Would you train under an uncertified Instructor?

[terryl965]

After watching a class or two and determining if the instructor knew what he was talking about, and the attitude and level of skill of the students in the class I would make my decision. Perhaps I've been around too long, or am a little too cynical, but titles and paperwork don't impress me, ability does.

I'm with you Morph.

 

[Grenadier]

Always look at the teaching ability of the instructor, as well as the quality of students. Someone with good teaching ability will tend to put out a better quality student, if you look at your "average" student in the school.

If you see that the guy is generating a decent number of quality students, then by all means go ahead and give it a whirl. If you're happy and perceive a good value out of the training, then stick with it.

Certifications can certainly be a nice thing to have, if you are an instructor, but you should think of such certifications as merely being the whipped cream and chocolate sprinkles on the sundae. It's the teaching ability that counts, and equates to the ice cream.

If you aren't sure the school is a "good" one, bring a friend with some experience along.

 

[Andrew Green]

As there is no regulations in the industry, there really is no such thing as "certification"

Every organization does there own thing, so anyone can be certified.

I think it's just the wrong word, "recognized" might be better, in that a person is "recognized" by someone else as being of a certain ability. But very often that just seems to be a way of establishing a hierarchy and can be more restrictive then beneficial.

A good instructor is a good instructor, their wall paper doesn't effect that. The only exception would be if you are a part of a larger organization for competition that requires membership and rank for certain things.

But in my mind there is nothing wrong with being independent, it's the more "traditional" way

 

[YoungMan]

No, because certification implies that the Instructor has agreed to abide by certain standards in his role as Instructor.
Think about it. Would you allow your kids to be taught or enrolled in daycare by someone who wasn't certified? I doubt it. Certification means the individual has met and passed certain criteria that state they are fit to teach a martial art. Being able to do the technique is only part of it.
In our organization, all of the more senior Instructors, myself included, were given certificates by our Grandmaster stating we are allowed to teach in his organization using his name. If you don't have one, you can't teach.

 

[Jade Tigress]

I certainly would. There are so many organizations out there handing out certifications and who can keep track of them all. Some are good and some are bad. It's the knowledge and quality of instruction that's important.

As far as how I'd feel about the gentleman you describe, sign me up!

I was prepared to formulate a reply, but Jeff said it so much better than I would have, so, what he said.

 

[geezer]

Well, it's time I owned up as to why I started this thread. I earned instructor certificates in Wing Tsun and a style of Escrima back in the 80's, but later "retired" for many years to raise a family and pursue a new career. Last year, I decided to get back into the thick of things and tracked down a former WT student of mine who I had also practiced Escrima with. He is the guy I'm talking about. I have the useless certificate in a drawer somewhere, but now I train under him--hey, I'm too old to let my ego prevent me from recognising the best instructor I know, certified or not! So that's the story.

 

[Adept]

So, how would you feel about this guy?

Sounds like exactly my kind of guy!

 

[Doc_Jude]

I started this same thread over on FMA Talk, but I'm interested to see how people over here respond. Here's the deal: a lot of martial arts instructors have verifiable certificates from well respected masters and assocations. Others do not. Would you train under an instructor who seems top notch and has been seriously involved in the martial arts for decades, but has trained here and there with different people, never got any certification--and doesn't care?

Wait, there's more. It's an Asian (FMA) martial art, but he's not of that nationality (although about half his students are). And, in his classes there's no rank or uniform. As far as rank is concerned, he says he knows where you're at. If you like uniforms, you can buy the school T-shirt...or not. Classes are friendly and informal. His students refer to him --respectfully-- by his first name. Regarding the value and practicality of technique, he encourages questions, and will answer them at whatever level of "reality" the student requires--from a patient explanation to a full speed, full contact demonstration if, "you really gotta know". Although, he is always careful about the safety of his students.

So, how would you feel about this guy?

Sounds pretty close to my Silat instructor, though if you dig hard enough you can find out who he is. Tremendous skill, but very informal, teacher's an open book, class is on a first name basis, friendly training atmosphere but respectful, comfortable clothing.

If you see something you want, or a skill level that you want to be at, then go for it! Nothing to lose, unless you're looking for some kind of certificate. Skill sets save the day, not paper or belts.

 

[Sanchin-J]

Would I train under an uncertified instructor.. Hrmm.. I would have to say yes, but only to a certain degree and without certification it would be unlikely that I would afford him or her any fees that he may require. Certification while not as "important" to some people, still allows a certain peace of mind when your training, it lets you know that the instructor has been formally trained and is knowledgeable in all the necessary aspects of the art.

As a person who does wish to teach classes one day, I am absolutely dedicated to reaching my rank through training and advancement and qualifying for the right to be called an instructor. It not only gives me credibility, but is also something to be proud of. The whole stereotype of the Martial Arts "Instructor" however has to be examined as well. There are thousands of perfectly capable instructors out there who can teach a student the art, but may lack in their own skills. I have a friend in Louisiana that teaches TKD and is a certified instructor, but the man is 6'2 and about 320lbs. He knows the art, and while he physically can't perform certain techniques gracefully, his instructional skills are outstanding.

*Slaps self* Back in topic however lol. Expanding your knowledge of the martial arts can never be a bad thing as long as the knowledge you are receiving is actual and not fragmented. The only way to really be sure on if a technique is correct is through certified instruction or at the very least asking a certified instructor. So, if your training with an uncertified instructor, take the time to ask the tough questions about techniques and things, and do some research, better to be safe and know your training is complete than to find out your training was neglected and left out crucial things later.

 

[harlan]

I find the idea of a 'qualified teacher' interesting. When it comes to 'certifications'...perhaps that is what is bestowed on a person by others...but when it comes to 'self-view'...I wonder if that is important. For example, I train/learn from someone without 'certifications' or rank (in this art)...and who does not consider himself to be a teacher.

 

[Sanchin-J]

I find the idea of a 'qualified teacher' interesting. When it comes to 'certifications'...perhaps that is what is bestowed on a person by others...but when it comes to 'self-view'...I wonder if that is important. For example, I train/learn from someone without 'certifications' or rank (in this art)...and who does not consider himself to be a teacher.

I can only speak for myself when I say this, but to me when it comes down to a 'self view' I would rather feel absolutely confident that I have been deemed knowledgeable and capable enough to teach the art in which I study by my peers and superiors first as it gives a certain degree of confidence to those who wish to teach. When I think of all the specific tips and methods involved in performing various techniques it makes me more aware of how vital it is to get certified or "qualified" instruction in the art before trying to teach someone else. The last thing anyone would want to do is teach bad habits and improper form.

This doesn't mean uncertified instruction is a bad thing, so long as the person teaching is serious and in fact knows the art in which they are attempting to teach. That's really where the real concern is, in this day and age, thousands of people claim to be involved in the martial arts and know this, that and the other, but what do they really know? How do you know they are being sincere? Its hard to prove their knowledge if they have no formal training and have no way to verify it. Some arts take great offense to those they have not deemed an instructor taking on the role of a teacher, and that's another consideration you have to think about.

I think the only exception I've ever made to the being certified first rule is with my 5 year old son, who I have been teaching the basics of Sanchin-Ryu, things I know and remember 100% accurately. This doesn't mean he won't have to put in his time as a white belt or anything later on, but giving him a solid foundation and a way to defend himself cannot be a bad thing.

 

[kidswarrior]

Certified by whom? And who certified the certifier? If we keep asking this up the line, we eventually bump up against the question of, who first promoted the founder to a high rank or sanctioned him to be the head of his own system? And that can get really ugly. :bomb:

An analogy: I'm a certified (termed certificated) teacher and administrator in California public schools. But some of the people entrusted with this certification process--that is, some who certified me and all the other teachers in the state (and most states are very similar)--couldn't handle my kids for an hour, let alone a day. And a week? Oh, the bloodshed. No, no, not real blood Just some hyperbole to make the point.