There is definitely a matter of matching students and teachers. I am pretty informal and loose. Someone who wants/needs a structured teaching style will not be as happy with me as someone who is inquisitive and excited.
The classes I taught for that age were 45-60 minutes (45 seemed a bit better, but that might be my reaction rather than the kidsā). They liked anything game-ish. Making them run laps around the mats turned into a squealing, rambling race of cutting corners and a game to not be spotted by the instructor.
At around age 6 is where you see the first real growth spurt in kids. It's more mental than physical. There's a sharp increase in vocabulary and comprehension, and you see the beginnings of logical thought: step A leads to step B leads to step C, etc. IMNSHO, this is the age to start teaching kids and it's where they are the most receptive. In my school, they do the regular classes, and as long as I keep them moving and training, they stay focused. If I don't, they will start to see squirrels running across the ceiling. But then, so will the adults - it just takes them longer.
Remind me, what art/style do you teach? I have a theory about what works with kids that young - I see more success when there's a focus on striking, where they can either be worked in tandem, or can work on higher repetitions. I'm wondering if that's just my experience (maybe there were better kids' teachers in the striking styles I saw).At around age 6 is where you see the first real growth spurt in kids. It's more mental than physical. There's a sharp increase in vocabulary and comprehension, and you see the beginnings of logical thought: step A leads to step B leads to step C, etc. IMNSHO, this is the age to start teaching kids and it's where they are the most receptive. In my school, they do the regular classes, and as long as I keep them moving and training, they stay focused. If I don't, they will start to see squirrels running across the ceiling. But then, so will the adults - it just takes them longer.
Somewhere between 4 and 10. I'm useless.
I'd say between 8 and 13 they look! But ah I reckon you'll love it, just have to approach it a little differently than you would with adults
I teach Taekwondo. I've taught the Tigers (4-5) years and there just isn't the attention span or comprehension until around the 6th birthday. Mother Nature has this down pretty good.
Thanks. Yeah, I've seen some instructors change their youth curriculum (for 6-10 years old, or so) and shift more to striking/blocking from a primarily standing grappling approach. This allows them to move more often and keep them more in sync, etc. Interestingly, the relative safety of working escapes from mount in BJJ seems to work well - it doesn't require the same slow start that learning to take a fall does, so kids get to move more.
A good teacher may be hard to find. A good student is even harder to find.
HEKSURAA?? What an awful acronym!
Hahaha.. how bout SHURA-KAE? Sound more martial-artsy XD
I knew he wasn't. But having spent too much time around trainers and speakers who love acronyms (and often butcher their topic to fit a cute one), I immediately looked for one. Now that I think of it, I like it better than some of the cutesy ones I've seen used on stage.
