Brain rigor mortis syndrome

[Bill Glasheen]

I am a teacher by school of hard knocks.

For most of my martial arts teaching career (done nonprofit, BTW), I have been spoiled. I taught UVa students, faculty, and staff for 14 years. Getting the best and the brightest in the primes of their lives is something that few teachers have the privilege to experience. And when it came to rank, I was highly merit-based in my rewards. With large classes, I could afford to give the faster learners a couple of kyu rank jumps (as many as 3) for each semester I ran a test. The average person went up 1 or 2 ranks, and a rare few got no advancement. In the thousands of people I taught, I never had to kick a student out, even though I had a way of making life absolutely miserable for those who didn't understand protocol. (After a while, this became self-sustaining in the dojo.)

Two things have happened since then.

• I've gotten smarter both as a practitioner and as a teacher. I see what the very gifted can do, and can break it down into bite-sized learning chunks. If someone will hold up their end of the learning bargain, I can do a lot with most people. There is no mistique and therer is no chi. But my best students can do more than those who (used to) claim mystical powers. It does indeed start with the center, but not in any foo foo way.
• Instead of teaching within the confines of a University, I now teach in the spoiled West End of the greater Richmond area. This is where all the "outsiders" come to settle. It's soccer mom and karate dad city. It's a population of transients in both job status and life interest. Little did I know when I went from small university town to suburbia that I'd have a MORE difficult time keeping people for any length of time.

The combination of the two things has kept me (for quite some time) from bringing any but maybe one or two locals at a time anywhere near the depth of knowledge I'd love to share. It is what it is... I take on the challenge of learning how to teach better. By learning how to teach better, I learn my material even better.

There is one problem though that is about to drive me to drinking. I have a few students who've been with me here for a decade (or longer) who tend to regress back to old mistakes. Here I am trying to teach complex principles of core management alongside mastery of the periphery, with an energy preserving structure in-between. I'm also pointing to how what I'm programming in their upper brains will mesh with what's already there in their lower brains. And my students? At times they regress to clopping like Clydesdales (I can hear those heels touch 100 yards away), hunching like Igor, and drawing in like wallflowers.



I really do try to be patient. For those with the worst problems, I've even resorted to teaching the white belts the specific problems that these upper belts are suffering from. What the hell... I figure it may be a learning opportunity for both. When my UVa club was very large, I did reach this critical mass were folks were teaching each other quite effectively. I also name some of the worst mistakes after specific students. Everyone who has been with me for a while knows what "Alison's disease" is. That student subsequently went on to get a black belt, as well as a PhD in biology. And she was good-natured about my ribbing - even to the point of laughing to tears when I do a caricature of the syndrome. (You need a good booty and swivel hips to do it right... ).

How many of you teachers out there suffer from perfectly fine students who are constantly regressing? Any ideas on how to achieve permanent breakthroughs?

Any and all suggestions appreciated. After all these years, I'm still learning about this teaching thing - if that makes sense.

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

One more thought...

This isn't about embarrassing anyone. I already had one guilty conscience send me an e-mail. This is a sincere effort by a caring teacher to shoulder the responsibility for students' occasional inabilities to progress.

It's easier to wash your hands of it all and blame it on the student. That is what some of my peers do. I reject that notion. The buck stops with me.

Now... is there anyone else I can offend? I'm on a roll!

- Bill

[CornMaiden]

My suggestion would be to start drinking...heavily, unless you believe you can indeed teach an old (or younger) dog new tricks.

What would you do with your dog? I remember reading that you had one.

Corn Maiden

[Bill Glasheen]

My suggestion would be to start drinking...heavily, unless you believe you can indeed teach an old (or younger) dog new tricks.

Careful there. I'm already catching sheet (on the side) from someone who thinks this post is about them.

It's all about my desire to be a better teacher. It's also part of my intellectual curiosity. One of the great gifts of teaching is learning how others' brains work. Getting someone else to do what you are doing is an artform in and of itself. Like playing a piano, it takes time, effort, and a lot of skill.

What would you do with your dog?

The first thing I do is learn by trial and error. But I also read, and consult with others.

I do indeed have a very stubborn dog now (a Rhodesian Ridgeback). He's quite a challenge - especially considering that he's in his physical prime and fully intact. There are days when he's a lot more motivated by a nearby Fifi than he is by pleasing me.

Dogs are a bit different though. With them it's about learning what they want, and then putting what you want them to do in-between them and their goal. I can get my Ridgeback to do almost anything if I have a cheese stick dangling out of my mouth. Otherwise... forgetaboutit. Ridgebacks are programmed to hunt; it's what they do. You have to work with the cards they are dealt.

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

In defense of Corn Maiden...

I truly believe I could get more than a few students to improve on their martial timing - if only they would pick up a musical instrument. They don't have to be that good at it; all it takes is developing an interest and then enjoying the experience.





But as they say...



I can't make someone do something they don't want to do.

- Bill

[MikeK]

Dogs are a bit different though.

That's a deep observation.

Have you ever asked them why they are "regressing" into those "old mistakes"? Often times people do things for a reason; to protect an old injury, habit, physical inability, doing the "right thing" hurts or it feels silly. But ask them.

Here I am trying to teach complex principles of core management alongside mastery of the periphery, with an energy preserving structure in-between. I'm also pointing to how what I'm programming in their upper brains will mesh with what's already there in their lower brains.

Huh? That could be a problem right there. I know what you're saying and I can barely understand what you're saying. Try speaking English or at least in layman's terms. Sometimes it's best not to go into detail (or jargon, or be technical) and just help the person develop things by example and practice. The guy I train with never got technical about what he was trying to teach me, but got the lesson across during our little nature walks.

[Bill Glasheen]

Mike

It is a bit different when working things in real life. There the multimedia combination of voice and live performance helps complete the picture, along with the interactive piece.

You are right to the extent that I led you to this conclusion, Mike. What I was trying to say is that as you layer detail onto a simple framework, sometimes the individual regresses to old errors. Then you have to step back and start all over again. This is one of many reasons why the old masters suggested a "circular" approach to teaching this style, where you always come back to the basics of Sanchin kata.

Do I hit people with a lot of information? Absolutely. Why does Bill Glasheen do this? Because I'm a different kind of teacher. I want people not just to copy me like mockingbirds. I want them to see why I do what I do, and what the underlying principles are. If they ever get that - and I have a 12-year-old girl who "gets" much of what I teach - then they can take the principles of the style and run with them. In the end it isn't about specific forms and specific prearranged kumite. It's about learning to take those lessons and applying them freeform.

You're a musician, Mike. From the standpoint of going from a fixed piece of music to jamming or playing jazz, it's all about understanding the theory and mastering technique. Then the music is yours - either as a composer or someone who can run a random melody to background accompaniment.

A good example of what I see, Mike, is a student doing a kata for about the 400th time, and seeing old mistakes pop up that they used to do 200 iterations ago. They are really stupid simple things - the kinds of things you teach beginners in the first month.

The one cool part about it though is to have a group of beginners sit and watch an advanced form being done, and let them see "mistakes" that I taught them to avoid in their first month. When you see simple things done well (or not) in advanced techniques, then the lesson hits home - at least on an intellectual level. Making it second nature? Well... That's the hard part.

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

So let's get simple with this.

Why do people who have been practicing something for years regress back to mistakes on the most basic of things? And when these things come back again and again, how does a teacher make a breakthrough? It isn't always a pretty thing, but it most certainly is a common one.

If you read George Mattson's Uechiryu Karatedo, there's an interesting story in there about Kanei Uechi's teaching habits. A common format for less structured teaching in Okinawa was to have folks come in and do their thing, and occasionally approach Master Uechi to have him look at a kata or check up on something. In his own giving and gentle way, he'd point out issues people would have with a form, or with a sequence. If you came back at a future date and made the same mistake again, he would just say nothing. You got no feedback. None. I guess he wouldn't even tell you which mistake you just repeated. That was his way.

I remember the way my first teacher (Hiroshi Hamada) dealt with it. He had a shinai, and he knew how to use it... And I'll bet you think I'm joking. Christ, I still remember those welts on MY body!

Maybe if we have some professional educators out there, they might have some experience to bring to the topic.

- Bill

[MikeK]

What I was trying to say is that as you layer detail onto a simple framework, sometimes the individual regresses to old errors. Then you have to step back and start all over again. This is one of many reasons why the old masters suggested a "circular" approach to teaching this style, where you always come back to the basics of Sanchin kata.

I think if a person is regressing back to "old errors" as opposed to just doing something differently, then they didn't really move past those errors. At least I know that's how it is with me and other folks I've trained with. I don't think adding detail to a simple frame work should cause anyone to regress, as long as the detail isn't distracting the person from what they are really working on. I've made that mistake with teaching guitar when my son wanted to just learn a song and I distracted the hell out of him by explaining basic music theory. TMI.

Do I hit people with a lot of information? Absolutely. Why does Bill Glasheen do this? Because I'm a different kind of teacher. I want people not just to copy me like mockingbirds. I want them to see why I do what I do, and what the underlying principles are. If they ever get that - and I have a 12-year-old girl who "gets" much of what I teach - then they can take the principles of the style and run with them. In the end it isn't about specific forms and specific prearranged kumite. It's about learning to take those lessons and applying them freeform.

But it sounds like you are trying to make mockingbirds. You want them to see why you do what you do, opposed to seeing why they do what they do. In a big class setting the instructor is the focus, but in a small group you have the luxury of the students being the focus. That a 12-year-old gets what you're trying to do should tell you something. What is different about a younger person and someone whose been around a few decades longer?
BTW, there are no errors in free-form.

You're a musician, Mike. From the standpoint of going from a fixed piece of music to jamming or playing jazz, it's all about understanding the theory and mastering technique. Then the music is yours - either as a composer or someone who can run a random melody to background accompaniment.

You're missing some other elements, such as feel, taste and that X-factor that some players have. I know quite a few musicians that when improvising throw theory and technique out the window, and that's when the fun really begins.

A good example of what I see, Mike, is a student doing a kata for about the 400th time, and seeing old mistakes pop up that they used to do 200 iterations ago. They are really stupid simple things - the kinds of things you teach beginners in the first month.

The one cool part about it though is to have a group of beginners sit and watch an advanced form being done, and let them see "mistakes" that I taught them to avoid in their first month. When you see simple things done well (or not) in advanced techniques, then the lesson hits home - at least on an intellectual level. Making it second nature? Well... That's the hard part.

So what's the point of making them do the same old kata for that many iterations if they regress doing it. Could be a fault in the training methodology. Could be time for something new and different.

[Bill Glasheen]

But it sounds like you are trying to make mockingbirds. You want them to see why you do what you do, opposed to seeing why they do what they do.

That's not the case when there's nothing they are bringing to the table, Mike.

I occasionally have students dropped in my lap who bring a lot to the table. I can name names.

Vicki Antonich was one. She came to me from Michigan, having learned Uechi (fairly badly) from a renegade instructor. But I could sense something special was there. And I didn't want to destroy "it."

I learned a long time ago not to mess with a base that had substance. Instead I peel off things that they can't justify as useful. (If I see something I don't like but a student can tell me a valid reason why they do it, I let them run with it. In fact, I ENCOURAGE that. It means they are... THINKING.)

A year later, she went up to George's New England tournament and won the kata competition.

Quite the contrary, I don't teach by rote. I don't say "do this, because this is how my teacher taught me." I don't do 3 of this kata and then 3 of the next kata, yada yada ad nauseum.

In a big class setting the instructor is the focus, but in a small group you have the luxury of the students being the focus.

Actually...

Since I now deal with smaller classes, we drill pieces and parts of things. We tear them apart and build them back up. I'll make people try applications of the technique with partners. We see how people put them together, and let them go with things that seem right.

That a 12-year-old gets what you're trying to do should tell you something.

Indeed it does.. It tells me that this girl probably WILL get accepted to the governor's school. And other things as well.

Not the answer you wanted, I know.

What is different about a younger person and someone whose been around a few decades longer?

Maybe I'm not going where you want to take me. But let's just play with this for a bit.

There is a phenomenon that Tomoyose Ryuko used to talk about. (Note - Tomoyose Ryuko has been given the designation "national treasure." He's no ordinary Uechi teacher.) He spoke of how much he enjoyed working with beginners, because they don't bring agendas to the table. They're the way I was when I piled in a tiny subcompact with a handful of other colleges students, and did a road trip to Boston to work out with people we thought were famous. To us they were, because we had to travel far and sacrifice largely to spend the smallest amount of time with them.

I'd go to George's class and he'd lament that I was the only one in the class doing what he was trying to get the others to do. Now George was using me (in a flattering way) to shame his own students into trying harder. But there was an important kernel of truth in his layman psychologist methods.

I believe it's instructor fatigue, or something like that. Since I only got a week out of the year to work with someone I had to go in hock for (as a student) to spend just a little bit of time with, I was like a dry sponge. Carpe diem! I was there to seize the moment.

It's one reason I encourage my students to go to camp, or get others in the class to work one-on-one with them. It's why I've learned not to teach my own kids. I put someone else in charge of them, although I pick and choose very carefully. It's why I absolutely bless someone else picking up another style with a good teacher - AFTER they get shodan.

It's why it's so damn difficult to go in day after day, and make those minds hungry as if it's their first week, or they knew you weren't going to be there ever again.

BTW, there are no errors in free-form.

Great philosophers have written volumes on similar topics. There IS such a thing as good and bad, beautiful and ugly. There is such a thing as good free-form, "interesting" free-form, and free form that clearly shows no talent.

You're missing some other elements, such as feel, taste and that X-factor that some players have. I know quite a few musicians that when improvising throw theory and technique out the window, and that's when the fun really begins.

But here's the thing, Mike. They don't START that way, do they?

I tried finding the specific quote, but I couldn't. Paul Giella once used it, and I think it's Italian. Basically it's something like 'First you use the mold, and then you throw the mold away.'

In order to be effective and creative at breaking the rules, you first must understand the rules. It's something I stress to people who don't understand jazz, and think the people have no talent. Quite the contrary. Study the life of Benny Goodman, and you'll know what I'm talking about.

So what's the point of making them do the same old kata for that many iterations if they regress doing it. Could be a fault in the training methodology. Could be time for something new and different.

I don't, Mike. I'm moving away from this way of teaching, because I think it's lazy, vacuous, and insulting to the students.

But the way people do "standardized" choreography will always be a measure of their fundamentals. It's like compulsories in gymnastics. Some things are pretty cut-and-dry, and you can't flim-flam your way out the fundamentals. There ARE a handful of things that any random dozen Uechi teachers can agree on. Don't lift the shoulders when thrusting. Don't lead with your nose when attacking. Don't pivot on the heel. Don't forget to breathe. Don't block (intercept) with the fingers. Don't do intercepting techniques in kata close to your body. Don't front kick with an arc that finishes with a vertical tangent unless you either intend to kick their balls, or you really do want to smash your foot on a partner's elbow. Don't put most of your weight on your front leg. Don't thrust with all your might using a "wet noodle fist." Don't look at the floor when you get confused. Etc., etc.

And yet when someone gets up to perform in front of a group, stupid simple bad things happen. When they get stressed on a test, stupid simple bad things happen. And if they do that with just a little bit of stress in the safe, well-controlled confines of the dojo...

And then there are those who are just the opposite. They keep their sheet together when stressed, and rise to another level. Where's the patent on that "X-factor"?

- Bill

[maxwell ainley]

Bill,
I think all teachers have problems getting over,there knowledge at some point ,you can spell it out any way you want ,but the lesson does not sink in .
We are back to the plateau effect with individuals ,and sometimes there is little that can be done to bring someone of their individual plateau, in lots of cases .

[CornMaiden]

I can't make someone do something they don't want to do.

I can offer you a corkscrew, Mr. Glasheen.

Cornmaiden

[Van Canna]

I tried finding the specific quote, but I couldn't. Paul Giella once used it, and I think it's Italian. Basically it's something like 'First you use the mold, and then you throw the mold away.'

Here it is " Impara L'arte e mettila da parte"

Learn the art then put it aside.
"Learn the skill and forget about it until you need it".


It is a saw used when someone is learning something not immediately useful.

Well the meaning is "keep on learning beacause you never know wether one day this will be useful or not".


This expression means that learning is always useful, even though you don't need a specific ability in the moment when you learn it... Knowing something or, better, being able to do something, might always be useful in the future...

~~

So the person learns the 'art' then uses what is useful to him, from what he learned, to develop something else as a personal goal.

But if the student is not made to understand that from the beginning, he will revert back to the original moves...whatever he originally learned...

[Bill Glasheen]

That was a fairly robust and in-depth translation, Van. Thanks.

Somehow I knew you were quietly lurking.

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

I can offer you a corkscrew, Mr. Glasheen.

All you girls from Mary Wash
And RMWC,
Never let a Cavalier
An inch above your knee.
He'll fill you full of liquor;
He'll fill you full of beer.
And soon you be the mother of
A bastard Cavalier.

Oh I think we need another drink, Hey!
I think we need another drink, Hey!
I think we need another drink,
For the glory of the U.Va.!

Oh, uh... Whatever did you mean, Cornmaiden?



- Bill