Syllabuses (syllabi?)

[Sionnagh]

In my syllabus what is expected at each level is fairly well specified. It has timeframes based on regular training and specifics mentioned for each grade. For example 8th kyu (yellow) assesses:
- punching with the front hand from guard
- short punch
- elbow strike
- outside block
- knife-hand block
- a few other things like some basic stances.

It also has some set basic sparring drills drawn from kata and some basic escapes from simple holds.

Other grades have similar formats for what is assessed. You can also be asked to demonstrate anything from earlier grades so they can't really be learnt once for grading then abandoned because at some point they're sure to be asked for again.

What do others think, is this format better, knowing what you are to be assessed on for each grade?


Mick

[AngelaG]

I guess that it depends what the instructor wants to test. My personal opinion is that gradings can be stressful enough without throwing people, especially the new lower grades, deep into the unknown. The pressure comes from the test environment, from strangers watching our every move, from expecting to perform everything correctly, from all eyes being on you - not from thinking we are entering some secret hazing! IMO There should be no secrets from students - that way there can be no accusations of improprieties levelled at you, and no little clusters of people hanging around feeling smug and superior as they have gone through their little rite of passage.

The best way to learn new teachniques is to keep practicing them. If people know they are to be tested on them they are more likely to practice them. For example: Give a student age uke and let him know he will be tested on it, and give him soto uke and say he just has to know it but it is not in the grading syllabus, and see which one improves at a greater rate!

Perhaps a bit of mystery is more understandable for Shodan and above, as by then the student should be adaptable but I fail to see the point of keeping students in the dark before then.

[thingy]

I think a grading syllabus is a perfectly good idea but i've seen some people really abuse it in order to practice the minimum. They'll learn something, grade on it and then forget it, saying "oh well I won't have to do this on this grading". Terrible.

I don't like the situation where a grading is set down to the Nth degree of detail though. For the first gradings I have no problem with that, in fact I think it's quite right. But increasingly there should be scope for for some movement.
I just like the idea of having students going into a grading being able to do the things that you would reasonably expect them to be able to do in a class.

Our black belt gradings were once a behind closed-doors mystery thing. It was kinda difficult because a master was flown in from America, and we had to learn his lingo as part of the grading preparation. Spinning Wheel Kicks, Back Spinning Kicks, Lunge Punches etc. All terminology that meant nothing to us and you had no idea what he'd ask of you.

Now the gradings are done within the organisation... there is a set syllabus, you go in there knowing exactly what you're going to do. Even the linework - The man that calls out the instructions prepared some linework combinations, and at some point his notes got copied and spread throughout the clubs.

I don't know that the gradings have to be shrouded in mystery, and I don't think there's a need for secrets.
Our gradings have been uber-standardised and in that way you can say their totally fair - everyone who goes up for a certain belt gets asked to do exactly the same, and I think I'd rather sacrifice some fairness for some flexibility.

[Sionnagh]

I did consider some of those things in formatting the syllabus like giving specifics in the first few levels as a reassurance what they could expect to be tested on. I also considered that some people would only practice what they think they need for the next grading, but perhaps this can be mitigated by making them aware that anything from a previous grade can also be tested.
Then by the time they get to middle kyu grades the syllabus is not quite so detailed and has more generalised descriptions.


Mick

[Aefibird]

We have a very detailed grading syllabus for the fisrt few grades.
Techniques are repeated at all grades, though, so the student's dont just learn a technique for a particular grade and then never practice it again.

For the intermediate and higher kyu grades the grading syllabus contains guidelines for testing, but techniques chosen can be from any that have been done before,not just the ones that are there as the minimum for testing.

I liked having the structure there when I was a low kyu grade, but I think the flexibility we have for higher grades is good too - it shows that you have to be adaptable and ready for anything!

For Shodan and Nidan there is a list of techniques that the instructor will test you on (eg, age uke, soto uke, jodan maegier etc etc). However, the student doesn't know in which order or combination techniques will be asked for. Plus, for any technique, the instructor will ask for a practical demonstration against one or more opponents with a verbal explanation.

[AngelaG]

I've been rethinking about this today and I thought that for the higher grades it may be interesting to have a set grading syllabus, but also to throw a few random things into the midst. Maybe something to test their spirit. You could either do something that they've never done before and see if they still try their hardest to do it, despite the fact that it's an unknown element - or some sort of test where 2 people are against each other and maybe have to get achieve something (whether that be take them to the floor, or grab a tag off them or something).

A fight is unpredicatable and as karate is a martial art for self-defence it might be interesting to see how karateka cope in an unpredictable situation. It would prevent a grading from becoming a well rehearsed scenario. Also it tests spirit and that they won't give up even when the going is tough. (Keep fighting until the very last?!)

These were just a couple of musings of mine whilst making my early morning coffee today.

Angela

[miffersy]

Hi,
I have a set syllabus for all grades but as Angela says I do tend to throw a Spanner in the works, when they do Jiyu-Ippon Kumite I call the order of the attacks. It has also been known to get the odd Gyaku Haito or Ashi Barai Mawashee Geri, these really do put them on the spot and I do like to be a bit evil with them.

[pasmith]

Really interested in this so thought I'd resurrect it.

I believe that a good syllabus can really help with the development of a person from "non-fighter" into "fully fledged BB".
I do however feel that most clubs and arts miss that opportunity and instead kep teaching the same old syllabus without changing stuff or questioning it. Many syllabi are illogical or in-efficient.

For my first Karate grading I had to learn three Tiukoyu (sp?) kata that are essentially the same. The second one was even taught as "like the first one but the punches are higher".
To me that is wasted stuff. They could easily be condensed into one kata.

One of the first patterns in TKD (Dan-gun) taught a finger tip strike. How many people actually went on to develop a finger tip strike they could use? Probably none. Something more suitable for a beginner would be better.

I believe that syllabi can be constructed logically and progressively so that things are introduced at the proper stage and existing knowledge is continually built upon.

I generally work back from what I think a BB should be able to do and that informs me as to what a syllabus needs to be to create that in a person.
I believe that a BB should be able to perform well in many different types of restricted sparring. They don't have to win but hold their own.
For example just Boxing (hand techniques), Kickboxing (hand and feet), Thai style sparring, Judo style sparring, MMA, ground fighting, ground fighting with strikes, stick fighting, unarmed defence against stick and knife. That kind of thing. I'd also include first aid, fitness knowledge, dietary and nutritional knowledge, knowledge of the laws on SD, the theories behind modern teaching methods and transferring knowledge to others, anatomy even. Loads of stuff.
That shows me what a BB would need to learn in those areas in order to operate well. That in turn can be used to formulate a syllabus.

I feel that not enough clubs view their training and teaching in this way. "Form" follows "function". The "function" of a syllabus is to creat an effective fighter. That should then determine it's form.
As it stands many people get good at MA despite a syllabus not because of one.

In a bit I'll post up what I consider to be a good first grading for a complete beginner (if anyone is interested ).

[Aefibird]

pasmith said:

In a bit I'll post up what I consider to be a good first grading for a complete beginner (if anyone is interested ).

Yes!

Please post it - I'm sure that it would make interesting reading. Perhaps all of us might like to "have a go" at creating what we think is a suitable syllabus for beginner students.

[smr]

I'm a firm believer in having an objective syllabus for the student to adhere to. This is a real bonus for many students who might have self-esteem and confidence issues. They can assess for themselves whether or not they will pass the test because they know what will be tested. They don't have to worry about what they may have forgotten to practice, nor will they have to worry if they are 'good enough.' If they can perform the techniques on the syllabus, then they pass. That simple. If the student is interested in subjective grading, they can go to a tournament.

If the syllabus is carefully configured, then you can make sure to include kata and excersizes which demonstrate things graded at previous exams. This way you don't need to explicitly re-test them, but if they don't know them then they can't pass the next exam.

[pasmith]

Weeelll...here goes...this is off the cuff so bear with me.

Any syllabus is going to be biased towards what the creator (me basically) sees as important.
Above all *I* feel that ALL MA should make people better at surviving violent encounters in today’s society, wherever they might live (so a syllabus can and should change from person to person (to some degree), year to year, country to country and area to area).
They should also become versatile and effective in any situation as a result of going through the syllabus.
Any other benefits of doing MA are of secondary importance to me (like being "good" at an actual named art, inner peace, balance etc etc).
I also think that people should cover SD first and then branch out into other areas from that base.

I tend to thinks of things as falling into 5 categories.
Stand up, clinch, ground, weapons and contextual knowledge (the stuff that makes it work for you, in reality and against real attackers).
When I see something new I tend to file it into one of those areas and then try to integrate it with what I already know.

To that end any beginning grading or syllabus should build strong foundations in some (or maybe even all) of those areas…

First up would be getting the student along the road of perfecting a fence, pre-emptive strike, action trigger combo. That to me is a must for anyone. The bed-rock of modern SD. That strike can come from any art so this is not art specific. This forms the first steps of the “Stand-up” portion of fighting.

Coupled with that would some understanding of modern attack rituals, how attacks happen and how they can be avoided. Some understanding of the nature of “fights” will also be needed so that the student begins to understand the environment that they must survive in. This is begining contextual knowledge.

A basic 45 degree fighting stance.

Moving in stance backwards, forwards, right and left.

How to form a fist.

A standing guard structure.

Straight punches off both hands (with fists AND palms) with impact on pads. This is the real foundation of stand up fighting and an intro into “kickboxing” (to use a generic term for stand up fighting using many physical weapons rather than actually meaning kickboxing as an art).

Clinch knee (onto pads) using the Thai clinch. This introduces clinching (should strikes (pre-emptive or otherwise) fail) as a concept and striking in a clinch.

How to get up (safely) from the floor if you are prone. This introduces the fact that you might have to fight on the floor from day one.

There’s probably other stuff but essentially I think someone should be able to show that after three months training AND have a SD foundation that they can use almost straight away from day one.

[AngelaG]

Just out of interest, does anyone on here have some measurement of physical fitness tested in their gradings? Obviously, in the extreme, if someone is very unfit they won't be able to complete their kata, or kihon combinations etc, but apart from that is there a dedicated portion of the grading for reviewing the candidates levels of fitness?

[Sionnagh]

I don't think it should be necessary to test fitness. I have seen gradings which were more like an endurance test than a skills test, and IMO this can be restrictive by making it harder and even creating a situation where someone who is more skilled in timing, distancing, accuracy of striking does not grade through having a lower level of fitness while someone who is fitter but poorer in technical skill passes to the next grade.


Mick

[Aefibird]

angelag said:

Just out of interest, does anyone on here have some measurement of physical fitness tested in their gradings? Obviously, in the extreme, if someone is very unfit they won't be able to complete their kata, or kihon combinations etc, but apart from that is there a dedicated portion of the grading for reviewing the candidates levels of fitness?

We used to have a physical fitness test in the gradings until fairly recently, but that was dropped. There also used to be pad work in the dan gradings too, but that was also stopped.

[bob]

the problem with a syllabus that makes a grading the same for everyone is that everyone is not the same. for example when do you require head kicks? lets say for talking sake green belt. now lets imagine a 45 year old starting martial arts for the first time. they cant lift their leg to face height no matter how much stretching they do. are they never to pass above yellow belt? they might be the best puncher in the club but that wont matter. each grading has to take into account that people will be better at some things and not others. whether its strength speed or flexibility or something else entirely.