of our coaching time is spent trying to teach correct technique after they've learned and used bad technique (habits) for years. Lower level students can 'do' the higher forms, but aren't they more appropriate for students who have the fundamentals in place. I think it would be harder, not easier, to try to teach advanced techniques while also teaching basics to the same student. Doesn't something get neglected?
2. Aren't poomsae also intended to teach stance, movement, and the fundamentals of power (including use of hips, momentum, reaction force, and focus), and probably other lessons I've yet to learn? Can a student fully benefit from the principles of higher poomsae without the foundation?
If not, then the instructor will need to teach each student higher aspects of each poomsae each time it comes around in the rotation? Seems like it would fragment learning and make teaching harder too. I've been taught that there are principles underlying the poomsae and the sequence of their instruction.
3. Doesn't this make it hard for students to compete in poomsae at tournaments? Does a green belt perform Chil Jang if he hasn't learned Sam Jang yet?
4. This thread makes me thankful I chose my instructor carefully.
StudentCarl

 

[dortiz]

"Suppose I have a straight linear progression with specific start dates. You join, then miss 3 weeks of classes at some point, should the whole group go back for you? Even if we repeat, it's really not fair to the rest of the group who have already spent 3-weeks working on something to then have you come back and slow down the group trying to get caught up. Same thing would happen if you missed 3-weeks in a academic class, when you come back you are behind, you have missed material that is likely required before you can move forward."

Here lies the problem..or difference. For many learning TKD has been about the individual, not a team sport. So to us its been a place where each person learns as they learn. Some faster some slower most at the same pace. But they learn from basics up. At a point dictated by belt level (in our world now). They find equal ground. Again someone may get to that level in 2 months, some in 4 but at that point wearing that green belt they all have learned and can show that same general abilities.
Those levels are measurings sticks in progression. NOT TIME.
Roatating a curriculum confuses this basic concept.

Dave O.

 

[Miles]

While I believe that a rotating curriculum on poomsae is ridiculous, I do rotate kicking techniques and combination on a weekly basis. For example :
Week 1 Chun-gin/Il Bo Chun-gin foot work with rear leg attacks. Week 2 Hoo-Gin/Il bo Hoo-gin foot work with rear leg attacks. I then switch back to week 1 but with lead leg attacking kicks...etc. It works for those type of techniques.

I do the same thing with the same material except week 3 is combination kicks and week 4 is spinning and jumping kicks. I ad-lib when I get a month with 5 weeks.

 

[dortiz]

I think rotating a schedule of rpactice is not the same thing as what was being proposed. I like knowing one week or weekday is X kicking techniques and another sparring drills etc.
I would bet that you guys also still tailor the coaching to the individuals level.
Just as you dont expect the white belt to pada chagi flying off the target you dont expect them to do a form 4 levels above.
Yes?

Dave O.

 

[Miles]

I think rotating a schedule of rpactice is not the same thing as what was being proposed. .....

Just as you dont expect the white belt to pada chagi flying off the target you dont expect them to do a form 4 levels above.
Yes?

Dave O.

Correct! I have a set schedule in which we are introducing (or reinforcing for more experienced students) techniques and concepts.