Teach stances or blocks first?

[skribs]

My point is quite simple, toddlers can be stroppy little buggers through no one's fault, it's just part of learning to be human but why teach them to actually fight until they have more understanding and control?

Because you teach them control. Here are things we teach:

1. You don't fight, you get an adult
2. You yell "I DON'T WANT TO FIGHT"
3. You don't punch or kick, if you need to defend yourself against bullies you control the situation

Also, simply by learning patience and discipline, it helps to keep them from fighting. Most kids get into fights because they don't have any other tools to deal with things. There was a high school football coach who wanted to stop his players from getting into fights when taunted on the field. So part of practice was for one player to taunt another, and the other player to ignore the taunt and walk away.

 

[Tez3]

Because you teach them control. Here are things we teach:

1. You don't fight, you get an adult
2. You yell "I DON'T WANT TO FIGHT"
3. You don't punch or kick, if you need to defend yourself against bullies you control the situation

Also, simply by learning patience and discipline, it helps to keep them from fighting. Most kids get into fights because they don't have any other tools to deal with things. There was a high school football coach who wanted to stop his players from getting into fights when taunted on the field. So part of practice was for one player to taunt another, and the other player to ignore the taunt and walk away.

Three olds are still babies, you do not teach them 'control' with martial arts. You quite honestly don't have much understanding of three and four year olds psychology or how they develop.

so to answer.
1. Toddlers are unable to always reason things out like older children and adults, they don't always understand why they should share toys, so if one child has a toy and another wants it they will just take it. they may hit the child with the toy or just snatch it. When they get upset because they cannot express themselves proper because they either don't have the words or understand what the emotion is they are feeling they will lash out. If they get angry because they can't do what they want because it's too hard or an adult won't let them they can lash out. Another issue is they haven't developed impulse control, it's part of being a toddler, they learn to express themselves with words and not to lash out, it's a recognised part of growing up.

2. Three and four year olds won't understand this. This is for older children.

3. Talk of bullies again is for older children, toddlers absolutely will not understand this.

As I said before, I am specially talking about the 3-4 year olds you are teaching not older children.
https://www.foundationyears.org.uk/files/2015/03/4Children_ParentsGuide_2015_WEB.pdf

https://www.babycentre.co.uk/a1040599/aggression-how-to-deal-with-hitting-and-biting
If you look at these coping strategies for when toddlers hit/bite, you will see that it's pitched to the child's understanding and on your understanding why they do it, shouting that they don't want to fight isn't there because it simply not one that is useful with toddlers. it's a common thing, it's not aggression as such nor is it bullying. it's not children getting into fights, it's toddlers learning to be human.

 

[WaterGal]

Who can honestly say that putting 3 and 4 year olds in a structured class teaching them exactly the same as adults is a good thing? Not a child's play class but a full on martial arts class exactly the same as you'd teach adults.

Well, nobody on this thread is saying that, for one. I think that Skribs school is probably teaching his littles class *more* like the older kids than may be optimal, which is probably why he's having the problems he's having, but neither he nor anyone else on here has suggested putting 3 year olds in with adults and teaching them exactly the same way.

 

[WaterGal]

An aside here.... It goes against my personal beliefs to call any man 'Master' and I would not consider it my place as a martial arts instructor to lecture about anything other than martial arts nor would I have been happy at anyone lecturing my children in that way but I guess it goes down well with parents who feel they get their money's worth. But then that's me, I was taught respect was earnt and to be independent of thought. I very much dislike the cult like behaviour sometimes to be found in martial arts, no I'm not saying that is yours, it's just an observation.

"Mat chats" are very, very common in children's martial arts programs. We all know that character development is a big reason why parents enroll their kids in martial arts classes. Doing a "mat chat" to tell the kids, you know, "don't hit your classmates, clean your room, listen to your parents" etc and so forth is one way to teach character development.

I do a little bit of that with my Little Dragons, particularly to emphasize that they should only ever kick or punch someone when they're at the martial arts school wearing their special sparring gear so nobody gets hurt, that they should never hit their mom or dad or siblings, that it's important to take turns and help each other out, etc. I'd like to incorporate some more of that kind of thing (i.e. maybe talking to them about dealing with feelings, like if you get angry to count to ten and take deep breaths, etc), and I've been reading some preschool child development books to get some ideas, but I've been struggling a little with the best way to approach it in this context.

 

[Tez3]

Well, nobody on this thread is saying that, for one. I think that Skribs school is probably teaching his littles class *more* like the older kids than may be optimal, which is probably why he's having the problems he's having, but neither he nor anyone else on here has suggested putting 3 year olds in with adults and teaching them exactly the same way.

I didn't say they did I was referring to the link I put up and the quotes therein.

"Mat chats" are very, very common in children's martial arts programs. We all know that character development is a big reason why parents enroll their kids in martial arts classes. Doing a "mat chat" to tell the kids, you know, "don't hit your classmates, clean your room, listen to your parents" etc and so forth is one way to teach character development.

I think this must be a cultural thing we don't find as much here I imagine because of the childcare laws we have here, martial arts and other sports are seen only as hobbies/sports/leisure activities. To extend such activities into teaching anything other than just that would encroach onto parents and schools responsibility. A martial arts instructor would tell the children not to use what they learn outside of course but the rest would be regarded as most likely as an invasion of privacy by parents. European parents are much more guarded about who informs their children, many of our parents would take their children out of class if we started doing that. Bringing up children is the remit of parents not instructors. European children are for the most part raised differently from American children.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Putting 3 and 4 year olds into classes isn't beneficial for the children it is for the parents.




Actually it's not that hard we've been doing it for millennia. I've done it successfully myself.



For 3 years olds? no, it's not, it's for the parents to save them the bother of teaching them so I'm sure they are grateful to you. Why would you do that to children who have often not even learned to control their bladder and bowels properly!



In structured adult classes or classes designed for little ones? My point is against structured adult type classes.




I didn't even hint there was so I don't know why you'd say that. Very young children act first then think so are likely to fight anyway, teaching three year olds to fight properly isn't a good idea. As I said, wait until they are able to understand martial arts and can control themselves better. Not at any point did I say children who train fight more!

Who can honestly say that putting 3 and 4 year olds in a structured class teaching them exactly the same as adults is a good thing? Not a child's play class but a full on martial arts class exactly the same as you'd teach adults.

What about preschool? My mom teaches preschool for developmentally delayed 3 year olds. It's very specifically structured, and you can see changes in the children behaviorally, and they even seem to learn some stuff (evidenced by constant performance reports/evaluations that she has to complete, on specific motor skills, behavioral, social and intellectual abilities). It's certainly not a 'play class', but it's a class that is much more than a way to just give the parents a break.

 

[Tez3]

What about preschool? My mom teaches preschool for developmentally delayed 3 year olds. It's very specifically structured, and you can see changes in the children behaviorally, and they even seem to learn some stuff (evidenced by constant performance reports/evaluations that she has to complete, on specific motor skills, behavioral, social and intellectual abilities). It's certainly not a 'play class', but it's a class that is much more than a way to just give the parents a break.

That is very different as it will be specifically structured by experts in their field, who understand child development and psychology. I also assume it will be for more than an hour or so a week. It's vastly different from a sports class which is what I'm talking about not remedial or educational classes.

 

[skribs]

Well, nobody on this thread is saying that, for one. I think that Skribs school is probably teaching his littles class *more* like the older kids than may be optimal, which is probably why he's having the problems he's having, but neither he nor anyone else on here has suggested putting 3 year olds in with adults and teaching them exactly the same way.

What problems am I having?

If I followed the advice of some people in this thread I'd have problems. But I follow my Master's advice and it works.

 

[skribs]

"Mat chats" are very, very common in children's martial arts programs. We all know that character development is a big reason why parents enroll their kids in martial arts classes. Doing a "mat chat" to tell the kids, you know, "don't hit your classmates, clean your room, listen to your parents" etc and so forth is one way to teach character development.

I do a little bit of that with my Little Dragons, particularly to emphasize that they should only ever kick or punch someone when they're at the martial arts school wearing their special sparring gear so nobody gets hurt, that they should never hit their mom or dad or siblings, that it's important to take turns and help each other out, etc. I'd like to incorporate some more of that kind of thing (i.e. maybe talking to them about dealing with feelings, like if you get angry to count to ten and take deep breaths, etc), and I've been reading some preschool child development books to get some ideas, but I've been struggling a little with the best way to approach it in this context.

My Master has a few different things he does:

• He has a monthly chart which the kids fill out, which includes things like listening to their parents, doing their chores, taking care of their pets, not fighting with their siblings, etc. If you do good on the monthly chart for 12 months you get a special uniform (and another one at 24 months).
• He has a sheet they can get stamps on for bringing things like good report cards, notes from the teacher saying they did good, etc. If they get enough stamps, they get special nunchucks.
• He also has parents sometimes bring their kids to his office if the kid did something bad, such as lied to the parents, got in trouble at school, or something like that. I haven't been in his office for those talks, but some of those conversations have been very long.

I think it helps that my Master has degrees in counseling and is an ordained pastor, in addition to his martial arts credentials.

 

[Tez3]

is an ordained pastor

That explains everything. The 'special' things sound just on the edge of being a controlling thing. I get the impression martial arts isn't the important thing here but bringing the children into the flock is. As the Jesuits say 'Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man' hence your taking three and four years olds.

 

[skribs]

That explains everything. The 'special' things sound just on the edge of being a controlling thing. I get the impression martial arts isn't the important thing here but bringing the children into the flock is. As the Jesuits say 'Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man' hence your taking three and four years olds.

He does a real good job of separating the two jobs. I was merely pointing that out because pastors often provide counsel and advice for their parishioners, my Master is able to also provide advice for the kids.

But, I'm really glad you managed to assume we teach terrible martial arts because my Master has experience with another job.

 

[Tez3]

But, I'm really glad you managed to assume we teach terrible martial arts because my Master has experience with another job.

I have not said you 'teach horrible martial arts' at all. You are mistaken but there seems to be no separation of that teaching from the desire to interfere with the children's upbringing by their parents/carers. it's crossing a line that may be acceptable to you but would have social services visiting you here.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I have not said you 'teach horrible martial arts' at all. You are mistaken but there seems to be no separation of that teaching from the desire to interfere with the children's upbringing by their parents/carers. it's crossing a line that may be acceptable to you but would have social services visiting you here.

It's only interfering if the parents don't want it. Otherwise, it's helping. Obviously, the parents who enroll their kids at that school (and don't immediately withdraw them) are happy to have someone else reinforcing these kinds of lessons.

 

[skribs]

It's only interfering if the parents don't want it. Otherwise, it's helping. Obviously, the parents who enroll their kids at that school (and don't immediately withdraw them) are happy to have someone else reinforcing these kinds of lessons.

It's actually a big selling point. If all we did is teach martial arts, and only martial arts, we'd probably have less than half the students that we do.

Edit to add: in fact, my post above mentioned parents bringing kids to the office specifically to have these talks. So that would imply the parents are okay with it.

 

[Tez3]

It's actually a big selling point. If all we did is teach martial arts, and only martial arts, we'd probably have less than half the students that we do.

Edit to add: in fact, my post above mentioned parents bringing kids to the office specifically to have these talks. So that would imply the parents are okay with it.

I can imagine they are happy with the arrangement, they pay and have someone else do the parenting for them. Omission of parental responsibility, this would be quite shocking to Europeans that anyone would bring their child to martial arts classes to be raised. Martial arts instructors wouldn't be very happy either if expected to bring other people's children up.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I can imagine they are happy with the arrangement, they pay and have someone else do the parenting for them. Omission of parental responsibility, this would be quite shocking to Europeans that anyone would bring their child to martial arts classes to be raised. Martial arts instructors wouldn't be very happy either if expected to bring other people's children up.

Why do you assume the parents are not also teaching these things?

 

[Buka]

 

[Yokozuna514]

I just read the last page of this thread and found it interesting that both sides are so oppositional about something that is clearly a cultural divide (as Tez3 stated). I’m from Canada and although we follow a lot of same concepts Skribs mentioned, I do know European outlooks are different.

In many parts of Europe, these types of concepts are not followed or expected when enrolling a child in a MA. They are considered in the domain of parenting.

I applaud the discussion for bringing out this difference and suggest this may be a perfect point to agree to disagree because essentially neither side wil change the others perspective as it is a cultural distinction between the two. It would be like debating which is better to use for eating, a fork vs chopsticks. Depends where you are and how you grew up.

My two cents

 

[skribs]

I just read the last page of this thread and found it interesting that both sides are so oppositional about something that is clearly a cultural divide (as Tez3 stated). I’m from Canada and although we follow a lot of same concepts Skribs mentioned, I do know European outlooks are different.

In many parts of Europe, these types of concepts are not followed or expected when enrolling a child in a MA. They are considered in the domain of parenting.

I applaud the discussion for bringing out this difference and suggest this may be a perfect point to agree to disagree because essentially neither side wil change the others perspective as it is a cultural distinction between the two. It would be like debating which is better to use for eating, a fork vs chopsticks. Depends where you are and how you grew up.

My two cents

It still is the domain of parenting. The parents are choosing where their child enrolls and what values they want the teacher to instill on their children.

 

[Yokozuna514]

It still is the domain of parenting. The parents are choosing where their child enrolls and what values they want the teacher to instill on their children.

Yes, that is true. Can you accept that Europeans parent differently?