Reversing the traditional teaching methods?

[Taiji Bum]

Know the stories we've heard about taiji masters making students stand like a tree for a year before teaching the first of the 13 moves? Then they would string together several moves and then the longer forms and then last of all weapons training. But nowadays we teach the longer forms first, then break it apart for applications and we all still save weapons for last.

 

Well I was thinking of a new model. Teach sword first to get in the warrior wannabe's. Then the empty hand form. Then sparring and meditation. I have been trying to figure out a way to get more younger males into classes since I love the rougher aspects of taiji... especially the throwing and wrist/arm locks.

 

Its more of a marketing ploy I guess. Any arguements for or against?

[gendao]

Know the stories we've heard about taiji masters making students stand like a tree for a year before teaching the first of the 13 moves? Then they would string together several moves and then the longer forms and then last of all weapons training. But nowadays we teach the longer forms first, then break it apart for applications and we all still save weapons for last.

Well, yiquan believes that zhan zhuang is the core practice of Taijiquan. Therefore, it would make sense for that to be the foundational basis for all other aspects.

 

Not very marketable (since most people would find standing still for hours boring as hell), but probably the most effective sequence...

[wudangspirit]

Yep, a marketing ploy. There is a reason why things are taught a certain way. It is not to say we can not make improvements but principles are principles.

 

Standing Pole teaches the student to center their attention inward and allows the mind to center itself on rooting in spirit and body. Essential for Taiji practice. Taiji walking drills allow for the student to build the legs and better balance. The short forms allow the student to get a foundation for the movement in a more fundamental and simplified way. The longer forms allow us to refine and sword allows us to project our energy outward more and become more aware of the energies around us. Of course these are also all connected to the martial side of things as well.

 

However, if the students jumps right in to fighting and sword without a foundation they will get hurt and frustrated that they cannot fight well. They will not trust that your teaching is doing them any good.

 

Stick with basics and principle and do not sacrifice them for marketing ploys. That is a waste of your time and qi.

 

Know the stories we've heard about taiji masters making students stand like a tree for a year before teaching the first of the 13 moves? Then they would string together several moves and then the longer forms and then last of all weapons training. But nowadays we teach the longer forms first, then break it apart for applications and we all still save weapons for last.

 

Well I was thinking of a new model. Teach sword first to get in the warrior wannabe's. Then the empty hand form. Then sparring and meditation. I have been trying to figure out a way to get more younger males into classes since I love the rougher aspects of taiji... especially the throwing and wrist/arm locks.

 

Its more of a marketing ploy I guess. Any arguements for or against?

[goldisheavy]

Unfortunately at some point you have to decide between making more money or delivering quality. If you focus on quality you will make less money. Obviously you need a modicum of quality to attract customers, but once the customer is in your trap, any extra quality on top of that is "waste" from the POV of sucking the money from the person.

 

So real quality always comes from outside business. Business is good at delivering mediocrity. At the same time, business makes more money.

 

I've heard stories of Chinese martial arts masters teaching utter bullshit to people for money. I mean literally teaching wrong stuff or made up moves. Anything. Then using earned money to live and to support 1 or 2 real disciples whom they taught correctly. To my mind, this is fraud. These so-called "masters" are going to hell. On the other hand, they were successful businessmen because they attracted lots of people and were super-lenient and allowed them to do whatever they wanted and so forth, so everyone had this illusion of success.

 

Horrible crap.

 

EDIT: I should say that faster teaching approaches do not have to be crappy, but in the end there is no short-cut, because the faster approach amounts to explaining everything up front, but the time you need to spend practicing what you've been told is exactly the same. So the only difference is that in the slow approach the master slowly removes the veil of secrecy, while in the faster you get the whole system explained to you in a week or two. But once you get the explanation it still takes you 30 years to practice it to get good. So it's less frustrating because you feel like you're not treated as a baby because you're a responsible person who knows how to use information and when. Just because you know something doesn't mean you have to do it too soon or in the wrong order etc. In the slow approach you're treated as an irresponsible imbecile who uses information impulsively and incorrectly and who has 99.9% chance of self-combustion if explained even one extra bit of information. This is of course nonsense and insulting.

Edited November 3, 2009 by goldisheavy

[Prince...]

Know the stories we've heard about taiji masters making students stand like a tree for a year before teaching the first of the 13 moves? Then they would string together several moves and then the longer forms and then last of all weapons training. But nowadays we teach the longer forms first, then break it apart for applications and we all still save weapons for last.

 

Well I was thinking of a new model. Teach sword first to get in the warrior wannabe's. Then the empty hand form. Then sparring and meditation. I have been trying to figure out a way to get more younger males into classes since I love the rougher aspects of taiji... especially the throwing and wrist/arm locks.

 

Its more of a marketing ploy I guess. Any arguements for or against?

 

Darin are you studying Taiji with anyone in the Detroit area? My teacher started out taking classes up there with an old lady in the Yang Family Association. In one of his more fun stories about her, she asked him to show her some of his Shaolin Kempo that he'd been studying for well over a decade....after she dusted him up a bit, she left the room saying,"Shaolin is weak." In case you ever care to check her out, here is her school's website:

 

http://www.michigantaichi.com/

[Martial Development]

Know the stories we've heard about taiji masters making students stand like a tree for a year before teaching the first of the 13 moves? Then they would string together several moves and then the longer forms and then last of all weapons training. But nowadays we teach the longer forms first, then break it apart for applications and we all still save weapons for last.

 

Well I was thinking of a new model. Teach sword first to get in the warrior wannabe's. Then the empty hand form. Then sparring and meditation. I have been trying to figure out a way to get more younger males into classes since I love the rougher aspects of taiji... especially the throwing and wrist/arm locks.

 

Its more of a marketing ploy I guess. Any arguements for or against?

 

I think either method could work, but the "traditional" method will eliminate the lower-quality students immediately, whereas your model will keep them around to waste a few months of your time.

 

On top of that, if someone hasn't demonstrated a basic level of coordination (e.g. in the hand form), I don't necessarily want them swinging a sword around in my vicinity!

 

If you are only after sparring partners, why not attend or host an "open mat" session? This would allow you to demonstrate the skills your method offers, without compromising your class structure. (This is not to say that all change is bad, or that what we might consider "traditional structure" is both genuine and for the best.)

 

In my experience, even young men are willing to endure the initially boring aspects of CMA practice (bad students notwithstanding), so long as they have a clear picture of where that training leads, and of their steady progress towards that end. It's all about perception.

Edited November 3, 2009 by Martial Development

[Trunk]

Well I was thinking of a new model. Teach sword first to get in the warrior wannabe's. Then the empty hand form. Then sparring and meditation. I have been trying to figure out a way to get more younger males into classes since I love the rougher aspects of taiji... especially the throwing and wrist/arm locks.

 

Its more of a marketing ploy I guess. Any arguements for or against?

If people are having fun and learning and not getting hurt, then I don't see anything wrong with it. Still better than baseball.

 

I saw some foam rubber sparring swords once, looked like a ton o' fun.

 

One dangerous thing is the psychology. You train younger males in vigorous, fun, sword movements.. maybe even sparring... and they get really into it physically. Not too big of a step (for a young mind in good-judgement-deficit) to take a swing at someone with a real sword. It's one thing to take a swing at someone with your hand (or even foot) but to have a weapon... that takes it immediately to a lethal level regardless of amount of time training. No time to train respect for the art, respect for each other, respect for the weapon - and no time to weed out kids who aren't psychologically suited for weapons work at all.

 

Hmmmm.

 

Trunk

[Taiji Bum]

Darin are you studying Taiji with anyone in the Detroit area? My teacher started out taking classes up there with an old lady in the Yang Family Association. In one of his more fun stories about her, she asked him to show her some of his Shaolin Kempo that he'd been studying for well over a decade....after she dusted him up a bit, she left the room saying,"Shaolin is weak." In case you ever care to check her out, here is her school's website:

 

http://www.michigantaichi.com/

I've known of her for years and I have seen her perform on several occasions. My sister even studies with her since she is a local. Whats your friends name? Thats the first I have heard that she can use taiji in a fight.

 

If you are only after sparring partners, why not attend or host an "open mat" session? This would allow you to demonstrate the skills your method offers, without compromising your class structure.

One of the things I am looking to do is just mentor the local boys who have too much time on their hands. When it comes to "the mat" I am a card carrying memberj of the United States Judo Federation. I dont need anymore sparring partners. Even my lovely 130lbs sister is now into Jujitsu so..... no... I dont need anymore sparring partners!

 

I think I just need to define what "exactly" it is that I feel so compelled to do or teach.