What Is A McDojo?

[RTKDCMB]

I think the quote-worthy part is this:

No previous martial arts experience is necessary to qualify for a PRO Martial Arts franchise!

That may not be as bad as it appears, it could mean that the franchisee does not require martial arts experience to own and run the business side of the Dojo but would have to employ an instructor to run classes. Although with no martial arts experience he may not know what to look for.

 

[Dissertating]

That may not be as bad as it appears, it could mean that the franchisee does not require martial arts experience to own and run the business side of the Dojo but would have to employ an instructor to run classes. Although with no martial arts experience he may not know what to look for.

I went back and really looked at the website and found this:

5. How many employees do I need?
You can start with as few as 3 to 4 employees, (with yourself as owner/manager), a Program Director, and instructors. However, franchisees who have the funds to hire additional people whose talents complement their own can grow faster.

So, I haven't been able to explicitly find whether the "owner/manager" is supposed to having teaching duties. It does state that the owner/manager will learn the curriculum but as a manager you should be familiar with it even if you are not an instructor. I can't say for certain though without calling them. Though on the non-franchise side of the site they noted their organization's instructor qualifications as:

1. Level 1 karate instructor certification
2. Black Belt-IL Dan Bo
3. Personal safety training
4. First aid knowledge
5. Full insurance coverage
6. Criminal background check
7. Ongoing continuing education

Doesn't mean this is written in stone, just something I found. Not bad standards if they're adhered to and particularly if the instructor training is good. The benefits to franchises, even those that may have some of the indicators mentioned for a McDojo, is that they provide a proven successful (theoretically should anyway) business system which could potentially be the difference between a good instructor going belly up because they don't know anything about business and being a successful teacher/studio owner.

-D.

Edit: The dreaded spelling/grammar.

 

[elder999]

Lets use Elder999's post as an example. He has found a website, posted its link here and stated that he thinks it may be a McDojo. Now are we all supposed to debate its merit as a McDojo based on its website? Elder999 may know a great deal about the Pro Martial Arts franchise as a whole or one of its Franchisees. ll.

Exactly. Look to my first post in this thread.

McDonald's are all franchises.

Franchise "karate studio"=McDojo

I was probably there when the term was first coined. What it means now, to individuals is irrelevant, as is-as you and others have stated-the quality of instruction received therein.....

 

[Dissertating]

Steve,

Thanks for the reply, took me some time to get back to it as I had to go punish my legs tonight

I think I get what you're saying and it makes sense. For you, the term "McDojo" is not necessarily derogatory but rather a term that could be completely derogatory (bad business, bad instruction) or could be just a description of a school that has solid instruction but a few business practices that you aren't exactly keen on. I think the key is that it does not always have to be derogatory. My view on the label is based on my personal experiences where the term has basically always been used as an insult.

The heart of my reason for not liking the term is the subjectivity you mentioned. I have always seen it used in a derogatory manner. You seem to feel as I described above and I bet there are a few people out there that don't see it in a negative way at all. Perhaps a type who only use it to describe aggressive marketing without passing judgement on those methods. I think it is the flaw of the term.

If I can bother you with another question, why use a term such as "McDojo" rather than saying "I think the instruction is solid, but I personally don't like the way they are always trying to sell their curriculum videos"? Is the latter not a clearer picture of what you mean?

If I asked you a opinion of a school in your area because I was thinking about training there and you said "No, I wouldn't train there it's a McDojo." What has that told me? If I knew the definition of what you gave about the term could mean a wide range of things, like the instruction taking a back seat to profits or the occasional mandatory seminar. If I didn't know your viewpoint, but rather the general consensus mentioned earlier which was along the lines of the back seat to profits, it would be just as vague. If it were a couple things off of Daniel's list of McDojo type traits, how am I to know which ones? Maybe the traits that, you or Daniel or whoever, think places a school on the McDojo side are a non-issue for me if I know about them.

Once again, I do appreciate the reply and am not trying to be argumentative or anything like that. Truly am curious about the need for the label versus just stating the issue right out.

And thanks for that post, looking back it sheds a little more light on Daniel's post. I think your viewpoint may have been the message I missed in his. After reading yours I can see a bit of that perspective there, though a few things still don't quite reconcile with that to me (yet). Maybe with some luck Daniel will stop back by to let me know if that is the point I missed and we can flesh it out. I'm interested in his viewpoint as well.

-D.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Good morning David,

I appreciate the response.

In all honesty I did read your post, multiple times in fact.

No doubt. But in your restating of my statements, you clearly didn't read them carefully. The traditional school comment being one example. You made it plain that you were reading it differently than it was typed, although when you speculated on what I could mean, you made the same point that I was making.

And I honestly was just trying to give my opinion based on the points I saw you making. In your opinion I may not have grasped the nuance of what you were saying. So the overall premise I took from what you had quoted was that you felt there were indicators that made a McDojo,

Actually, I gave a composite of what people have said on this topic over the many years that it has been rehashed and some personal observations. I don't personally use the term outside of discussions on the topic. From a business standpoint, a school is either for profit or not for profit. It either has par or subpar instruction. The business model doesn't mitigate one or the other.

which I gave an alternating point of view that some of the things can have legitimate uses or not necessarily be red flags. The overall purpose being to show a point of view that perhaps contrasted your own and furthered the conversation. I did restate your comments because I agreed with some, and some I agreed with after some modification. I will be honest that I feel much the same way about your posts. You say that you are ok with an instructor making a profit but then you call the School owner who maintains the integrity of their art while making a profit a McDojo owner. In my defense I did state at the very beginning that all of this was my opinion and attempted to show where it differs. And at the end I again attempted to relay that it was my opinion and to explicitly state that I was not trying to attack or be argumentative as I know how easy it is to take things people say on forums like these.

I didn't take it as an attack. If I did, I would have said as much. But you demonstrate in the bolded comment above that you didn't read my post carefully. Because I didn't do that.

I can apologize for the length. I am talkative, sometimes go off on tangents, and can even be preachy at times (I was raised southern baptist, I'm trapped and don't know how to get rid of the preachiness ). It is my tendency to go off on tangents and be preachy that I try to write often that it is my opinion and that I am not meaning to seem like I am attacking or trying to offend anyone. I send my days talking to people and it has made me a bit chatty.

The bold was by accident. I did not bold it intentionally and am not sure how it got that way.

The length really wasn't an issue, but blog length posts don't fit quite as well into a discussion.

I guess my "brimming over with my rebuttal" was accurate as the post was meant to be a rebuttal but not really in a negative way. I am sorry if you took it that way.

What I mean by "brimming over with your rebuttal" is that you're so focussed on writing your rebuttal that you ended up rebutting points that were never made.

I use rhetorical questions, quite a bit both when I write and speak. Not intended to be snarky, cheeky maybe but not snarky. I would be willing to bet that most of the questions you felt were snarky were not meant to be snarky or probably even cheeky. I don't see a problem with using rhetorical questions. I use them to make or emphasize points, maybe too much but its how I am. Some of the non-rhetorical questions that you found snarky, well again I can only apologize for you finding them snarky but I assure you there was a valid (not necessarily one you agree with) point behind them. I'll try not to blog at you, though I am afraid it is another one of those personal quirks. I try to be thorough in my explanations, its a habit I have from teaching rather complex topics to people often straight out of high school. I am not saying that anything I said above was complex, just that I am used to explaining in depth. And I would rather write a hundred magazine articles or blog posts than a single scientific paper, I like the style of writing better.

I have no problem with rhetorical questions. It was the snark that I was refering to.

Maybe our definition of discussions are different. I responded to what you responded to me with. You gave me your point of view, I gave you and defended mine in return. You took offense either because of how I write or because you thought I was being snarky or because you felt I wasn't "getting" what you were saying, or because I gave my honest rebuttal rather than caving to your views and ended the conversation. If you had responded, I would have responded to you and by the time it was done I think we would have both clarified some misunderstandings and would have ended up with a decent approximation of what each person believes and quite possibly a better understanding of the opposing viewpoint. Real discussions take work and a willingness to do so on both sides even though they may not agree with what they're hearing/reading. I honestly wanted to better understand your point of view and the best way to do that was to confront it with my own and then see how you did so in return.

Okay, here are some of what I was refering to.

"There is a problem with a businessperson trying to be profitable?"
I neither said nor implied this. You're misrepresenting my statement.

"You are an expert on adult and child educational theory and application? "
For all you know, I may be. But rather than speculate on my area of expertise, respond to my statement. It will stand or no on its own merit. Attempting to discredit me in order to strengthen your response is unnecessary. In any case, none of what I posted qualify as deeply held beliefs. If you offer a compelling case to the contrary, I'm open to changing my perspective on the topic.

"Physical ability is not important in a physical activity?"
This, along with your follow up comments about PT in the military, show a lack of careful reading of my post. It isn't even close to what I said.

"So when you started off as a white belt your instructor taught you everything that was required all the way through the highest level in your system as a white belt, yes? "
The rest of your paragraph was a reasonable response to what I said, but this was unnecessary.

Perhaps they aren't meant to be snarky and probably arent, so apologies if I took them as such.

And I do not doubt that you are supportive of commercial schools, but as you noted I have not been here for any length of time and do not know how supportive you have been in the past. You speak from the sum of your experience, as do I even if we don't always know the sum of that experience. The last two sentences that you added in may have had me approach the whole thing a little differently had I seen them before I began writing my reply, though probably not. Each of the things you noted were on your list of McDojo common denominators. Now you may have meant that in and of themselves each one does not mean a McDojo, but it did read that way for me at least. And in my defense you gave no real quantifiable way to use this list to determine what mix of these traits denotes a McDojo and other statements as mentioned above show that profit is an important part of your definition regardless of quality (the whole McDojo Shool owner that makes a profit and "remembers why (s)he teaches"). I may be dense and not understanding the hidden meaning but the water is a little muddy.

Generally, I consider homogenization and over commericialization to be bad for any product, be it martial arts, food, or cars. If someone tells me that a school is a McDojo, but they teach an art that interest me and are conveniently located. I check out the school and if I like what I see, I may give it a whirl. If I don't, I won't. About the only thing that will chase me off right away are contracts and/or bank drafting. If I like what I see and can train without either of those, I'm willing to look deeper.

I don't personally use the term, "McDojo" outside of these discussions precisely because it isn't universally defined and because it is a pejorative. Also, some of the things that are associated with them are not actually bad things in and of themselves. So, if I visit a school and don't like what I see, I don't label it as a McDojo. I simply write it off as a bad fit for me and go elsewhere without disparging them on the web. My common denominator list includes the negatives that are often associated witht he term, not a red flag list for people to check off. Also, I find that many of the problems that people encounter in a martial arts studio are not apparent until you've been training there for some length of time. Thus, without training somewhere, I wouldn't presume to judge the quality of a school.

I partially agree with Steve; the business model is part of what goes into a McDojo. But the other part is the perception of subpar quality. McDonalds is a successful franchise, but the general perception of their food (particularly when the term 'McDojo' was coined) is that it tastes okay, comes with fun frills, and lacks actual nutritional value. So while the model may be part of it, it goes beyond just a business model.

If a school is a franchise or a commercial school, I prefer to look at them based on how well they do what they do rather than on their format.

I really don't know how to respond to the whole "if I'm here any length of time" as though I am supposed to turn and run from the board as fast as I can because you and I had a misunderstanding.

You don't really have to respond. People come, fire off a flurry of posts and then leave. Others come, fire off a flury of posts and then stay. Thus the comment, "if you're here for any length of time."

Based on your post, we probably agree on a lot regarding this subject, which is all that I was trying to communicate.

I have a thick skin but if misunderstandings are going to be all too common then it may be best for me to allow you the rule of your kingdom without my meddling.

Now this is snarky. I don't rule anything, be it here or anywhere else. This was completely unnecessary and quite frankly, rude.

With that being said I again apologize if you took offense to anything I said or thought I was trying to do anything more than have a conversation. I will admit that maybe I did not make myself clear on some things or how I meant things. I accept my part in the misunderstanding and hope that this little blog post helped clear up where I was coming from or my intentions or just gave a little insight into the way I write/speak that can be taken the wrong way. I truly was, and still am, interested in understanding your point of view and do feel you have as much a right to yours as I do to mine.

No worries. Again, I appreciate the response. I look forward to future conversations.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

No meaningful instruction in weapons that were designed based off farm implements to be used in a different era? Just pointing that out, I am well aware that the principles of these weapons can be applied to sometimes readily available everyday items (pool cues, sticks, etc). But is it really your or my place to judge the value of weapons training for other people? I choose to train in the weapons I carry with me or feel I can acquire in most instances. Predominantly my interests are in knives and firearms because I am rarely far from either. But I also enjoy more traditional weapons regardless of their day-to-day self-defense availability. I've seen a lot of schools that have weapons as part of the curriculum, traditional schools, that teach a handful of kata for each weapon, and don't practice them beyond kata. No practice or discussion of their practical application. It never seemed to bother the students. Were I teaching weapons would I want to teach practical applications? Absolutely, but that doesn't necessarily detract from the value of another school. People are enamored with weapons, they want to train in them, as a kid I wanted to train with them and not because I wanted to know how to use them to beat other people up, it was enjoyable. When you watch some of the "extreme" empty-hand and weapons forms that people create for competition that are designed to look good not be deadly do you think that they are wrong for doing so? If they find enjoyment in it, then so be it. Quality is important, but enjoyment is also important. If whatever depth you teach weapons, you are giving quality instruction in what you do teach then what is the problem? Teaching poor quality can be unethical, but we also have to remember that quality is subjective in everything including the martial arts. As far as your last statement, if an instructor adds something to their curriculum that is usually not there but that their students enjoy then this is bad? Back when I went through paramedic school my instructor made all of us learn the full medical school physical assessment that was above and beyond what was required of the curriculum. This made me a worse paramedic, yes? I bit of an extreme example, sorry. But the martial arts students learned a little bit extra about martial arts (even if not to the depth you would prefer or to be experts in the practical applications of that weapon) that they enjoyed learning and this is a qualification for a label?

This, I would like to address, but I will start a new thread, as it really goes beyond the subject of the McDojo term.

 

[MJS]

Personally, I really dislike the term "McDojo." There really is not a good definition for it because everyone has their own definition and it typically boils down to "You do something I do not or that I do not agree with, thus you are a McDojo." If we all spent the time training that we seem to spend worrying about McDojo's and what defines a McDojo, we'd all be better martial artists. The simple reality is there is no real way to define McDojo. We can only point to things we feel aren't right and say this is what constitutes a McDojo. I don't label schools this way, I label them schools I would either train at or not for whatever reason. I may not see the value in what a school is doing but if other people see the value and are willing to go to a school that I would not, more power to them. The martial arts for me is a journey and it is different for every person. Some people care about self-defense, some want a workout, some want the belt, some want weapons training, some want to compete or be on demonstration teams.

I trained at a school in Texas that was a Franchise (red flag for most) with a contract (red flag) and that required you to buy gear through their school (another red flag) that also had any number of items for sale (another red flag) and who had a sales process for new students (gasp red flag) which was considered expensive to a lot of people (everybody man their battle stations this is getting bad) with an instructor with several black belts (*feint* it's just too much). I happily paid my close to $200 a month not caring that plenty of people would label them a McDojo. It was some of the best training I'd ever had and if I hadn't moved out of Texas I would still be training there. I was also attending a Tae Kwon Do and a Krav school when I was there. The Krav school was licensed through KM worldwide (red flag), no required contract but could sign one for a discount (red flaggish), a moderate price, with plenty of add-ons you could choose to purchase (red flaggish). Happily paid my $60/month and enjoyed it (well when I wasn't about to pass out). The Tae Kwon Do place was a hole in the wall type place with an instructor who was a good technician but lacking as an instructor in many ways, no real sales system to speak of other than he would not talk about prices over the phone-you had to come in, and would often disappear from the TKD class to check on the MMA guys in the back. He was about $80/month. If I moved back to San Antonio tomorrow I'd be signed back up with the franchise and Krav studio the same day, I can't say the same about the school that most people would consider the least-McDojo out of the three.

What I think is important to remember is that school owners are in business. I have no problem with them trying to make money. If they have a business practice that I really just do not agree with that I cannot overlook then I'll find somewhere else to train. No need to try and label them as others may not have any problem with that tactic. What I mean by this is I have a big problem personally with most automated payment systems. I don't disagree with the premise of using them as I understand the benefit they provide to the instructor. My problem comes with the practices of some of the more common companies. Whenever I ended up at a school that used one of these companies they were so sporadic it drove me nuts. One month the payment came out on the 1st. The next month it would come out on the 10th. The month after that it came out on the 24th. I prefer consistency in my payments, if the school would use a company that could manage to take the payment out on the same day, give or take a few days every month as I know my bank also plays a role in this, then it wouldn't bother me to allow for automated payments. Since this is one of my issues that can effect whether I train somewhere or not I have a talk about it with the instructor up front. Usually when I explain my concerns with it they tell me that they'll invoice me every month and I can just pay them directly. If they tell me that they use the payment system because of the benefits and it would not be fair to let students pick and choose, mostly because it would defeat the benefit of using it; well then I will either decide that its not worth it to me or if I really do want to train there I'll tell the instructor that I can live with that as long as the payments come out relatively consistently. If they don't, I walk. At the least it means the instructor probably calls the billing company to discuss this with them.

Ultimately there is no universal definition of McDojo because everybody has different perceptions, expectations, and tolerance for different business practices. We should focus on ourselves (do I want to train here), rather than trying to determine if this school meets some arbitrary definition of McDojo.

Just my .02

-D.

As I've said in other posts, I'm not the martial arts police. However, that doesn't mean that I should ignore places that are a bit suspect or people who are fakes. I call the shots like I see them. It really has nothing to do with them doing things that I don't do. IE: the way they conduct belt testing. If they want the people testing to jump up and down 10 times and say they love Karate, then rock on man...LOL. No, I'm talking about schools/people that take the unsuspecting for a ride. The things that are suspect should be obvious. Hey, its 2013...everyone needs to make money. But when you're using shady tactics to do it...no, that's not right.

 

[MJS]

. It is not really fair or respectful to try and influence other people's choices or viewpoints about a certain school using ambiguous terms that are not clearly defined (in my opinion).

Sure it is and I've got no issues with doing it! People ask on here all the time, about various schools. Sorry, but I'm going to give an HONEST view of it, not sugar coat it to make someone feel good. If I'm teaching at a school, (which I have in the past) and people inquired about testing, I'd give them an honest answer. Why? Because anyone that I teach, is a reflection of me, that's why! If you suck and you're not ready, I'm going to tell you you're not good, when you're not.

If someone I know personally, asked me for advice on a school, either for themselves or their kid, I'm going to guide them in the right direction. Why send them to a place, where the belts are handed out with fries and a coke? LOL! If they want their kid to learn something and actually earn it, without having it handed to them, I'll steer them away from certain places and towards others.

 

[MJS]

Which is why the whole quote is important:

It is not really fair or respectful to try and influence other people's choices or viewpoints about a certain school using ambiguous terms that are not clearly defined (in my opinion).

The part in bold left out.

I do not think it is wrong, and have said so in this thread, to give opinions when there is some substance to them. Don't just tell me you don't like it, give me the reasons why. This is kind of why I dislike the term, because I feel it is used too often to tell someone no stay away from that place without actually telling them why. If I came and asked you well what do you think about Such-and-such Karate school and you just said "Stay away it's a McDojo." Which seems is the response when someone doesn't actually know anything about the school but doesn't like it for some off the wall reason (I looked at their website and it looked to commercial). It is a lot less helpful than telling them well I tried the school out and the instructor was very rude or didn't seem interested in his students or that in your opinion the instructor wasn't teaching what he claimed to be teaching based on your experiences with that art.

That was the actual point being expressed, telling someone it is a McDojo tells them nothing to me. Telling them the reasons why you don't like it or why you do is what we should be doing. If you want to quantify you think it's a McDojo before you give the reasons then that is your choice. For me it's just wasted breath, especially considering it is an opinion (whether actually right or wrong).

Sooo.....you don't think that when someone asks, we don't tell them why we don't like something? I just don't say, "Don't go to "X" Karate school because they're a mcdojo!" I tell them why they're a mcdojo..lol. Oh, I also compare the questionable school to ones that I know are legit, and explain the differences between the 2.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Regarding meaningful weapon instruction, here is the thread. http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php/112285-Meaningful-weapons-programs

I welcome conversation.

 

[SENC-33]

I have mixed emotions about commercial schools and how they operate. Many take your money, promote easily and get you that black belt as quickly as possible when many students SHOULD be halfway to a true black belt. It took me 6 years to get my first black belt because my instructor cared far more about the "lineage" of his high level students than money. When I got it I had earned it......

After that I left and went to Muay Thai for many years before finally joining the mixed ranks focusing on Combatives and pure self defense. There are still good commercial schools who put lineage ahead of profit but they are becoming more rare IMO.

 

[WaterGal]

I went back and really looked at the website and found this:

5. How many employees do I need?
You can start with as few as 3 to 4 employees, (with yourself as owner/manager), a Program Director, and instructors. However, franchisees who have the funds to hire additional people whose talents complement their own can grow faster.

So, I haven't been able to explicitly find whether the "owner/manager" is supposed to having teaching duties. It does state that the owner/manager will learn the curriculum but as a manager you should be familiar with it even if you are not an instructor. I can't say for certain though without calling them. Though on the non-franchise side of the site they noted their organization's instructor qualifications as:

1. Level 1 karate instructor certification
2. Black Belt-IL Dan Bo
3. Personal safety training
4. First aid knowledge
5. Full insurance coverage
6. Criminal background check
7. Ongoing continuing education

So the business model is to have a businessperson with no martial arts experience managing a bunch of first-degree black belts. That doesn't sound like the recipe for a great school to me. Who's teaching the instructors, or even the students that get to first dan?

 

[WaterGal]

I have mixed emotions about commercial schools and how they operate. Many take your money, promote easily and get you that black belt as quickly as possible when many students SHOULD be halfway to a true black belt. It took me 6 years to get my first black belt because my instructor cared far more about the "lineage" of his high level students than money. When I got it I had earned it.......

Well, there's that and then there's the schools that promote easily but very slowly, so they can milk that family for money for 4-6 years and still not turn out a quality black belt. Our main competitor is this way. We've had a few of their old students join us, and even after 2-3 years there they couldn't hang with students we've taught for 6 months. Fortunately these are good hardworking kids, and have shown a lot of improvement since they signed up with us.

 

[K-man]

McDojo website here.I think.....

Certainly looks that way. Thing that puts me off slightly was that huge pile of cash in the picture that obviously goes to buy the franchise. After lease, fit-out, wages, advertising and ongoing franchise fee, how much will be left for me? Nothing like the pile of cash on the desk I bet!
:asian:

 

[K-man]

Can I point out that assuming the ethics of a business are sound I have no issue with schools making good money. I have a number of friends making huge amounts of money from well run schools with top quality instruction. The one thing they all have in common is their independence under a loose affiliation.

My only experience of a McDojo, and I have posted this before, was where I was coming back into training after a period away and my original school had closed. I thought this McDojo sounded as if the training was similar to that I had undertaken. There was no contract but there were many gradings and fees that kept the money rolling in to the head of the organisation which is widespread here and overseas.

So far so good. For the sake of convenience I could live with that. What I had difficulty with was the quality of the instruction and the fact that the guy taking the class was wearing a black belt, with a stripe, and behaving as a black belt but with very little technical knowledge or ability. Turns out the stripe denotes he is not a black belt, just in training. Explain that in simple language.

So even with years of experience you can be sucked in to training at a McDojo. I think that information on a forum such and this is quite valuable in giving new MAs an idea of what to look for and what to avoid in finding a good school.
:asian:

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Can I point out that assuming the ethics of a business are sound I have no issue with schools making good money. I have a number of friends making huge amounts of money from well run schools with top quality instruction.

I fully agree with this.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

So the business model is to have a businessperson with no martial arts experience managing a bunch of first-degree black belts. That doesn't sound like the recipe for a great school to me. Who's teaching the instructors, or even the students that get to first dan?

As it is a franchise, there is probably access to higher ranking instructors, either via seminar or traveling to train. I'm not sticking up for the model, though qualifications 3-6 are very good ideas in my opinion.

 

[K-man]

As it is a franchise, there is probably access to higher ranking instructors, either via seminar or traveling to train. I'm not sticking up for the model, though qualifications 3-6 are very good ideas in my opinion.

Why? It's hard enough to find good quality instructors anywhere. For instance, would you teach in a place like that or would you have your own school where you could teach the way you want to teach?
:asian:

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Why? It's hard enough to find good quality instructors anywhere. For instance, would you teach in a place like that or would you have your own school where you could teach the way you want to teach?
:asian:

I never said "good." I said higher ranking. Anyway, I was responding to Watergal's query, "Who's teaching the instructors, or even the students that get to first dan?"

Not that I think that that is an ideal solution.

 

[pgsmith]

Well, there's that and then there's the schools that promote easily but very slowly, so they can milk that family for money for 4-6 years and still not turn out a quality black belt. Our main competitor is this way. We've had a few of their old students join us, and even after 2-3 years there they couldn't hang with students we've taught for 6 months. Fortunately these are good hardworking kids, and have shown a lot of improvement since they signed up with us.

But the problem with the dismissive attitude toward the McDojo is that it doesn't really matter what type of martial artist these schools produce. There are a great many people that are much more interested in the trappings of the martial arts than they are in the actual techniques. These are the people that happily attend your corner McDojo. If the McDojo wasn't there, these folks would NOT be in a difficult school struggling hard to learn solid technique. That's not what they're after.

As far as I'm concerned, it's far better for these folks to attend the corner McDojo and learn nothing of any real value than it is for them to stay home and watch reality TV on the couch. Also, it's better for them to bring their kids in to learn nothing of any great value than it is to leave the kid sit in front of his video game. Those that really want to learn will figure it out and move on to a better school.