My associate and I were
discussing the teaching of kata the other day. The Association had (this past fall) decided to
utilize the (20+ year old)
videos as a reference for kata practice. My own initial thoughts were
that (at least) there would then be some (fixed?)
manner of a standard that could be anticipated for testing
purposes.
My associate pointed out
the fact that we haven't performed (any of) the kata as done on those
tapes in 15+ years. After I
actually took a look
at them (which I hadn't done in probably that same length of time as
well, LOL), I had to concede that he was correct.
What was being done on those tapes only barely
resemble the way that any
of the kata are performed now.
Though the association is claiming
that they will use those examples as “testing standards”, I'm
wondering how long that
will last (and to what degree adhered to?).
As
we discussed our own
classes performing (and practice) of the kata, we both decided that
we won't be utilizing
the terms “Basic, and/or (ever)
“Advanced”. Either of those descriptions creates inaccurate
training attitudes in
regards to the kata being practiced.
When/if
someone hears the term Basic, their
first perception is
“simplistic”, for
which nothing could be
further from the
truth. I'm thinking Introductory
or Skeletal is
a better description
(for the first level
of instruction). I believe either of these terms instills the feeling
of a structure to be built upon. Important,
yet (obviously) not complete (something
that will be added to,
but is structurally “sound”
on it's own).
The
term Advanced carries
similar inaccurate connotations to it as
well. A common attitude (by student's) will be “why
should we learn one
way (of performing a kata), only to have to change
it later?”. This (even to myself,
LOL) is a valid
question/objection.
I
believe that I'd prefer to use the term Complete,
to describe the final
instructed form of the kata. I think this would convey an attitude of
having learned all of
the correct motions contained within the kata. Though (obviously) not
implying that one understands
all of the intricacy's of the kata motions (bunkai),
they should feel that they have completed the
instruction of all of
the required motions
contained within it.
In
a class environment,
the difficulty (for
student's to
understand), is that not everyone
is always at the same
level of instruction (for the same kata). This is why I haven't
listed an “Intermediate” (kata) form. After having been shown the Introductory form of
the kata, the student is shown individual pieces
(that are added into
their version of the kata, as they
proceed with their practice of it throughout their continued training).
By
individually including these small additions to each student's kata, it
also conveys a feeling of personal
attention (to that student). Though seemingly hokey
to an outsider to hear, having that personal
attention/instruction is important
to a student (especially while learning an often-times challenging
task). It conveys an attitude of (personal)
attention, and concern for
their instruction.
Once
the student has been shown the Introductory
(version) kata, the instructor will be adding bit's and
pieces as they believe the
student can handle them. This will continue as they proceed in their
advancement through the kyu-ranks.
The
instruction of the Complete
kata (all of the system's 12), is done by the time they have achieved Ikkyu (First kyu). This
will tend to vary
(slightly) between the individual student's (and kata). As individual
changes and additions are made throughout the student's practice of
the kata (during their advancement through the kyu-ranks), the motions contained within them, have often been slowly
modified to meet the requirements of the final/completed version.
This
approach is one of compromise,
a class is rarely (if ever) tailored to suit one
(individual) student and their personal
requirements/needs. And (of course) not every student learns at the same rate/speed. An instructor, in order to create a more
generalized curriculum must fit the needs of as many different
student types as is
practical. This often means teaching to the lowest
common denominator. In larger classes, this is almost a mandated
occurrence.
Though
(sometimes) not considered to be “fair” (to the more adept
students), this prevents those who aren't as quick
to learn certain aspects, from feeling ignored
and/or abandoned if
the remainder of the class excels (too far) ahead
of them.
The
fact is, that not everyone will learn everything, at the same
rate. It's impossible for an instructor to know
(ahead of time) what will/won't/can or can't be learned (and at what
speed) by every
student, every minute of every class.
This
is especially true for the learning/instruction of kata. I am always
surprised by the
motions that will confound a student's ability to perform a
particular kata (and it seems to be a different motion/kata for each
student, LOL).
The
instruction of the various kata is an integral piece of every
student's training. It's done in conjunction with the instruction of
Tuite, Kyusho
and the Defensive and Controlling Actions
that are being shown for self/life-Protection. It needs to be remembered that all of
these individual applications are illustrated within those motions
performed while practicing the kata.
3 comments:
Interesting and thought-provoking post. The term 'Introductory' might still carry the same connotations you're trying to remove. Perhaps 'Foundation' and 'Structure/Structural' would be useful terms to replace 'Entry-Level' and 'Advanced'. Enjoying the blog!
There are several "options" for the beginning level descriptions (most I feel are interchangeable) It's really the "completion" level that's more important in it's identification manner (to avoid confusion by the student, IMO). The nonsensical term "advanced", is the one to avoid (being extremely over used, and usually incorrectly). Most systems I've been involved with, have used the "advanced" handle, then choose to present yet another version afterword.
For the experienced student, the "completed" version, more clearly illustrates the bunkai (IMO).
I prefer skeleton or frame work when I'm explaining the kata. Taika frequently said 'framework'.
Our order of kata is actually a little varied than other schools. We teach the Pinan kata last. These are taught during the brown belt levels. I don't really think that by the time students reach this level they should dwell on 'basic' concepts. So why are we teaching them basic kata? I think they should learn the foundation or structure or skeleton and immediately be placing level based things into the kata such as kake.
Post a Comment