Distance outside of class.

I'm getting tired of making posts about social interactions, but I want to make a last point.

Kenpo is a connective force. I feel a sense of brotherhood with my fellow kenpoists. Every time we sweat, bleed, or laugh, we feel closer.

However, it doesn't do much, and maybe shouldn't do much, to build a connection with non-martial artists. If I go to family gatherings, like Thanksgiving 2 days ago, kenpo doesn't help me feel connected, at least not directly.

There are some little connections. I'm more relaxed thanks to kenpo, so I'm more open with people. Every so often the conversation can take a turn that makes knowledge of martial arts, self-defense, or related ethical issues relevant.

But, generally, I spend a lot of time doing something that doens't connect me to, say, my in-laws, and kenpo rarely comes up. This isn't a problem. Just an observation.

-- SGB

When social connection goes wrong.

Continuing on a theme of social connectedness, I've been thinking a lot lately about in groups, out groups, and how it feels to be a beginner.

I've heard a couple students now talk about how it can be socially difficult when starting in our club. We don't have cliques or any of that, and we all accept and help each other surprisingly well. But, there are groupings of students. The grouping that stands out is the hardcore students, 3 or 4 who have been doing this since the club started, who are serious about training, and who have volunteered for teaching or officer duties.

Fact is, not everyone comes to class for the same reason, and not everyone can be so intense or give so much time. University students are particularly concerned with not having time to do all they want. I am willing to make allowance for these varying levels of commitment, and let them know they are welcome in class even if they've missed one or two. They can even come part-time and be welcome, if they are willing to advance more slowly and work the material at home to keep it fresh. And, I tell them to do all the kenpo they can, but school comes first.

But, my attempts to make the club open to students with varying motivations and levels of intensity does little to ease this sense of there being a core group seperate in some way from the rest. Just seeing the fire in the eyes of the hardcore students is enough to indicate they have set themselves apart. I also see some advantages to having this hardcore group, both to keep the club going strong and to serve as models for the students who want to become hardcore.

But, on that first day, in that first month, really up until the first test (when everyone starts feeling more connected), new people probably feel pretty left out, second tier. They aren't, not in my eyes, and not according to the hardcore students, who have all expressed a desire to have everyone feel equally part of the group. But, the sense is still there.

I don't know what to do about it, or even if I can or should do anything about it. I'm open to suggestions.

-- SGB

Social stuff that reaches beyond class

My last post gives so little of the totality of social interaction, that I figure I should give a little more. There's no way to share it all, online. Online social interactions among martial artists, while interesting and important, are nothing like real-life interactions.

Anyway, for all the students who've been working a while, and many of the new students, when we leave class, we continue to feel connected. I think part of this is from helping each other so much. Part of it is from sharing an obsession. :) Part is that we always have such a good time when together, both on the mat and off.

A big part of it is testing. We have pretty tough tests, that push the students' endurance and ability to focus and persevere. Tougher is better come test time. This also builds bonds, as we all stagger out, sweating and aching, and feeling like we've done something meaningful, something powerful, and we've done it together. When I'm running the test, I get frustrated, because I can't be out there working with them. I find myself pacing and walking all over the floor, dodging strikes as I evaluate them. In those cases, we all still feel bonded even though I'm not sweating like they are. This is partly because I participated as instructor, and partly because of a sense of shared experience because they know I've been there, done that, and will do it again for my instructor when it's my turn to test.

-- SGB

social aspects in class

So it's the holidays, time to go see people I don't see much. It gets me thinking about connectedness with folks, and social interaction.

MArtial arts, the way we do it, is pretty social. Sure, we spend some time doing the same thing in a group without interacting, like with some of our warm-up exercises, most of the stretching, and of course much time spent in lines doing basic moves again and again.

But, much of what we do is interactive as well. We do some exercises and stretches together, such as when we warm up by wrestling or doing technique lines (a way of having the whole class take turns playing bad guys and defenders). But the real interaction comes when we start learning self-defense techniques. We interact on a very physical level. There are some questions and very brief discussion, like I've described in previous posts, but mostly we interact with bodies, with encouraging each other, and trying to help each other.

There is a strong component of students teaching or helping each other, usually when person A is trying to punch person B, B has problems dealing with it, and A and B work together to figure out what the problem is. For the last part of class, my role as instructor is wandering among the pairs as they practice on each other, looking for ways to help them or help them help each other.

There is a sense of interconnectedness, of shared effort, and of giving and taking freely. This is one aspect of the sense of brotherhood martial artists share.

-- SGB

More about the trip

This time, we weren't going to a major get-together. Instead, we were just taking the opportunity to visit and work out with the folks at the base school.

We worked with Carla, an instructor at the base school. She targeted a lot of our workout toward customizing self-defense techniques so that they will work more effectively for smaller defenders, since most there were lightweight women (and I suggested the topic). That was on Saturday.

On Friday night, or rather starting around 1 am Sat morning, I also ran Trina and Casey through a session focused on hitting heavy bags. We used 2 bags, both with bases, not hanging. One was low and just a big padded tube shape, so we did a lot of legwork there. The other was a "Bob", which is a punching bag shaped like a person, specifically an angry-looking guy with no arms or legs. We make many jokes about good old Bob. My goal was to get them both to understand how to strike with purpose and intent, penetrate properly, feel the effects on their own knuckles, and, thanks to Bob, fitting the right weapon (kind of strike) to the target (without hurting themselves).

The best base-school trips are the ones where we are going to attend seminars and step-tests. We get to see many more of our fellow kenpoists, both from the base school and other schools. If it's a seminar, we get to learn from the best martial artists out there. Every year we see Richard "Huk" Planas and Zach Whitson at the base school - phenomenal and world-famous martial artists and instructors. Twice a year (unless there's some snag) we go to a step-test, which is a 6 or 7 hour test where we work ourselves past exhaustion reviewing everything in the system in air and on bodies. There is something beautiful about being part of a group where everyone is working well past their own limits. Maybe it's because most of us hit an altered state of consciousness from sheer exhaustion. :) Dragging ourselves out right after to eat and crack jokes is pretty good, too.

-- SGB

Taking a trip

This weekend, leaving on Friday and getting back in the wee hours Saturday night, 4 of us drove across 2 states to visit the base school (where I got most of my training) back in Lafayette, Indiana.

I love these trips. Everyone is relaxed, we get to talk at length about anything we want, the workouts are interesting, and we get to eat together and generally bond. They are a pretty funny bunch.

This weekend it was Trina, Casey, Barrington, and myself. This was the first trip for Trina (new to kenpo this semester) and Casey (she started last school year). Barrington managed to sprain his ankle on Thursday while practicing for a hip-hop dance show, so he was on crutches and couldn't work out.

Certain things always seem to happen on these base trips. We all sleep on the couches and floor at the base school, so we play (work out) late into the night and take a while before we go to sleep, because it's essentially a sleepover. During the 4.5 hour drive, we always end up getting into discussions about race relations, in part because we're comfortable with each other and there are always people from multiple races (and other minority groups) along. In the early trips a few years ago, we used to make jokes because the usual crowd was myself (a white guy) and everyone else was from one minority group or another. Driving through the midwest can be a bit odd when it's 3 black guys and a white guy. We get funny looks when we stop for gas. :) When we're not talking about race, we usually talk politics or philosophy, sometimes religion. University kids are fun to talk with; they can make intelligent arguments and are aware of the issues and facts.

These trips are great. I'm glad to hear, as we head back, everyone talking about how much they learned and how glad they are that they went.

Of course, a month later when it's time to go again, we still have trouble getting a big crowd to go. College students all think they are so busy. If they think they are busy now, just wait 'till they have jobs and families and lives -- and grad school. :)

Peace,
SGB

Trouble-shooting

Usually, when learning a self-defense tech, we spend a fair amount of time doing the technique on each other. In the process, folks work out the kinks. Almost all the time, the problem is the need to do each basic move better. Usually, with such a diverse group of students of varying skills, sizes, and approaches, lots of errors are made, and I get a chance to advise on how to improve.

If the problem is a common one, I will pause class, review the problem, and review the solution or solutions. On occasion, if the problem also leads to a useful optional way to do the technique (a useful "what if?" moment), I will cover the option. If the problem is unique to that person, I will cover it quietly with them while the rest of the class keeps working out. If I know the person has the ability to solve the problem themselves, then I ask pointed questions to get them started on finding their own solution. Honestly, I do this much of the time anyway.

On Tuesday, we had a somewhat unusual situation. The class did the tech well enough that there weren't many problems to solve. So, I took a different approach, and asked people to find all the places where the tech could go wrong, and why. It was useful. Folks were trying to apply point of view of the bad guy, the defender, and 3rd person observer. They were very good at figuring out when the techs could go wrong, identifying how to keep that from happening, and even identifying principles to follow in order to prevent issues.

I was happy with the results.

-- SGB

Belt Rankings

Oh, yeah, just to clarify when I mention colored belt ranks, here's the order in American Kenpo:

White
Yellow
Orange
Purple
Blue
Green
1st Brown
2nd Brown
3rd Brown
1st Black
2nd Black
and it goes on from there until 10th Black

Everyone starts with a white belt, and tests for all other belts, in order. After they have demonstrated understanding of the material and have met minimum time-in-grade, they do a grueling cumulative test to earn the next belt. That means they have to keep up with the old material as well as learn the new material.

Peace,
SGB

Students as teachers

This happens in three ways in our club.

First, we do almost everything on body, meaning we pair up or form technique lines and apply the moves and self-defense techniques/combos on each other. This is a chance for us to help each other. We don't spend a lot of time talking about it, but rather do quick corrections and feedback on effectiveness. (It's a time for "less yak, more smack") :)

Second, I encourage each student to work out with each other outside of class, and point out the most experienced students as resources to learn basic moves and provide the expert eye.

Third, starting at blue belt, I give students the chance to teach a class or two in the semester. At green belt, if they want to, they can teach more regularly (say, teach 1 of the 5 classes each week). In the brown levels, everyone has to spend a minimum amount of time teaching. Nothing clarifies and solidifies my understanding of kenpo quite like teaching kenpo.

Peace,
SGB

More non-constructivism

The last post brings to mind another point where martial arts is not always constructivist. Constructivists seem to have an aversion to the idea of a teacher teaching the student. They want the teacher to be a help-mate, not an expert who gives good information.

Fact is, there are good ways and bad ways to punch, to kick, or to do any other basic move. The practitioner must have proper body alignment, must engage the body in the right way, must understand where the power is coming from, have the coordination to use power well, and have excellent targeting and an understanding of how each strike will affect the bad guy. All of this requires good teaching. There are tricks and methods to make the teaching part more interactive, but the fact is, in the end, the instructor needs to teach the students how to do the basic moves effectively, and test the results. The work may be physical, but it still means the teacher serves as an expert imparting vital information -- a sort of moving lecture where everyone ends up sweating, including the teacher.

Students could try to develop proper technique themselves, but talk about reinventing the wheel! It might take years to get basic moves right, and the students may develop less-than-effective moves that work kind-of right, and never figure out the really effective moves. This is particularly true for the moves that include locks, holds, and throws. It is interesting to spend a bit of time, sometimes, letting the students try to come up with the best way to, say, put on a center wrist lock, but the teacher will still have to step in and demonstrate the lock.

Peace,
SGB

But not all constructivist

Not everything in our classes is an example of constructivist approach. It's all physical, and all done in groups, but that doens't necessarily mean constructivist.

For example, martial arts skill depends heavily on repetition. We can't have confidence in our ability to use effective motion / technique under pressure until we've drilled that technique countless times. We have to make the technique ours.

To that end, we spend a fair amount of time, usually at the beginning of class, doing the same basic move again and again and again. For example, we might stand in horse stance (a stable way of standing designed to let us focus on the upper body) and practice horizontal thrust punches (the basic martial arts punch) a few hundred times.

I don't see a way around this -- we need repetition and practicing basics in the air has proven a vital way to build skills and proper technique. Anyone have suggestions on other ways to do this?

Sometimes what we do is practice on each other. For example, one person does punches, while the other person blocks them. This is very interactive, and leaves big bruises on the arms. :) But, it's not quite the same -- not quite so pure an example, not quite so clean a line -- as practicing "in air".

Peace,
SGB

What would you do?

One example of the use of constructivist methods can be found in preparing to learn a self-defense technique. Let's say I'm about to teach a technique where we learn how to defend when the bad guy grabs with both hands from the front and pulls in. What I do is demonstrate the attack, then have the students get into pairs or small groups.

I say "okay, grab each other and pull in. Take turns. When you are grabbing, I want you to think about why a bad guy would do this to someone. Also, think of what the bad guy might do next. When you are being grabbed, also think about why, think about what they are doing to you, and think about your options for defense. After a couple grabs, try some options out, both as bad guy and defender."

They do this, and seem to have fun doing it. It's a physical sort of pursuit; not much talking except to critique each other's results. After a couple minutes, I stop them and start asking what they found, giving each person a chance to explain what they think and also demonstrate on me or on their partner. In this manner, we come up with a few options for defense and also have a chance to critique and praise each other's ideas. I find people are most critical of their own ideas, usually. I try to apply the "expert" eye.

Then, I start teaching the self-defense combo / technique for that class. Almost always, someone has already come up with the first move, or a variation, so I can start with what that person did.

This practice is consistent with the recommendations of Ed Parker, Sr., the guy who developed American Kenpo. He said it is important to analyze self-defense from three perspectives -- the bad guy, the defender, and the 3rd person observer.

Peace,
SGB

Authentic learning via resistance

One example of trying to make martial arts training more "authentic" is the process of practicing self-defense combos on resisting partners. This means the defender responds to the attack with the self-defense technique, while the agressor (bad guy, "dummy") tries to resist in as realistic a way as possible. A major problem for some martial arts clubs is a decided lack of realism -- the bad guys throws a punch, then stands like a stone statue while the defender whacks away. Resisting is a way to complicate the situation to more closely simulate a live confrontation. The defender has to do their technique very well to make it work, and has to develop timing, have good range, hit targets precisely, and be able to deal with anything that goes horribly wrong. A resisting partner will make sure everything goes wrong, if the defender lets them.

A few rules about how to do this more-or-less safely (sometimes it hurts, and it's exhausting, but it shouldn't lead to injuries):

First, some strikes can have a bit more force, like a punch to the stomach. Others can not. Nothing worse than someone who doesn't understand the difference between hitting the stomach and hitting the throat!

Second, the dummy has to dummy well ("don't be a dumb dummy"), meaning if there's a groin kick and there is that lovely "chok" sound as the foot hits the cup, then the dummy should respond as if struck, whether that be bending over or sinking down. I find this part easier than it sounds. With a little practice, it's easy to feel, even at full speed, a good hit from a bad one. (And if the dummy gets it wrong and doesn't react well every so often, then there's that much more to work with.)

Third, and most important, is the idea that the dummy makes that first attack as the technique is designed for, then works like mad to evade, counter, slip and dodge, attack, or otherwise gum up the defender. The defender has to be able to strike effectively, invade space, control zones, and all the rest well -- well enough to overcome resistance. The resistance has to be as realistic as the participants can make it, short of a doctor visit. One vital part of this whole thing is that the defender doesn't quit when a tech goes wrong. Rather the defender continues the defense to resolution, doing whatever the situation calls for even if she or he wanders far from the pre-planned moves, then next time works to get the tech right.

Kenpo's self-defense techs/combos are beautifully designed. "Pressure testing" reveals that the tech is made well, but the practitioner is weak in the application. Almost always, in my limited experience, this is because of a poorly done basic or a timing issue. A resisting partner reveals weaknesses in execution that aren't apparent when working with a compliant partner.

In my opinion, working with resistance should be a gradual development, done when all parties are ready and at the limits of their ability. (Don't push them into more resistance, just offer it and they will seek it on their own, at the pace they can handle.) In other words, the pressure testing for a yellow belt will differ in intensity and kind from the pressure testing for a green belt. But it must be done eventually, and everyone must know from early on that they are working for more realism, more "live" training.

Doing techniques on a resisting partner is a real eye-opener. And fun, to boot.

-- SGB

Defining Constructivist methods

I've mentioned MA, now I'll mention constructivist teaching methods for the non-teachers.

First, I'm no expert. These ideas are all new to me. I'm learning about them in a class I'm taking while pursuing a Masters in Library Science. This blog, actually, is part of the work of that class. Constructivism seems more a collection of priorities and principles than an organized approach or defined methodology.

Some links:

Tons about learning theories at http://tip.psychology.org/ , constructivist section at http://tip.psychology.org/bruner.html

Minimalist listing of principles: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/drugfree/sa3const.htm

A paper with a rather colorful overview (hurts my eyes): http://www.prainbow.com/cld/cldp.html

The too-much-information entry: http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/constructivism.html

Also, here's my grossly oversimplified take on some basic principles, a shortened version of a list in our textbook. (Learning to Solve Problems with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective, second edition; Jonassen, David H, et. al.; 2003 Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey; p.6-9) Following each description will be the buzzwords the book lists, sort of theoretical synonyms.

1. Good learning is active, meaning the student interacts with the environment and learns to manipulate objects and ideas. It is about adapting to the environment and adapting the environement. (Manipulative / Observant)

2. Good learning is constructive, meaning the student will make mental models to better understand what he or she is studying, will question, and will reflect on what they've learned and done. This grows out of active learning. (Articulative / Reflective)

3. Students should be seeking a specific goal in their learning (Intentional), such as solving a problem, troubleshooting, developing strategies, or applying an idea in a new situation. (Reflective / Regulatory)

4. When teachers present an idea or problem, it should be as realistic as possible (Authentic). The idea is to apply information in a way that is complex and "realistic", emphasizing "real-world" and problem-solving tasks. Teachers should resist the urge to simplify or dumb down a problem, and thereby limit understanding. This is the easiest for me to understand, though I think there are times to go complex right off, and other times to provide principle first and then go complex, depending on the nature of the information and the student. (Complex / Contextualized)

5. We should work together, collaborate, do group projects, or otherwise interact in our learning (Cooperative). What benifits are emphasized will depend on how the group is constructed and what the group members do to organize the work and interactions. (Collaborative / Conversational)

In future posts, I will try to cover some examples, give some criticisms, and elaborate when I can. Those of you who do martial arts, especially hands-on work like we do in kenpo, are probably already thinking of examples.

-- SGB

Defining Kenpo

Everyone has some idea of what martial arts are. You probably have an interest, or you wouldn't have found this blog. The art I do and teach is American Kenpo. It's well know on the coasts, but not well known here in the midwest.

Essentially, it is a comprehensive martial art that focuses on practical, effective self-defense. It is best known for the use of pre-defined combos in response to particular attacks -- self-defense techniques. These combos are lesson plans, used to teach the principles and application of the art. It has forms, sets, and sparring as well.

Ed Parker, Sr. founded American Kenpo. The roots of the art go back to the kenpo practiced in Hawaii, particularly that of Mr. Parker's primary teacher, Professor "Thunderbolt" Chow, as well as kung-fu systems by folks like Ark Yuey Wong, Lao Bun, "Tiny" Lefiti, and Jimmy Wing Woo. But, he trained with and taught many martial arts greats, and stands as one of the most influential martial artists in the U.S.

This, hopefully, gives a context for my comments. Martial arts are hands-on, interactive, and done with specific practical goals in mind, like building realistic self-defense skills. In short, MA instruction incorporates the ideas of constructivist theory. This kind of training can happen in any martial art, depending on the instructor and methods, and so the comments I make about kenpo can apply just as well to most other arts.

Here's a link to a mojor kenpo page: www.kenponet.com
More to come.

Salute!
SGB