Your students or not?

[Thesemindz]

In my opinion, the Master of the school claims the students. The other instructors are subordinate to him. Even if the majority of classes are taught by the other instructors. As far as belt heirarchy goes, the students are all in his lineage.

That aside, my students, your students, his students, who cares? They're students. You show up every day and teach the best karate you can. And you hope they show up too. Everything else is secondary. I don't worry about who gets the credit.


-Rob

 

[Thesemindz]

We are looking at the positive side of things here. What if the student was very unruly or showed poor sportsmanship or, just sucked no matter how hard you try to teach him? This reflects badly on the school but in particular to the owner of the school. No one ever says "Yeah he is GM John Doe's student, but it is really Jeremy who is his teacher." The owner of the school may get a lot of the glory but he gets all of the criticism for bad things as well.

When you teach a class in a school that is not yours, do you teach whatever you want, how you want? Or do you teach the owner's curriculum how he wants it taught?

To your first point, it is the Master's responsibility to decide who is and is not involved with his school. That includes students and teachers. If there is an unruly person involved with his dojo, it is his fault and he should get the criticism.

To your second point, I am in this situation exactly. I am a paid instructor at the martial arts school of a friend of mine. I teach his curriculum, how he tells me to, in the order he desires. Because it is his school, with his name on the sign. I speak up when I think I have a good suggestion, and I offer my input on curriculum. He hired me to teach karate because he knows I am good at it, and part of what pays for is my perspective. But he's the owner and the head instructor. He get's final say on everything at all times and I make whatever adjustments to my instruction that he requires.

Basically, he has a set curriculum of techniques, class themes, drills, exercises, and training methods. I teach that, as he instructs, supplemented with my own knowledge and method. I send him copies of my class plans ahead of time so that I can make whatever changes he wants, and we go over any specific adjustments that need to be made from night to night based on attendance or tests or whatever else can come up.

In the end, he's the owner of the school. If I wasn't willing to teach things his way he wouldn't have me in his dojo and I wouldn't have any right to be there. It's the owner's reponsibility to control what is taught in his home on his floor. If I owned the school I might do some things differently. But I don't.

I think it's important to remember that.


-Rob

 

[Thesemindz]

Get paid to teach? Interesting. Helping out in class is just part of being a senior student at our school.

...

The more I hear things like this the more I wonder if there are head instructors who aren't showing up to the classes that are being run in their school and, if so, why not? Really, it just seems odd to me.

Pax,

Chris

I get paid to teach. Because I'm good at it, and I can't afford to do it for free. If I wasn't getting paid to do it, I'd have to have some other job during that time and then I couldn't do it at all. There's nothing wrong with getting compensated for my time and effort. I recognize that teaching is part of being a senior student, in fact I require it of all my students to their juniors, but some of us are professionals too. Getting paid doesn't diminsh the value of what I do, it makes what I do possible.

As to your other point, about head instructors not showing up, that can be a problem. The head instructor should always be involved. I think it's fine for other instructors to teach classes under his direction but he should always have a hand in. That's what being a head instructor is. I also think he should personally teach all the material at black belt and above, but that's just me.


-Rob

 

[bushidomartialarts]

I'm having trouble seeing why it matters.

You know how you've contributed to the growth of some people in your school. They know how you've helped them.

It's one of the prime purposes of martial arts study to eliminate ego-based reasoning that makes this an issue to begin with?

 

[chrispillertkd]

I get paid to teach. Because I'm good at it, and I can't afford to do it for free. If I wasn't getting paid to do it, I'd have to have some other job during that time and then I couldn't do it at all. There's nothing wrong with getting compensated for my time and effort. I recognize that teaching is part of being a senior student, in fact I require it of all my students to their juniors, but some of us are professionals too. Getting paid doesn't diminsh the value of what I do, it makes what I do possible.

Oh, I don't have a problem with people getting paid to teach. I just found it interesting that in the context of the post to which I was replying students get paid to teach other students. If one wants to get paid to teach they could open their own school. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole getting paid to teach other students thing isn't at least partially contributing to the question of "whose students are these?"

YMMV

Pax,

Chris

 

[Earl Weiss]

In my opinion, the Master of the school claims the students.

-Rob

Perhaps this is a fundamental issue. What matters more? Who the instructor claims as a student, or who the student claims as an instructor?

I may elaborate more on why I asked this question.

When I have had students screw up I tell them that if they ever mess up that bad training somewhere els and they ask "Who is your instructor?" That they should lie and say someone other than me

 

[StudentCarl]

I still think the language of this whole discussion is the problem. A student is yours because you have spent regular time teaching them, not because they attend a school with your name on it. There are levels of this and they don't conflict. I'm a junior assistant who doesn't teach classes; I work with individuals. The way I think of some kids as 'mine' is that I make a difference in their growth. They are also the students of the regular instructor of their class who teaches them new curriculum; he's invested in them too and they are 'his'. My master runs the school and teaches too; obviously they are his too. To think that somehow you teach a student regularly but they are not your student is not real in terms of relationships and not logical within the language.

I do not claim to be the master. I don't speak or act for him except as he specifically delegates to me. Same with the instructors who run class. But within the tasks that are given to me, it's perfectly appropriate for me to feel pride and mine-ness. If my charges do poorly, it's a reflection on me and my master and it should bother me so I do better. When I'm given credit, I credit my instructor and master. I'm just the junior member of a well-led team.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

We are looking at the positive side of things here. What if the student was very unruly or showed poor sportsmanship or, just sucked no matter how hard you try to teach him? This reflects badly on the school but in particular to the owner of the school. No one ever says "Yeah he is GM John Doe's student, but it is really Jeremy who is his teacher." The owner of the school may get a lot of the glory but he gets all of the criticism for bad things as well.

When you teach a class in a school that is not yours, do you teach whatever you want, how you want? Or do you teach the owner's curriculum how he wants it taught?

Good point. Personally, I don't think that the GM should get a ton of criticism for such a student unless he has willingly passed the student along in order to collect the testing fees.

At that point, it is the GM's responsibility.

Daniel

 

[terryl965]

Perhaps this is a fundamental issue. What matters more? Who the instructor claims as a student, or who the student claims as an instructor?

I may elaborate more on why I asked this question.

When I have had students screw up I tell them that if they ever mess up that bad training somewhere els and they ask "Who is your instructor?" That they should lie and say someone other than me

Well I will add this to the above statement if the head instructor is not thought of as the student instructor, than he is doing one bad job. The students know who is really doing what, but a student should never feel the instructor is not his instructor.

Now for me I have always said GM Kim is my instructor but I train with Matser so and so as well and he has done alot for me. It is always in the wording with anything.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

In response to the OP, the students are your responsibility while you are teachng them. You are responsible for how you teach and what you teach.

If you are their regular teacher, then they may be coloquially refered to as your students, even though they are really students of the dojang. Likewise, student will coloquially refer to the dojang as 'my dojang' even though they are not owners of it.

The students don't really belong to anyone. They pay to train at the location where you teach. If they move, they will pay to train at another location. If they decide that they do not like the instruction, they will cease to train at the location where you teach and will either pay to train elsewhere or will simply quit.

If all instructors at your location teach on a volunteer basis and students are not charged a fee to train there, the dynamic still applies.

Daniel

 

[ATC]

In response to the OP, the students are your responsibility while you are teachng them. You are responsible for how you teach and what you teach.

If you are their regular teacher, then they may be coloquially refered to as your students, even though they are really students of the dojang. Likewise, student will coloquially refer to the dojang as 'my dojang' even though they are not owners of it.

The students don't really belong to anyone. They pay to train at the location where you teach. If they move, they will pay to train at another location. If they decide that they do not like the instruction, they will cease to train at the location where you teach and will either pay to train elsewhere or will simply quit.

If all instructors at your location teach on a volunteer basis and students are not charged a fee to train there, the dynamic still applies.

Daniel

Someone that understands. :asian:

 

[puunui]

Someone that understands. :asian:

But his explanation doesn't apply to you, because he said if you are their regular teacher. You are not. You said:

Now I assist in classes that I don't head but do from time to time head some classes on my own.

 

[puunui]

The more I hear things like this the more I wonder if there are head instructors who aren't showing up to the classes that are being run in their school and, if so, why not? Really, it just seems odd to me.

This happens in at least a couple/few situations that I can think of. One is where the head instructor has multiple schools. It's hard to show up and teach every class when you have five schools all over the place. Second situation is where the head instructor is semi retired or is about to retire and the first assistant does the bulk of the teaching. Third situation is where the head instructor is actively involved in the political aspects, travels alot or is otherwise engaged, and so again the first assistant does the majority of the teaching. Fourth situation is where the head instructor has actually sold the school to a student, but the head instructor is still referred as the head instructor. Fifth situation is where a student opens a dojang but asks his instructor to be the figurehead leader of the school, putting his picture, certificates, etc. up on the wall. So there are a lot of situations where the head instructor doesn't do the bulk of the teaching.

 

[puunui]

When I taught at my own school, I had my own students. Before that I taught at my instructors' school, but I taught their students. They were my fellow students but there were plenty of times that I taught class or taught groups of students within a certain class session. In fact, teaching - or at least assisting - is a requirement for being promoted to senior ranks at my instructors' school.

So does that mean that you won't be promoted anymore, because you no longer have your own school and/or no longer teach on a regular basis?

 

[puunui]

I suppose it's akin to using sa-hyung to refer to someone who is your senior (or sa-je for someone who is your junior), as opposed to your sabum. Sunbae and Hubae can, of course, be used but IIRC sa-hyung and sa-je are specifically for people in your same lineage under the same sabum.

I've never heard the term sa-hyung or sa-je used before. Generally we use the terms sumbae (sunbae means gentleman, different term) and hubae.

 

[chrispillertkd]

So does that mean that you won't be promoted anymore, because you no longer have your own school and/or no longer teach on a regular basis?

It's good to see you so concerned about any future promotions I may or may not get, Glenn. Thanks.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

But his explanation doesn't apply to you, because he said if you are their regular teacher. You are not. You said:

I suppose in his case, they are 'his' students (coloquially speaking) for the time during which the responsibility for teaching them is given to him.

What they are called is unimportant. The students will have a relationship with their regular teacher and may also have a relationship with ATC, depending on how regularly he stands in.

If one were to evaluate how the students were trained, the primary instructor is who I would identify as their teacher: Your form is excellent/in need of work. Who taught you? At which point the regular instructor would be the one to get the credit/criticism.

ATC's role would be that of reinforcing the (hopefully) good training that the regular instructor is giving, but their relationship is really with the regular instructor.

Ultimately, it is that relationship that is important. Either you have it or you don't. If you don't, then you are just a trainer running a workout and participants cycle in and out as the classtimes change. The cardio kickboxing instructor at the company gym is a great trainer with regards to running the class. He calls the drills and the kicks and the participants get a great workout and burn calories. If you (the general you, not you specifically) have no relationship with your students, then that is what you amount to.

Daniel

 

[puunui]

If you teach at a school you are not an instructor nor a teacher but just a Jr. or helper. Even though your title is Instructor and that is what you are called, and you get paid as a staff member to teach classes and instruct students.

If you teach at a school, you are an instructor, but it is inappropriate to refer to the students as "your students". Slightly different than what you said.

You don't have any student's until you are the Master or owner of your own school. No matter if you teach every class and even have a 4th Dan ranking of Master. As long as the school is owned by a Master of equal or greater rank.

If you teach every class, regardless of your rank, then you would be the "soo suk sabum" or first instructor, and in this situation, you may consider the students to be "your students". Or more specifically, at that point, the students will refer to you as their instructor, along with the head instructor. For example, at the Chung Do Kwan main gym, GM UHM Woon Kyu was the Kwan Jang, but for many years GM PARK Hae Man was the Soosuk Sabum. So when I ask the students who their instructor was, they name both GM Uhm and GM Park as their instructors, even though they may have never taken an actual lesson from GM Uhm.

Students always only have one Master (the one they first started with) even if they go to another school even a longer time and learn more from that other school. So my current Master is not my true Master and I am not his student.

That's not true. I have many instructors that I have learned from over the years. My teachers consist of the head instructors of every school that I have been a member of.

 

[puunui]

It's good to see you so concerned about any future promotions I may or may not get, Glenn. Thanks.

Pax,

Chris

Just asking. You don't have to get so defensive.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I've never heard the term sa-hyung or sa-je used before. Generally we use the terms sumbae (sunbae means gentleman, different term) and hubae.

Wouldn't sa hyung mean forth form?

Daniel