Teach stances or blocks first?

[Gerry Seymour]

There are very good reasons we don't teach such young children and that's why he's experiencing something that isn't good for anyone, students or instructors.
JGW posted a very good video of what children should be doing, and it's not lining them up and treating them as you would older or adult students. There should be no fretting about 'stances', or even techniques with such young ones. As JGW also pointed out though, children can easily do more than one thing when they learn. In fact they are the best learners you can get.

Teaching adults as you would children isn't a recipe for success either I've found.

Teaching MA to kids isn't necessarily "lining them up and treating them as you would older or adult students". I've seen some MA-based programs for kids that were clearly mostly about developing the basic motor skills. They had simple tumbling, some very simple kata (balance and limb control), and the like.

 

[Tez3]

Teaching MA to kids isn't necessarily "lining them up and treating them as you would older or adult students". I've seen some MA-based programs for kids that were clearly mostly about developing the basic motor skills. They had simple tumbling, some very simple kata (balance and limb control), and the like.

I didn't say it was. However in this one case I strongly suspect it is otherwise why all the fuss about teaching stances and techniques separately? The fact he is teaching stances and strikes suggests that they are being lined up otherwise he wouldn't be teaching rather letting them play games etc

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I didn't say it was. However in this one case I strongly suspect it is otherwise why all the fuss about teaching stances and techniques separately? The fact he is teaching stances and strikes suggests that they are being lined up otherwise he wouldn't be teaching rather letting them play games etc

I have seen kids lined up to play games, too. It doesn't harm kids to have some structure to activity, so long as it's not too much. That said, I've taught stances and blocks without having anyone lined up in a group. I can't say what's done where he teaches, as I've never seen it. Nor, I might point out, have you. If it's the highly regimented teaching of details to very young kids, I'd tend to agree with you, but I don't really see anything indicating that's the case. In fact, he's actually referenced NOT teaching them in high detail early, but allowing them to form an approximation that can be corrected later. If I recall correctly, in one post he referred to correcting it a belt or two later, which makes much more sense in the context of quite young children than adults.

 

[Tez3]

Nor, I might point out, have you.

I didn't say I had, I said I strongly suspected. 'Correcting a couple of grades later' also indicates that they are learning more formal martial arts already and are grading already ( otherwise the sentence would be 'correcting after they had started grading'). One can learn an awful lot by examining words and sentences. that's how I surmised these were very young children he was teaching and this was confirmed when I asked him.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I didn't say I had, I said I strongly suspected. 'Correcting a couple of grades later' also indicates that they are learning more formal martial arts already and are grading already ( otherwise the sentence would be 'correcting after they had started grading'). One can learn an awful lot by examining words and sentences. that's how I surmised these were very young children he was teaching and this was confirmed when I asked him.

In many kids' programs, grading is not what it is for adults, especially for the wee ones. I've seen where grading was simply used to reinforce good teamwork, reasonable behavior, and hard work.

 

[skribs]

Remember Skribs deals with a lot of very young kids. I know kids are weird, so maybe it's ubiquitous enough among them for it to be a fair statement.

I don't mind when folks teach toddlers (so long as they don't ask me to), if they keep the training safe for them. The kids have a lot of fun at it, and it helps build motor skills. Same goes for having them in sports, or anything else.

This is part of why we isolate the moves for them. Because the less we let them move, the more likely they're in the right spot on the mat so they're not hitting/getting hit by another student.

I will say the little kids white belt class is the only class at my school that feels like a chore to teach. The rest are a blast, but that one is quite often hard for me. My Master has a lot more patience than I do, and I know if I were in charge I'd be a lot less patient. He will every once in a while tell a kid to try again in 6 months, but a lot of kids that I think need that treatment, he continues to teach, and most of them do turn around in a few months.

Of course, if I were in charge, I'd probably set a higher minimum age limit.

 

[skribs]

I have seen kids lined up to play games, too. It doesn't harm kids to have some structure to activity, so long as it's not too much. That said, I've taught stances and blocks without having anyone lined up in a group. I can't say what's done where he teaches, as I've never seen it. Nor, I might point out, have you. If it's the highly regimented teaching of details to very young kids, I'd tend to agree with you, but I don't really see anything indicating that's the case. In fact, he's actually referenced NOT teaching them in high detail early, but allowing them to form an approximation that can be corrected later. If I recall correctly, in one post he referred to correcting it a belt or two later, which makes much more sense in the context of quite young children than adults.

Our beginner kids classes are maybe 70/30 martial arts/games. Some days it's more 60/40, some days 80/20, but there's usually a game between every other training piece. For example, do punches, then kicks, then a ducking/jumping game. Then drills up and down the mat, then blocks, and then rolling skills followed by an obstacle course.

The game is kind of like a mini-recess and keeps the kids focused and engaged.

Some people just do 1/2 hour classes for the kids, so if we get 35 minutes of training and 15 minutes of games and fun in a 50-minute class, they're getting about as much practice. And for many of them, the games and obstacle courses are what keep them wanting to come back to class.

 

[skribs]

In many kids' programs, grading is not what it is for adults, especially for the wee ones. I've seen where grading was simply used to reinforce good teamwork, reasonable behavior, and hard work.

Our white belt kids class is basically "can you stand still when you need to, listen to the directions, and say 'yes, sir,'". Some kids it takes 6-8 months to get their yellow belt.

 

[wab25]

Alright... now I am a bit confused here. The thread started:

I was thinking conceptually about martial arts, and how the first thing you teach could be used to symbolize the training.

So if the first thing I teach in the early classes is the basic blocks, for example, that would teach that we should first focus on defense.

Similarly, if the first thing I teach are the basic stances, that would teach that we should focus on the foundations and build from there.

But then when it comes down to who you are teaching this to, we get this:

Our white belt kids class is basically "can you stand still when you need to, listen to the directions, and say 'yes, sir,'". Some kids it takes 6-8 months to get their yellow belt.

You are teaching 3-4 year olds that take a few months to learn to listen and be far enough away from the other kids so you don't accidentally hit each other.

I am not sure that at that age, they could understand this symbolism. Further, I don't think they could remember it. I certainly don't remember much about the symbolism I was taught at 3 or 4.

What am I missing here?

 

[WaterGal]

Our beginner kids classes are maybe 70/30 martial arts/games. Some days it's more 60/40, some days 80/20, but there's usually a game between every other training piece. For example, do punches, then kicks, then a ducking/jumping game. Then drills up and down the mat, then blocks, and then rolling skills followed by an obstacle course.

The game is kind of like a mini-recess and keeps the kids focused and engaged.

Some people just do 1/2 hour classes for the kids, so if we get 35 minutes of training and 15 minutes of games and fun in a 50-minute class, they're getting about as much practice. And for many of them, the games and obstacle courses are what keep them wanting to come back to class.

I know that you're not in charge, and probably don't have any authority to make any changes to your program. But I've found that the more I could teach the youngest kids through games, the better they did and the happier they were. Don't worry about teaching them your regular TKD curriculum; come up with a different curriculum for them, with their own belt ranks. Look at what the kids have a hard time with, and develop fun games to help them learn that skill. Find fun, funny ways to explain and work on that thing.

For example, we have our Little Dragons do some TKD sparring. But they would often just stand there and punching each other on the hogu over and over, or kick each other in the groin. So I started doing sparring games. One game we call "kick the giant", where I put on a hogu and kneel down in the middle of a sparring ring. The kids make a circle around me, and when I kiyap, they all rush in and try to kick me on the hogu and then run away. We do some different variations on this, and they think this is SO FUN. It teaches them a few things: 1) to kick in the right place, 2) to move around the ring, moving in to strike the opponent and move away, 3) to wait to go until I yell (patience/discipline).

Another game I do is "kick over the tower". I stack up some kicking shields into a tower, and they have to do a side kick and knock the tower over. This helps teach them to drive their kick into the target instead of just aiming at the surface, and encourages them to kick hard. They also think this is super fun and silly.

Teaching kids this age shouldn't be excessively stressful. It should be fun and silly.

 

[skribs]

I know that you're not in charge, and probably don't have any authority to make any changes to your program. But I've found that the more I could teach the youngest kids through games, the better they did and the happier they were. Don't worry about teaching them your regular TKD curriculum; come up with a different curriculum for them, with their own belt ranks. Look at what the kids have a hard time with, and develop fun games to help them learn that skill. Find fun, funny ways to explain and work on that thing.

For example, we have our Little Dragons do some TKD sparring. But they would often just stand there and punching each other on the hogu over and over, or kick each other in the groin. So I started doing sparring games. One game we call "kick the giant", where I put on a hogu and kneel down in the middle of a sparring ring. The kids make a circle around me, and when I kiyap, they all rush in and try to kick me on the hogu and then run away. We do some different variations on this, and they think this is SO FUN. It teaches them a few things: 1) to kick in the right place, 2) to move around the ring, moving in to strike the opponent and move away, 3) to wait to go until I yell (patience/discipline).

Another game I do is "kick over the tower". I stack up some kicking shields into a tower, and they have to do a side kick and knock the tower over. This helps teach them to drive their kick into the target instead of just aiming at the surface, and encourages them to kick hard. They also think this is super fun and silly.

Teaching kids this age shouldn't be excessively stressful. It should be fun and silly.

We teach the curriculum but do so in a way that focuses on energy and confidence more than technique at that level.

 

[dvcochran]

There's a difference between having students go into horse stance and teaching them horse stance. My old school taught you the way the stances look from the start. When you learned a front stance, you learned exactly what it was. When you learned a back stance, same thing, and you also learned why you would use each stance.

The school I'm at now teaches the stances very loosely at the white and yellow belt level, and gets more detail as you get to green belt. You learn a lot more details about the punches and kicks than you do the stances.

I did not want to click disagree. However, most instructors know that there a many people (not all) you can teach a front/horse/back stance to the first night and they are able to follow along for the most part. Usually following along in mechanics only. But when you take your teachings away and have them fall in with the rest of the class in cadence their "technique" falls apart. And this only a stance. So for a brief few minutes while their mind hasn't become overloaded they "have the technique". But in reality and in application it is quickly obvious there is more involved and creating the coordination and subsequent muscle memory takes time. Period. And this is just one pillar of teaching developmental skills like punches and blocks.
It took me a while but I do see value in your latter teaching method where the new student is expected to fully know X and Y before moving forward. That white/yellow belt period is a great time of acclimation to class methodology. If the class structure is sound that white/yellow period that seem a little vague to some is full of tangent lines of training that merges well with the upcoming content. A more challenging and dynamic class for the instructor(s) but a more effective method. Hey @Hanzou , look as us we did TMA a new way. Ready to get off our backs? HaHA

 

[skribs]

I did not want to click disagree. However, most instructors know that there a many people (not all) you can teach a front/horse/back stance to the first night and they are able to follow along for the most part. Usually following along in mechanics only. But when you take your teachings away and have them fall in with the rest of the class in cadence their "technique" falls apart. And this only a stance. So for a brief few minutes while their mind hasn't become overloaded they "have the technique". But in reality and in application it is quickly obvious there is more involved and creating the coordination and subsequent muscle memory takes time. Period. And this is just one pillar of teaching developmental skills like punches and blocks.
It took me a while but I do see value in your latter teaching method where the new student is expected to fully know X and Y before moving forward. That white/yellow belt period is a great time of acclimation to class methodology. If the class structure is sound that white/yellow period that seem a little vague to some is full of tangent lines of training that merges well with the upcoming content. A more challenging and dynamic class for the instructor(s) but a more effective method. Hey @Hanzou , look as us we did TMA a new way. Ready to get off our backs? HaHA

You're right, especially with kids. Most of them make a pretty good copy of my horse stance right away, but then as soon as they start punching they just have their legs straight and double-shoulder width.

Then there's the kids who don't quite get it. Most kids point their toes way out to make a straight line with their feet. A good portion do at least some of the following:

• Bend their knees inward so they look like they have to pee
• Bend their knees forward like they're trying to sit down
• Hunch their back along with bending their leg
• Tense their shoulders and keep their power contained inside
• Kid is lined up on the side of the mat and is punching toward the instructor, so his punches are drifting to the left

And don't forget the kids who just want to play with the stance. "Bend down" means bend so low you're practically sitting down (beyond the point where your muscles are working to hold you up). Or when they punch they bend the knee their punching with (and then start speeding up because they want to dance).

But you make a very good point about being able to copy, but then losing the stance to focus on the hands.

 

[Tez3]

And don't forget the kids who just want to play with the stance

Frankly, what else do you expect of toddlers?

It took me a while but I do see value in your latter teaching method where the new student is expected to fully know X and Y before moving forward.

He does this because he is teaching very small children.

We teach the curriculum but do so in a way that focuses on energy and confidence more than technique at that level.

then why are you posting that this is the way to teach everyone? At the beginning of your thread it was assumed you were teaching adults or at least children of an age to actually learn martial arts. The way you teach toddlers is not the way to teach people who are older.

 

[Buka]

Back in the nineties I used to fly to L.A. for a week every month to train and teach at Billy Blanks' dojo in Sherman Oaks California. (maybe why I don't always agree with the "it's too far to go" stuff) Billy's was the busiest, craziest dojo I've ever seen. Literally, thousands of people a day. It was the height of the Tae-Bo popularity and there were ten classes of over a hundred people in each class doing Tae-Bo. Not to mention the fitness classes and Martial Arts classes that went on all damn day. He had about five hundred Tae-Kwon-Do students, every single day.

One day Billy grabs me and says "Go help Sandy teach upstairs". So up I go. Only to find a class of a jillion four year olds. I turn around and run down the stairs like my pants were on fire. Right where Billy was waiting for me. He said, "get back up there, that's not a request, git!"

I'm not used to little kids. I didn't accept kids until they were ten. And even that was reluctantly.

Up I went. I don't know if I've ever been that frightened in a dojo before. But Sandy, a long time stunt woman and long time black belt, showed me what to do. It was mostly playing Karate games and concentration games with the kids. It went well, Sandy had been doing it for a long time. But, man, it still scares me thinking about it. They're just so little.

It's a big responsibility teaching anyone. It's even bigger with little, tiny kids. A big tip of my hat to anyone who does. That's from the heart.

 

[Tez3]

maybe why I don't always agree with the "it's too far to go" stuff

Too far often means too expensive for most of us.

It's a big responsibility teaching anyone. It's even bigger with little, tiny kids. A big tip of my hat to anyone who does. That's from the heart.

It's actually very rewarding teaching children, they keep you on your toes and young in the mind but you have to know what you are doing with them, they are really good BS detectors! They are both tougher and more fragile than you think. Teaching three and four years olds the martial arts you teach adults isn't a good idea, just playing games is but I also suspect there's plenty of dragon parents who want their child to be a black belt at 6 or who want cheap child care so there's a great many places who will take children in before they should.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Too far often means too expensive for most of us.




It's actually very rewarding teaching children, they keep you on your toes and young in the mind but you have to know what you are doing with them, they are really good BS detectors! They are both tougher and more fragile than you think. Teaching three and four years olds the martial arts you teach adults isn't a good idea, just playing games is but I also suspect there's plenty of dragon parents who want their child to be a black belt at 6 or who want cheap child care so there's a great many places who will take children in before they should.

What is your primary concern about little kids learning MA? I should have asked that earlier.

 

[Tez3]

What is your primary concern about little kids learning MA? I should have asked that earlier.

Children as young as three and four are still learning how to play with and co-operate with others. They have just learned by that age they are individuals, separate from their mothers, they are figuring a lot of things out, most will be toilet trained by four but are still prone to accidents as their concentration is elsewhere. Their hand eye co-ordination as well as motor skills are still developing, their cognitive and reasoning abilities are still forming, that's enough for most children, they don't need to be thrown into a serious martial arts class.

Playing games, learning to socialise and enjoying themselves are the best types of activities for youngsters of this age. At this age they do need confidence and independence building activities but not ones where they are put into an actual class of anything. Toddler groups where a parent/care attends too are great, singing groups, 'tumbletots' etc which all bring fun into the child's life.

In the UK children start school at four and a half mostly, they are in the reception class, increasing teachers are telling us that children are coming to school not toilet trained, some still in nappies, unable to dress themselves and unable to communicate ( we do also have the over achieving child but more later). If teachers are having this problem how can martial arts instructors teach them martial arts? the problem is the young school age as children were ready for it in past years but a change in parenting skills or lack of. However most children starting school have enough to cope with without giving them formal martial arts lessons ( or any other activity). I have Rainbows which start at five, we meet for an hour a week and do activities which are often 'learning' ones but ones that are fun so they don't realise they are learning, we sing, play games, cook, make things, earn badges, chat and have fun. We strive very hard not to be 'school'. We do have parents, as do all types of groups, who want their child to earn the most badges, to make the best crafts etc etc. I've had them in martial arts, when are they getting their next belt, why haven't they graded etc etc. We've all met those parents.

We also come to the emotional aspect of martial arts, do we really want to teach three and four years olds how to punch, kick and fight? They manage it very well without been taught to do it even better, they can also wrestle, bite and scratch. They are emotional creatures who are unlikely to be able to reason and talk enough when they are frustrated so will lash out. This means that, however many times you tell them not to use martial arts they most certainly will!

Martial arts should not to be taught until the child has a reasonable handle on the world, can control their emotions enough to be able understand in what circumstances they can use their martial skills. Most of all they shouldn't be taught until they want to learn martial arts. One of the things that most annoys me is parents who bring their child along to learn 'discipline', no, that's their job. it's their job to teach respect too not ours. Children will learn self confidence from achieving in just about every activity, martial arts isn't an exception. People don't need to learn 'discipline' as such they need to learn self discipline, the only kind that counts. Martial arts classes can teach children, if we aren't careful, to only follow the majority rather than be an individual who can question and find answers for themselves. The huge class with everyone in line following barked orders and with no chance to ask questions isn't a conducive atmosphere for growing minds but many adults see 'discipline' in it.

The question as well is why are martial arts instructors taking on such young children? Is it because it can be a lucrative market?
If it's because an instructor has experience of early years development and wants to start young children on the path to martial arts by playing games, helping them gain motor skills and teaching them to play nicely with others that's great but I suspect its the former reason. Getting children in early and grading them hooks the parents into keeping them at that school.

Instructors who teach very young children, though it really covers all children, should also be aware of the physical effects of training and exercise. They should understand children's physiology not just psychology, this is why I'm a great advocate for taking the appropriate training to be an instructor/coach. In the UK to be a coach or instructor in every sport and activity apart from martial arts you have to be qualified from a recognised authority such as Sport England, the FA, the RU etc. martial arts only have style self regulated organisations and in many cases instructors have no qualifications, just the belt they graded at.

Have a read of some of these comments. https://www.mamapedia.com/article/martial-arts-for-a-3-year-old-good-idea-or-too-young

 

[skribs]

but not ones where they are put into an actual class of anything.

Why shouldn't they be in a class of anything?

We have some students that come in that are in that age range and are also in classes for singing, piano, and swimming.

A lot of what you say about what children should be able to do before joining martial arts...martial arts helps them with. I have seen the kids at my school go from undisciplined to disciplined, and martial arts helps a lot with that. It's hard to explain how it works, I just know I've seen the progress and know that it works. The parents that bring their kids in are trying, but raising kids is hard. (I, personally, am glad I get to hand the kids back at the end of the hour, even if I love working with them).

Kids having a structured class where they have to follow directions, take turns, share, and learn to control themselves is a very good thing for them.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Children as young as three and four are still learning how to play with and co-operate with others. They have just learned by that age they are individuals, separate from their mothers, they are figuring a lot of things out, most will be toilet trained by four but are still prone to accidents as their concentration is elsewhere. Their hand eye co-ordination as well as motor skills are still developing, their cognitive and reasoning abilities are still forming, that's enough for most children, they don't need to be thrown into a serious martial arts class.

Playing games, learning to socialise and enjoying themselves are the best types of activities for youngsters of this age. At this age they do need confidence and independence building activities but not ones where they are put into an actual class of anything. Toddler groups where a parent/care attends too are great, singing groups, 'tumbletots' etc which all bring fun into the child's life.

In the UK children start school at four and a half mostly, they are in the reception class, increasing teachers are telling us that children are coming to school not toilet trained, some still in nappies, unable to dress themselves and unable to communicate ( we do also have the over achieving child but more later). If teachers are having this problem how can martial arts instructors teach them martial arts? the problem is the young school age as children were ready for it in past years but a change in parenting skills or lack of. However most children starting school have enough to cope with without giving them formal martial arts lessons ( or any other activity). I have Rainbows which start at five, we meet for an hour a week and do activities which are often 'learning' ones but ones that are fun so they don't realise they are learning, we sing, play games, cook, make things, earn badges, chat and have fun. We strive very hard not to be 'school'. We do have parents, as do all types of groups, who want their child to earn the most badges, to make the best crafts etc etc. I've had them in martial arts, when are they getting their next belt, why haven't they graded etc etc. We've all met those parents.

We also come to the emotional aspect of martial arts, do we really want to teach three and four years olds how to punch, kick and fight? They manage it very well without been taught to do it even better, they can also wrestle, bite and scratch. They are emotional creatures who are unlikely to be able to reason and talk enough when they are frustrated so will lash out. This means that, however many times you tell them not to use martial arts they most certainly will!

Martial arts should not to be taught until the child has a reasonable handle on the world, can control their emotions enough to be able understand in what circumstances they can use their martial skills. Most of all they shouldn't be taught until they want to learn martial arts. One of the things that most annoys me is parents who bring their child along to learn 'discipline', no, that's their job. it's their job to teach respect too not ours. Children will learn self confidence from achieving in just about every activity, martial arts isn't an exception. People don't need to learn 'discipline' as such they need to learn self discipline, the only kind that counts. Martial arts classes can teach children, if we aren't careful, to only follow the majority rather than be an individual who can question and find answers for themselves. The huge class with everyone in line following barked orders and with no chance to ask questions isn't a conducive atmosphere for growing minds but many adults see 'discipline' in it.

The question as well is why are martial arts instructors taking on such young children? Is it because it can be a lucrative market?
If it's because an instructor has experience of early years development and wants to start young children on the path to martial arts by playing games, helping them gain motor skills and teaching them to play nicely with others that's great but I suspect its the former reason. Getting children in early and grading them hooks the parents into keeping them at that school.

Instructors who teach very young children, though it really covers all children, should also be aware of the physical effects of training and exercise. They should understand children's physiology not just psychology, this is why I'm a great advocate for taking the appropriate training to be an instructor/coach. In the UK to be a coach or instructor in every sport and activity apart from martial arts you have to be qualified from a recognised authority such as Sport England, the FA, the RU etc. martial arts only have style self regulated organisations and in many cases instructors have no qualifications, just the belt they graded at.

Have a read of some of these comments. https://www.mamapedia.com/article/martial-arts-for-a-3-year-old-good-idea-or-too-young

I can see your points, but I will say I've seen some very happy tiny kids in MA classes. I've seen some very healthy kids who had been doing MA since they were tiny, too. I don't think it's right for all of them (any more than anything else is), but as long as they are happy with the activity, I see no problem with it.

As for why it's offered, there are many reasons. In the commercial school, doubtless income is part of that. I don't mind if that's the primary reason, so long as the program keeps the kids happy and healthy. Some people are simply more economically motivated than I am (in fact, Spranger included "economic" as one of the 6 motivators in his model of values).

I've not seen any higher incidence of fighting among trained kids. If any thing, they hear more often that fighting isn't a good answer, and seem to be somewhat less prone to fighting when they receive early training.